There is no “pull” of gravity, only the PUSH of flowing ether!
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Two times happening together
Next: NOW ????????????
From: NoEinstein on 9 Mar 2010 17:30 On Mar 8, 1:20 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Dear PD, the Parasite Dunce: Wind resistance is proportional to the frontal area of the hair. Ether flow is independent of the frontal area and is in proportion to the average density of the hair. The ventilation system inside planes causes more hair motion than the flowing ether. Budding scientists who read this should perform a hanging plumb bob test with the plane, in level flight, and at a steady cruising speed. There will be a leaning of the plumb bob toward the back of the plane. NoEinstein > > On Mar 8, 2:27 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > On Mar 5, 10:52 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mar 5, 4:27 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > On Mar 3, 11:08 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Mar 2, 4:58 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. > > > > > > Really? Then why do people sleep on airplanes, without their hair > > > > > streaming backwards as though they were in a breeze? > > > > > > > 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 - > > > > > Dear PD, the Parasite Dunce: Ether flow is by degrees. And it isn't > > > > something going around the body, but through the body and the hair. > > > > Both the body and the hair get pushed proportionately. NoEinstein > > > > Right, same with wind. Wind pushes the body and the hair. But the hair > > > is lighter so it responds to the wind more easily. So tell me again > > > why the hair does not blow backwards in the aether breeze you say is > > > there?- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > Wrong, PD! Lightweight hair responds to moving AIR more easily. > > Ether flows through the air and through the hair in proportion to the > > masses of each. > > So lightweight hair does not respond to aether more easily too? Why > not? > > > Take a lead plumb bob and such will not hang > > vertically in a level-flight jetliner at a uniform cruising speed. > > Are you sure about that? Have you done measurements? And while we're > on the subject, how do you know that the fuselage is completely > horizontal in level flight? How would you test that? Have you tried > taking a water glass and laying it in the aisle to see if it rolls > backwards to the rear of the plane? > > > > > > > NoEinstein - Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
From: NoEinstein on 9 Mar 2010 17:33 On Mar 8, 1:22 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 8, 2:31 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On Mar 5, 10:53 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mar 5, 4:39 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 > > > > He does, all the time. You can't find them? Are you completely > > > incompetent with newsgroups? > > > > > > On Mar 3, 11:14 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Mar 3, 11:08 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mar 2, 4:58 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. > > > > > > > > Really? Then why do people sleep on airplanes, without their hair > > > > > > > streaming backwards as though they were in a breeze? > > > > > > > Because they are moving with constant momentum and the aether applies > > > > > > equal pressure to every part of the matter. The pressure the aether > > > > > > exerts on and throughout a moving airplane is greater than an object > > > > > > at the same altitude which would be considered to be at rest with > > > > > > respect to the aether but the pressure associated with the aether > > > > > > exerted on each and every nuclei in the moving plane is equal on every > > > > > > part of the nuclei. > > > > > > > It is during acceleration that the pressure associated with the aether > > > > > > is not equal on each and every part of the nuclei and that is why you > > > > > > are pushed back in you chair on take off and move forward during > > > > > > landings. Each and every nuclei which is the human body is interacting > > > > > > with the aether. > > > > > >http://www.physorg.com/news185201084.html > > > > > > "Superfluidity and superconductivity cause particles to move without > > > > > friction. Koos Gubbels investigated under what conditions such > > > > > particles keep moving endlessly without losing energy, like a swimmer > > > > > who takes one mighty stroke and then keeps gliding forever along the > > > > > swimming pool." > > > > > > Each nuclei is the swimmer. > > > > > > 'On the super-fluid property of the relativistic physical vacuum > > > > > medium and the inertial motion of particles'http://arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/0701/0701155.pdf > > > > > > "a particle moving through the vacuum medium at a speed less than the > > > > > speed of light in vacuum, though interacting with the vacuum medium, > > > > > never feels friction force and thus undergoes a frictionless and > > > > > inertial motion." > > > > > > "The property of the physical vacuum of our universe is a central > > > > > issue in modern particle physics and cosmology. In this paper we shall > > > > > show that the relativistic physical vacuum medium as a ubiquitous back > > > > > ground field is a super fluid medium." > > > > > > If the particle were accelerating through the super fluid medium then > > > > > even though the interaction is frictionless there is still more > > > > > pressure exerted on the front of the particle (in the direction of > > > > > travel) then on the back of the particle. > > > > > > Each nuclei is the particle moving through the aether, which in this > > > > > instance is analogous to a super fluid medium. > > > > > > If the nuclei are accelerating through the aether then even though the > > > > > interaction is frictionless there is still more pressure exerted on > > > > > the front of the nuclei (in the direction of travel) then on the back > > > > > of the nuclei. > > > > > > The opposite occurs during deceleration.