There is no “pull” of gravity, only the PUSH of flowing ether!
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Two times happening together
Next: NOW ????????????
From: mpc755 on 8 Mar 2010 17:37 On Mar 5, 5:39 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > On Mar 3, 11:55 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Dear mpc755: You should make your own '+new post' if you wish to > expound new notions about science. You are clearly off the subject. > NoEinstein > This thread discusses gravity as being the 'push of flowing aether'. A better description of gravity is the pressure associated with the aether displaced by massive objects.
From: BURT on 8 Mar 2010 23:58 On Mar 8, 2:32 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 5, 5:07 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > On Mar 2, 6:03 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Dear mpc755: Your "mather" is both a misspelling and a > > misunderstanding of matter. Tell me, guy: Why is it necessary for > > there to be THREE states of the Universe when only TWO are required? > > AFAIK, there are only two states of mather, matter and aether. > > The immaterial aether flow is for energy. It sets up its time. Proper time is the truth of the sameness of timerates to itself. Mitch Raemsch
From: spudnik on 9 Mar 2010 00:07 you are referring to teh great-circle path on the God-am map; as I already stated, aircraft do not do "level" flight, in order to minimize use of feul; it's a trajectory, but it can't be symmetrical, due to drag & so forth. > DearSpudnik: A jet in level flight around the globe is traveling a > circular course. But for any given altitude of flight the ether > interferometer. All they had to do was to ask ME, and I could have thus: I haven't seen this study, but are you avoiding the issue, that M&M et al did not get null results, as proclaimed by non-et al, and Al? now, perhaps this study refutes them, or perhaps it does not -- silly & stupid, for a guy who does actual experiments. > A 2007 study sensitive to 10^(-16) relative employed two simultaneous > interferometers over a year's observation: Optical in Berlin, Germany > at 52°31'N 13°20'E and microwave in Perth, Australia at 31°53'S > 115°53E. An aether background could never be at rest relative to both > of them. > > http://arXiv.org/abs/0706.2031 --Light: A History! http://wlym.com --Weber's electron, Moon's nucleus! http://21stcenturysciencetech.com/sample.html --Stop Cheeny, Rice, Waxman and the ICC's 3rd British invasion of Sudan! http://laroucehpub.com
From: spudnik on 9 Mar 2010 00:12 why does a wave in the "vacuum" need anything else, to wave transversally?... there is no absolute vacuum, and their are no rocks o'light! > Spudnik: The speed of light outside of Earth's atmosphere is > unaffected by the varying density of the ether, because the tangential > velocity of the polar IOTAs (smallest energy units of the ether) is > 'c'. The IOTAs NURTURE the light on its way, not slowing light down. thus: you refer to the great-circle path on the God-am map!... as I already stated, aircraft do not do "level" flight, in order to minimize use of feul; it's a trajectory, but it can't be symmetrical, due to drag & so forth. > interferometer. All they had to do was to ask ME, and I could have thus: I haven't seen this study, but are you avoiding the issue, that M&M et al did not get null results, as proclaimed by non-et al, and Al? now, perhaps this study refutes them, or perhaps it does not -- silly & stupid, for a guy who does actual experiments. > http://arXiv.org/abs/0706.2031 --Light: A History! http://wlym.com --Weber's electron, Moon's nucleus! http://21stcenturysciencetech.com/sample.html --Stop Cheeny, Rice, Waxman and the ICC's 3rd British invasion of Sudan! http://laroucehpub.com
From: NoEinstein on 9 Mar 2010 17:21
On Mar 8, 1:17 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Dear PD, the Parasite Dunce: Once again, you make a reply containing not a word about science. You only purport to be qualified to tell the world what the correct processes are. Unless and until you can make a thoughtful statement about science, without implying your non- existent (un plagiarized) posts, then, you continue to be just a perennial DRAG on progress in science. NE > > On Mar 8, 2:19 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > On Mar 5, 10:51 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Dear PD, the Parasite Dunce: Tell me, guy: How is "Oh dear" a > > discussion of science? Did you forget and leave the kettle boiling? > > But NoEinstein, why would you be complaining about the absence of a > discussion of science? You've already said you don't like reading my > posts, regardless whether they're a discussion of science. You don't > seem to know what you want. You ask for something, and then when it's > given to you, you say you don't want it after all. That's a > personality disorder, right? > > > > > NoEinstein > > > > On Mar 5, 4:23 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > On Mar 2, 6:04 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Dear mpc755: The 'push back'-in-your-seat while the plane is taking > > > > off and climbing to cruising altitude is due to the INERTIA of your > > > > body resisting being made to go faster. There is ether flow causing > > > > that 'push back'. The reason (observed) UFOs can change direction so > > > > quickly without having the 'g' forces kill the occupants is because > > > > UFOs control the ether envelope that must be there in order for there > > > > to be any 'g' forces at all. > > > > > When airliners are in level flight, and traveling at cruising speed, > > > > you are still being pushed back in your seat, slightly, by the ether > > > > flowing through the plane. You will notice that you seem to be > > > > walking up hill when going to the little plumbing room. > > > > Oh dear. > > > > > And walking > > > > downhill going back to your seat. Clocks on the space shuttle slow > > > > down in proportion to the total length of the flight. If acceleration > > > > was the only cause of the slowing, space flights of any length would > > > > cause identical slowing of the clocks, since the acceleration phases > > > > of each would be identical. NoEinstein > > > > > > On Mar 2, 5:58 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On Feb 26, 8:31 pm, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Feb 26, 12:15 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Matter has ether flowing within it. Ether is the mother > > > > > > > > of creation, not matter. > > > > > > > > There is no ether other than matter itself. In harmony with my > > > > > > > belief that important words should be defiend the first time they are > > > > > > > used in written form, I defined ether as being the continuity aspect > > > > > > > of a material field, whether or not particles are part of it. > > > > > > > > Because matter cannot be created or destroyed, it always existed and > > > > > > > so did the five other basic items of which everything in the universe > > > > > > > is composed. As to 'creation", I long ago realized that Evolution is > > > > > > > God's method of creating what now exists. > > > > > > > > glird > > > > > > > Dear glird: Every time you ride on a jet airliner you get pushed back > > > > > > in your seat by the ether that is flowing through the plane, front to > > > > > > back. > > > > > > While accelerating. Not during constant momentum. > > > > > > > That same flowing ether will slow down all mechanical, atomic, > > > > > > and biological processes. Instead of making up your own ideas about > > > > > > physics, realize that in nearly four years that I have been using > > > > > > sci.physics, not a SINGLE person has shown that my NEW science is in > > > > > > any way wrong. You've got a very long way to go before you can match > > > > > > what I have accomplished. NoEinstein - Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - |