There is no “pull” of gravity, only the PUSH of flowing ether!
in [Physics]
|
From: spudnik on 1 Apr 2010 17:44 how can you possibly demostrate (or believe in) a "vacuum that is devoid of matter" -- de void; how in Hell do you know that? > > be traveling in some medium. That medium was called aether. > > And since light can travel from across the Universe, ether was > > (WRONGLY) assumed to be located everywhere, equally. > > > When one says 'vacuum' that means space that is devoid of matter. > > Since ether is polar energy rather than matter, the ether can travel > > through the walls of any vacuum chamber and obstruct the flow of > > charged particles. That is why no electrons can be made to travel at > > velocity 'c' inside a vacuum chamber. The polar IOTAs of the ether > > clump like bugs to the front of a fast moving car. That clump gets > > larger the faster the car tries to go... until a top speed is > > reached. That is like trying to push a rubber peg into a tight hole: > > The harder you push, the more resistant the rubber is to going into > > the hole. > > > I know that light is photon emissions, only, because there are huge > > VOIDS between the galaxies from which the energy was scavenged for > > creating the galaxies. Because ether must be able to flow due to > > pressure differentials, I realized that the energy of the (finite) > > Universe would keep flowing outward unless there was a meniscus, like > > on a soap bubble. It was then that I realized those same meniscuses > > must be bounding the Swiss Cheese voids. If the meniscuses can hold > > in the ether, then, they must be capable of forming lines of magnetic > > flux that encircle the entire Universe like string wound on the > > outside of a ball. Since the Earth's magnetic protective envelope can > > be disrupted by sunspot activity, I reasoned that magnetic lines of > > flux must be vulnerable to being broken by intense photon or charged > > particle emission. The latter rationalization is consistent with > > those Swiss Cheese voids being located away from the major sources of > > protons and charged particles. Because light can travel perfectly > > well through the Swiss Cheese Voids, I knew for certain that light can > > only be photons, NEVER a wave of any kind. The reason the > > interference pattern of the double slit experiments is out of the line > > of sight is because the POLAR photons get attracted by the edges of > > the slits and will deviate from the line of sight depending upon how > > close to the edges of the slits the photons come. I hope this > > explains why vacuums can be either with ether, or without ether. thus: may be, you did not read the fullerene experiment too much; or, you'd be able to state a difference that waves of fullerenes make in their intereferences, compared to "that which can only *be* a wave-form," light. why cannot we finally bury Newton and his phoney corpuscular theory? if you do not wish to remain a part of the Second (secular) Church of England, look at *21st C. Science & Tech.* website. --NASCAR rules on rotary engines! http://white-smoke.wetpaint.com
From: NoEinstein on 2 Apr 2010 13:37 On Apr 1, 5:44 pm, spudnik <Space...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > how can you possibly demostrate (or believe in) a "vacuum > that is devoid of matter" -- de void; how in Hell do you know that? > > > > > > > > be traveling in some medium. That medium was called aether. > > > And since light can travel from across the Universe, ether was > > > (WRONGLY) assumed to be located everywhere, equally. > > > > When one says 'vacuum' that means space that is devoid of matter. > > > Since ether is polar energy rather than matter, the ether can travel > > > through the walls of any vacuum chamber and obstruct the flow of > > > charged particles. That is why no electrons can be made to travel at > > > velocity 'c' inside a vacuum chamber. The polar IOTAs of the ether > > > clump like bugs to the front of a fast moving car. That clump gets > > > larger the faster the car tries to go... until a top speed is > > > reached. That is like trying to push a rubber peg into a tight hole: > > > The harder you push, the more resistant the rubber is to going into > > > the hole. > > > > I know that light is photon emissions, only, because there are huge > > > VOIDS between the galaxies from which the energy was scavenged for > > > creating the galaxies. Because ether must be able to flow due to > > > pressure differentials, I realized that the energy of the (finite) > > > Universe would keep flowing outward unless there was a