There is no “pull” of gravity, only the PUSH of flowing ether!
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Two times happening together
Next: NOW ????????????
From: NoEinstein on 17 Mar 2010 17:11 On Mar 17, 11:30 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Dear mpc755: You said: "It is more correct to describe gravity as the 'downward' pressure associated with the aether displaced by a massive object." Actually... it is more correct to say that gravity is downward flowing ether which exerts a continuous force on objects, whether at rest or falling, which is directly proportional to the mass of the object. Like you never seem to grasp, ether flows through masses to generate the downward forces, just like flowing water puts pressure on a boat. There is no displacement of ether by the mass! The boat displaces water, but flowing ether goes THROUGH the boat as if such was constructed of screen wire. Loose the "displacement" notion and loose the "mather" and you are on the right track. NoEinstein > > On Mar 17, 10:15 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mar 16, 5:51 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > On Mar 9, 7:23 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Mar 9, 4:30 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > > 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. > > > > > Really? The plane is traveling at 550 mph through the aether, so your > > > > hair is traveling at 550 mph relative to the aether. The ventilation > > > > system pumps air at 2 mph relative to the aether. And the hair doesn't > > > > move? > > > > > > 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. > > > > > Are you sure? I think you'll be surprised if you actually do this. > > > > > > 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 -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > Dear PD: Studying the 'dynamics' of ether flow under various scenarios > > > is what real science will be about for the next few decades. > > > Then I invite you to do that for the next few decades. > > > > You show > > > your shallowness by referring to "with respect to the ether", as > > > though ether is some fixed 3D grid system for making measurements. It > > > is probable that the metal skin of airplanes will divert (but not > > > totally stop) the ether flowing through the airplanes. > > > Let's examine that statement for a minute. Since gravity is due to the > > downward flow of aether, > > It is more correct to describe gravity as the 'downward' pressure > associated with the aether displaced by a massive object. > > > according to you, this must mean that if a > > plane or a train or a car can slow down the flow of aether, then > > objects inside it should become lighter, with less gravitational pull > > on them. Do you have any experimental evidence of this happening? > > The rate at which objects move with respect to the aether determines > the pressure associated with the aether on and through the object. > > Here is evidence of the pressure associated with the aether determined > by an object moving with respect to the aether: > > 'Hafele and Keating Experiment'http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/Relativ/airtim.html > > 'Global Positioning System'http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Positioning_System#Relativity- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
From: mpc755 on 17 Mar 2010 17:58 On Mar 17, 4:58 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > On Mar 17, 11:25 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Dear mpc755: The resistance (force) imposed by moving an object > through ether is mass proportional. The same relative velocity of > ether flow on an at-rest mass will impose the identical force, even if > the mass is being held by some mechanical device. NoEinstein > Correct. Because the aether is displaced by the object and the aether applies a pressure towards the object doing the displacing, even if the mass it at rest. If we were able to determine a massive object is at rest with respect to the aether then even though there would be no aether flow with respect to the aether with respect to the massive object (i.e. the massive object is at rest with respect to the aether) the displaced aether would still apply pressure towards the massive object doing the displacing. You will more correct once your realize it is the pressure associated with the aether displaced by a massive object which is gravity vs. aether flow.
From: mpc755 on 17 Mar 2010 18:03 On Mar 17, 5:11 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > On Mar 17, 11:30 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Dear mpc755: You said: "It is more correct to describe gravity as the > 'downward' pressure > associated with the aether displaced by a massive object." > > Actually... it is more correct to say that gravity is downward flowing > ether which exerts a continuous force on objects, whether at rest or > falling, which is directly proportional to the mass of the object. > Like you never seem to grasp, ether flows through masses to generate > the downward forces, just like flowing water puts pressure on a boat. > There is no displacement of ether by the mass! The boat displaces > water, but flowing ether goes THROUGH the boat as if such was > constructed of screen wire. Loose the "displacement" notion and loose > the "mather" and you are on the right track. NoEinstein > Just the opposite is more correct. Instead of a boat let's use a submarine. Even if the submarine consists of millions of interconnected particles where the water is able to flow through the submarine the matter which is the submarine will still displace the water and the water will still apply pressure towards the matter which is the submarine. What your 'aether flow' theory can not account for is a massive body at rest with respect to the aether. In your 'understanding' of nature if a massive body were at rest with respect to the aether there would be no aether flow with respect to the aether body and as such there would be no gravity.
From: BURT on 17 Mar 2010 21:46 On Mar 17, 3:03 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 17, 5:11 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On Mar 17, 11:30 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Dear mpc755: You said: "It is more correct to describe gravity as the > > 'downward' pressure > > associated with the aether displaced by a massive object." > > > Actually... it is more correct to say that gravity is downward flowing > > ether which exerts a continuous force on objects, whether at rest or > > falling, which is directly proportional to the mass of the object. > > Like you never seem to grasp, ether flows through masses to generate > > the downward forces, just like flowing water puts pressure on a boat. > > There is no displacement of ether by the mass! The boat displaces > > water, but flowing ether goes THROUGH the boat as if such was > > constructed of screen wire. Loose the "displacement" notion and loose > > the "mather" and you are on the right track. NoEinstein > > Just the opposite is more correct. Instead of a boat let's use a > submarine. Even if the submarine consists of millions of > interconnected particles where the water is able to flow through the > submarine the matter which is the submarine will still displace the > water and the water will still apply pressure towards the matter which > is the submarine. > > What your 'aether flow' theory can not account for is a massive body > at rest with respect to the aether. In your 'understanding' of nature > if a massive body were at rest with respect to the aether there would > be no aether flow with respect to the aether body and as such there > would be no gravity.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - There is no aether pressure to be found. I challenge that. It flows over as time. Mitch Raemsch
From: PD on 18 Mar 2010 09:41
On Mar 17, 5:03 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Just the opposite is more correct. Instead of a boat let's use a > submarine. Even if the submarine consists of millions of > interconnected particles where the water is able to flow through the > submarine the matter which is the submarine will still displace the > water and the water will still apply pressure towards the matter which > is the submarine. This is an interesting remark. Even though the water would flow right through the submarine, the water would be displaced? What do you think "displaced" means? |