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > Like I tell YOU all the time, PD: I don't go on any wild-goose > > searches for anyone. > > It's not a wild goose chase. If you had any competence with your > newsreader at all, you'd see them laying right at your feet. If you > claim you cannot find any stones and you're standing in a gravel pit, > do you consider a wild-goose chase when someone suggests you look > down? > > > If you (or they) want to show competence on > > science, paraphrase your discussion points or give links to posts > > which you (or they) have authored. Otherwise, you'll be ignored. > > In other words, spoon feed you in the only way you can see it, or > you'll ignore it. That's fine. You're a mule led to water. If you > don't drink and you die thirsty, you've got no complaint that no one > carried the water to your lips. > I repeat: "If you (or they) want to show competence on science, paraphrase your discussion points or give links to posts which you (or they) have authored. Otherwise, you'll be ignored." NE
From: NoEinstein on 9 Mar 2010 17:36 On Mar 8, 5:32 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. > > > > > Ether doesn't FILL space; it flows through it like wind in weather > > systems on Earth. Ether is NOT a medium required for the propagation > > of light 'waves' (sic). I know that to be true because light quanta, > > or photons, can travel through the Swiss Cheese voids between > > galaxies. Additionally, there is no wavelike motion of the ether > > associated with 'gravity', either. > > > Since ether is the energy building block of everything else, I > > realized that ether must be capable of TANGLING into energy densities > > much greater than in the ether at large. Because ether can flow, > > there must be a meniscus on the edge of the Universe, otherwise the > > ether would keep flowing outward until the density gets too low to > > form any matter. Having the Universe be "infinite" doesn't compute > > never has and never will. That leaves open the possibility that there > > are other universes out there. The main 'creation' question that is > > unanswered is: How did the ether energy get there? Proposing that an > > omnipotent God put the energy there leaves this question: Who created > > God? Ultimately, the understanding of the Universe won't require > > faith. It's fun to know that there are still things to be learned! > > NoEinstein > > > > On Mar 2, 5:06 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > On Feb 26, 12:23 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:> > > > > > Dear mpc755: When you touch an index finger to the back of the > > > > opposite hand, at atomic scales, the IOTAs (smallest energy units of > > > > the ether), which are polar, oppose the polar IOTAs of the opposite > > > > hand. Thought of that way, there is no "matter" in the Universe, only > > > > tangles of IOTAs and free-flowing ether in the spaces between. So, it > > > > would be more proper to say that "matter" (the energy tangles) is a > > > > state of the ether, not the other way around. NoEinstein > > > > This is the opposite definition glird proposes. glird definition of > > > aether is "aether-is-the- > > > continuous-form-of-the-material-outside-of-and-surrounding-atomic- > > > nuclei IS matter-is-the-compressible-substance-that-fills-space". > > > > This is why I am naming the material which both the aether and matter > > > consist of mather. This avoids redefining already existing and > > > conceptualized terms. > > > > I think 'we' all have the same basic concept of what aether is. I > > > think 'we' all have the same basic concept of what matter is. Instead > > > of trying to modify the concept of aether to be a state of matter or > > > for matter to be a state of aether it is better if we define matter > > > and aether to both be states of mather. > > > > We can then agree mather has mass. Meaning both matter and aether have > > > mass. Meaning the aether is displaced by matter. Meaning the aether > > > applies pressure towards the matter doing the displacing. > > > > Meaning the pressure associated with the aether displaced by massive > > > objects is gravity.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Dear mpc755: You are... hopeless. Make a '+new post' promoting your notions. My post is not the place! NE
From: NoEinstein on 9 Mar 2010 17:39 On Mar 8, 5:36 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 5, 5:32 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > On Mar 3, 11:14 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Dear mpc755: The flowing ether applies pressure in direct proportion > > to the specific gravity and porosity of the matternot equally. That > > is why 'gravity' (flowing ether) causes lead to weigh more than > > feathers. NoEinstein > > The pressure associated with gravity is not equally applied to every > part of each and every nuclei the massive object consists of. > > The pressure associated with the aether displaced by massive objects > is gravity. more BS... NE
From: NoEinstein on 9 Mar 2010 17:41
On Mar 8, 5:37 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > 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. You are a FOOL, mpc755! Masses do NOT displace ether, they thrive in ether! NE |