meniscus, like > > > on a soap bubble. It was then that I realized those same meniscuses > > > must be bounding the Swiss Cheese voids. If the meniscuses can hold > > > in the ether, then, they must be capable of forming lines of magnetic > > > flux that encircle the entire Universe like string wound on the > > > outside of a ball. Since the Earth's magnetic protective envelope can > > > be disrupted by sunspot activity, I reasoned that magnetic lines of > > > flux must be vulnerable to being broken by intense photon or charged > > > particle emission. The latter rationalization is consistent with > > > those Swiss Cheese voids being located away from the major sources of > > > protons and charged particles. Because light can travel perfectly > > > well through the Swiss Cheese Voids, I knew for certain that light can > > > only be photons, NEVER a wave of any kind. The reason the > > > interference pattern of the double slit experiments is out of the line > > > of sight is because the POLAR photons get attracted by the edges of > > > the slits and will deviate from the line of sight depending upon how > > > close to the edges of the slits the photons come. I hope this > > > explains why vacuums can be either with ether, or without ether. > > thus: > may be, you did not read the fullerene experiment too much; or, > you'd be able to state a difference that waves of fullerenes make > in their intereferences, compared to "that which can only > *be* a wave-form," light. why cannot we finally bury Newton > and his phoney corpuscular theory? > > if you do not wish to remain a part of the Second (secular) Church > of England, look at *21st C. Science & Tech.* website. > > --NASCAR rules on rotary engines!http://white-smoke.wetpaint.com- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Dear Spudnik: The mechanism by which vacuum chambers can get out the matter isn't the power of the suction, it is the random motion of the individual atoms that remain inside the chambers, AND the functionality of the valve that keeps the evacuated matter out. Practically speaking, there is no 'perfect' vacuum. Interestingly, because matter can be propelled by photon emissions, the matter will get pushed around by light. To a lesser degree the ether, too, can be pushed by light. Just beyond the edges of a powerful laser beam the ether gets propelled along and sometimes carries dust particles which can be seen moving in the same direction as the light is shinning. Those same forces are what pushes away much of the residual dust and gases following star formation. Out around the Ort Cloud is where much of that... 'stuff' formed into comets and such. NoEinstein
From: spudnik on 2 Apr 2010 18:35 I'm clipping your ridiculous statement, which appears, above. so, why do you think that the dust is not propelled by the same lightwaves, as is "the matter that will get pushed around?" thus: I think, anyway, that a case might be made for blaming Einstein, for recreating the cult of Newton's "action at a distance" of gravity, via the re-adumbration of his dead-as- a-doornail-or-Schroedinger's-cat corpuscle, "the phtono." well, and/or "the aether," necessitated by "the vacuum." thus: yeah; the funny thing was, the Earth of Gauss and of Aristarchus was a part of some cosmography. (you, however, may be in your own me-verse; so, how does Shroedinger's cat smell, these days , thereat ?-) --Light: A History! http://21stcenturysciencetech.com --NASCAR rules on rotary engines! http://white-smoke.wetpaint.com
From: NoEinstein on 4 Apr 2010 16:45 On Apr 2, 6:35 pm, spudnik <Space...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > Dear Spudnik: You snipped 'who' you are replying to. If that was NoEinstein, I said that light (photons, NOT waves) can propel dust, specks of matter, and in some cases the ether itself. That process is very important in driving away excess material following star formations. NoEinstein > > I'm clipping your ridiculous statement, > which appears, above. so, > why do you think that the dust is not propelled > by the same lightwaves, as is "the matter > that will get pushed around?" > > thus: > I think, anyway, that a case might be made > for blaming Einstein, for recreating the cult > of Newton's "action at a distance" of gravity, > via the re-adumbration of his dead-as- > a-doornail-or-Schroedinger's-cat corpuscle, > "the phtono." well, and/or "the aether," > necessitated by "the vacuum." > > thus: > yeah; the funny thing was, the Earth of Gauss and > of Aristarchus was a part of some cosmography. (you, > however, may be in your own me-verse; so, > how does Shroedinger's cat smell, these days , thereat ?-) > > --Light: A History!http://21stcenturysciencetech.com > > --NASCAR rules on rotary engines!http://white-smoke.wetpaint.com
