There is no “pull” of gravity, only the PUSH of flowing ether!
in [Physics]
|
From: BURT on 10 Mar 2010 19:46 On Mar 10, 5:33 am, bert <herbertglazie...(a)msn.com> wrote: > On Mar 10, 12:05 am, spudnik <Space...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > why don't you just look it up, > > the practice of commercial pilots? > > > > GET lost! NE - > > > thus: > > science is about refining a hypothesis, > > which doesn't have to be one's own. most of "global" warming is, > > strictly, computerized simulacra & very selective reporting: > > the "hole" in the ozone is really, "the sky is glowing!" > > > > Science is not about showing that somebody was wrong; it's about showing > > > what is right. Do your own work, using your own data, and derive an > > > analysis of your own. Then publish your result. THAT is science. > > > --Light: A History!http://wlym.com > > > --Weber's electron, Moon's nucleus!http://21stcenturysciencetech.com/sample.html > > > --Stop Cheeny, Rice, Waxman, ICC's 3rd British invasion of Sudan!http://laroucehpub.com > > To Ya All Gravity as a push force has been kicked arounjd for > 250years It creates more problems than it solves.. TreBert- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Push is the real thing. Mitch Raemsch
From: BURT on 10 Mar 2010 19:53 On Mar 10, 3:40 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 10, 5:37 pm, spudnik <Space...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > in other words, frictionless supersolids are like the "currents > > in the solid mantle," and frictionless superfluids are like "aether" > > -- > > no thing. there just is no vacuum, dood, as we know > > by Pascal's 1654 experiment -- PX? > > > what sort of verifiable experiment do *you* have, > > for your so-called theory? > > Every double slit experiment ever performed. The observed behaviors in > a double slit experiment is due to the particle traveling a single > path and the associated aether wave propagating the available paths. > The aether waves exit the slits and create interference which alters > the direction the particle travels. Detecting the particle causes > decoherence of the associated aether wave (i.e. turns the wave into > chop) and there is no interference. > > Every 'delayed choice' or 'quantum eraser' experiment is simply the > particle traveling a single path and the associated aether wave > propagating the available paths. But the wave for matter can go away at the dection screen. Mitch Raemsch
From: mpc755 on 10 Mar 2010 20:03 On Mar 10, 7:53 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Mar 10, 3:40 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Mar 10, 5:37 pm, spudnik <Space...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > in other words, frictionless supersolids are like the "currents > > > in the solid mantle," and frictionless superfluids are like "aether" > > > -- > > > no thing. there just is no vacuum, dood, as we know > > > by Pascal's 1654 experiment -- PX? > > > > what sort of verifiable experiment do *you* have, > > > for your so-called theory? > > > Every double slit experiment ever performed. The observed behaviors in > > a double slit experiment is due to the particle traveling a single > > path and the associated aether wave propagating the available paths. > > The aether waves exit the slits and create interference which alters > > the direction the particle travels. Detecting the particle causes > > decoherence of the associated aether wave (i.e. turns the wave into > > chop) and there is no interference. > > > Every 'delayed choice' or 'quantum eraser' experiment is simply the > > particle traveling a single path and the associated aether wave > > propagating the available paths. > > But the wave for matter can go away at the dection screen. > > Mitch Raemsch For a photon when the photon wave interacts with the detection screen the photon collapses and is detected as a quantum of mather. The ability of the photon to collapse and be detected as a quantum of mather travels a single path. However, this path the photon 'particle' travel also consists of an associated aether wave which interference with the photon's aether wave exiting the other slit.
From: spudnik on 15 Mar 2010 20:45 your statements are somewhat mealy-mouthed. anyway, if you would just dysabuse yourself of the concept of an absolute vacuum, then that of a "rock o'light," you'd see that there is no need of aether. to wit, if you examine the concepts of permeability & permitivity, a) you might have to do some simple math, and b) you'd see that nothing has neither quality -- or you'd have to show how your aether does have it. (I suppose that an experiment has been done, to show the relative p&p of various degrees of relative vacuum, but maybe not.) teh wave just goes though both of Young's pinholes, and that is that -- or, see what Young said about it! > For a photon when the photon wave interacts with the detection screen > the photon collapses and is detected as a quantum of mather. The > ability of the photon to collapse and be detected as a quantum of > mather travels a single path. However, this path the photon 'particle' > travel also consists of an associated aether wave which interference > with the photon's aether wave exiting the other slit. thus: anyway, Einstein's biggest blunder was with "homopolar generators," and getting in over his head with Maxwell's wunnerful theory, which is also problematic; or, so saith my school (and Schroedinger's cat, in Meowse Code .-) thus: most of the interpretation of the EPR "paradox" results, a la Alain Aspect et al, is due to the ideal of a photon, in assinging all of the energy of the wave-front as a "mass" (electron-voltage, say) of a particle, whence the wave-energy was somehow collected by the photo- eletrical device. here are two ways to get over this: a) just consider the practice of audio quantization, the phonon; b) show how the photoelectrical device is actually tuned to absorb a particular frequency of light. so, is the "phonon" just one cycle of the period of the sound, and like-wise, is the photon just one cycle of the frequency? --Light: A History! http://wlym.com --Weber's electron, Moon's nucleus! http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/ --Stop Cheeny, Rice, Waxman, Pendergast and ICC's 3rd Brutish invasion of Sudan! http://larouchepub.com
From: NoEinstein on 16 Mar 2010 18:51
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. 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. The closest you manage to come to actually discussing science is to find some obscure aspect of my New Science and to question that, alone, while continuing to be BLIND to the totality of my disproofs of SR and GR. Unless and until you can show the readers even a single '+new post' by you, then you continue to be just a Parasite Dunce and a DRAG of progress in science. NE |