From: spudnik on 22 Apr 2010 19:32
aren't you referring to Maxwell's Demon, a merely thought experiment. yes, "preactically," there is no vacuum -- just get Pascal to see that! well, you seem to really believe in your tiny theory, interestingly; it just doesn't go any where. > The mechanism by which vacuum chambers can get out the > matter isn't the power of the suction, it is the random motion of the > individual atoms that remain inside the chambers, AND the > functionality of the valve that keeps the evacuated matter out. > Practically speaking, there is no 'perfect' vacuum. Interestingly, thus: as the only known (to me) student of Bucky, I say, he was Are Buckafka Fullofit on pi ... but, dood, do you know the surfer's value?... it's not in _Synergetics_: http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synergetics/synergetics.html > Bucky Fuller explained that nature doesn't think pi is 3.1416... thus: this reminds me of the old Ultraviolet Catastrophe, when you take Hubble's opinion about the redshift, being directly related to speeding-away ... and there is no antilight; only antimatter. what lies within the visible universe is still very, very hard to elaborate, at very high redshifts, but there are plenty of goofy theories. thus: unfortuantely for Olber, almost all of Universe is red- shifted out of visible spectra, including most blue- shifters, due supposedly to Hubble's being hounded into saying that the shift is "Dopplerian." thus: the main, supposedly unsolved anomaly is that the winters & nights are "warmer" than the days and summers. now, how on Earth could that, be? the problem is that, although the GCMs are frought with nearly irreducible uncertainties re clouds & vapor, virtually all of the changes that effect these are made by men on land; whereas the hydro cycle at sea is some- what more of a constant. that's why, they call it, the Anthropocene (viz, the typical passive solar take on the urban heat islands, and the UNIPCC's supposed fudge-factor to cover them, which never seems to come-up in the actual articles in the actual journals). thus: R. Bucky Fuller was a funny guy, and your spiel about orbit is a perfect counter to his blather about pi. on the other hand, the vast majority of earth scientists don't know spherical trig., which Bucky did, in the command of a naval vessel, just before radio came in (in their GCMs etc., the poles are singularities, as in a Mercator projection ... but the space-science folks are *all* about the poles .-) see color plates one & two in _Synergetics_. http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synergetics/synergetics.html thus: space-time is merely ordinary phase-space, properly seen, a la Lanczos' use of quaternions -- Death to the lightcone; long-live the lightcone-heads! so, are biquaternions non-associative, like octonions? poor Minkowski, made his bizzare slogan about time *qua* the graphed *function* on a piece of paper, and then he died, and that ain't electronics *or* rocketscience (like Bucky saith, It is *all* rocketscience .-) the great geometer Minkowski, alas, puts his pants on, one lightcone at a time, like any one else. --No Cap and Trade Bailout for Wall Street and The City! to whom it concerns; as I comprehend it, after briefly speaking with Waxman at UCLA, his bill does the same as his '91 cap&trade bill under HW, on SO2 and NOx (viz, acid rain); that is, it is just a nostrum of "frere trade." if Dubya had known that Kyoto was just another cap&trade "free trade" nostrum, he'd have signed it, since he has been thoroughly indoctrinated in the MBA school on "British Liberal Free Trade" (cotton, sugar & slavery, why the British organized and supported Secession with ships & materiel) -- what the Revolution was about -- not just, Taxation without representation, a la the Tea Party effetes and the Encyclopedia Brittaninca! Waxman perhaps has been too long on the job; when I spoke to him at the Faculty Center, he seemed to be on drugs, a marked difference form when I saw him in P.Palisades. anyway, as I asked him, Why can't we just have a very small Carbon Tax, instead of letting the arbitrageurs run the bull & bear hijinx? as they say, the bears make money, the bulls make money, and the hogs always get slaughtered. none of the (two) experts, I have read or asked, thought that a tax wouldn't work as well, just that it was somehow politically impossible. --sooner,bri |