There is no "pull" of gravity, only the PUSH of flowing ether!
in [Physics]
|
Prev: "The Einstein Hoax"
Next: ALL DIZEAZZEZ ARE DEZERVED ! ESPECIALLY THE CANCER GOODY, BACKBONE OF THE JUICY DIZEAZZEZ INDUSTRY
From: H.Y. ADDANDSTUFF on 4 May 2010 06:36 On May 3, 9:06 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On May 3, 9:54 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On May 3, 1:06 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Dear mpc755: As Ronald Reagan liked to say: "There you go again!" You > > said: "Because "this is not a flow of some form of matter through > > space, as previously considered in the aether models". The aether does > > not 'flow' towards matter to cause gravity. The author was unable to > > figure out that what he was best able to describe as a 'flow' is the > > pressure exerted by the displaced aether in nearby regions towards the > > matter." > > > Fellow, my correct explanation for the mechanism of gravitywell- > > explained at the beginning of this post, and throughoutisn't an > > invitation for you, or others, to keep proposing your science > > nonsense. Since so much of the latter has been written, it's not hard > > to find someone to agree with you (ha!). In true science, the only > > person who has to agree with you is MEand I DON'T agree! So, stop > > repeating stuff that is wrong! NoEinstein > > Aether and matter are different states of the same material. > I named this material mæther. > Aether is displaced by matter. > Displacement creates pressure. > Gravity is pressure exerted by æther displaced by matter. > > The pressure exerted by the æther in nearby regions towards the > matter doing the displacing is described, inadequately, as "[æther] > effectively flows towards matter". > > Gravitation, the 'Dark Matter' Effect and the Fine Structure Constanthttp://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0401047 > > "There we see the first arguments that indicate the logical necessity > for quantum behaviour, at both the spatial level and at the matter > level. There space is, at one of the lowest levels, a quantumfoam > system undergoing ongoing classicalisation. That model suggest that > gravity is caused by matter changing the processing rate of the > informational system that manifests as space, and as a consequence > space effectively flows towards matter. However this is not a flow > of some form of matter through space, as previously considered in > the aether models or in the random particulate Le Sage kinetic > theory of gravity, rather the flow is an ongoing rearrangement of the > quantum-foam patterns that form space, and indeed only have a > geometrical description at a coarse-grained level. Then the flow in > one region is relative only to the patterns in nearby regions, and not > relative to some a priori background geometrical space" > > What is described as "space effectively flows towards matter" is the > pressure exerted by the aether towards the matter. > > "Then the flow in one region is relative only to the patterns in > nearby regions" is the pressure exerted by the aether in nearby > regions displaced by the matter.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - If - this statement is used to open an exact proof p = np, if this is true or false, do this. = is equals, != equals not { is open function, } is close function //comments here and more there <!---// starts the script, //---> closes it. http://meami.org/
From: mpc755 on 4 May 2010 08:38 On May 4, 6:36 am, "H.Y. ADDANDSTUFF" <marty.musa...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On May 3, 9:06 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On May 3, 9:54 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > On May 3, 1:06 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Dear mpc755: As Ronald Reagan liked to say: "There you go again!" You > > > said: "Because "this is not a flow of some form of matter through > > > space, as previously considered in the aether models". The aether does > > > not 'flow' towards matter to cause gravity. The author was unable to > > > figure out that what he was best able to describe as a 'flow' is the > > > pressure exerted by the displaced aether in nearby regions towards the > > > matter." > > > > Fellow, my correct explanation for the mechanism of gravitywell- > > > explained at the beginning of this post, and throughoutisn't an > > > invitation for you, or others, to keep proposing your science > > > nonsense. Since so much of the latter has been written, it's not hard > > > to find someone to agree with you (ha!). In true science, the only > > > person who has to agree with you is MEand I DON'T agree! So, stop > > > repeating stuff that is wrong! NoEinstein > > > Aether and matter are different states of the same material. > > I named this material mæther. > > Aether is displaced by matter. > > Displacement creates pressure. > > Gravity is pressure exerted by æther displaced by matter. > > > The pressure exerted by the æther in nearby regions towards the > > matter doing the displacing is described, inadequately, as "[æther] > > effectively flows towards matter". > > > Gravitation, the 'Dark Matter' Effect and the Fine Structure Constanthttp://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0401047 > > > "There we see the first arguments that indicate the logical necessity > > for quantum behaviour, at both the spatial level and at the matter > > level. There space is, at one of the lowest levels, a quantumfoam > > system undergoing ongoing classicalisation. That model suggest that > > gravity is caused by matter changing the processing rate of the > > informational system that manifests as space, and as a consequence > > space effectively flows towards matter. However this is not a flow > > of some form of matter through space, as previously considered in > > the aether models or in the random particulate Le Sage kinetic > > theory of gravity, rather the flow is an ongoing rearrangement of the > > quantum-foam patterns that form space, and indeed only have a > > geometrical description at a coarse-grained level. Then the flow in > > one region is relative only to the patterns in nearby regions, and not > > relative to some a priori background geometrical space" > > > What is described as "space effectively flows towards matter" is the > > pressure exerted by the aether towards the matter. > > > "Then the flow in one region is relative only to the patterns in > > nearby regions" is the pressure exerted by the aether in nearby > > regions displaced by the matter.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > If - this statement is used to open an exact proof p = np, if this is > true or false, do this. > = is equals, != equals not > { is open function, } is close function > //comments here and more there > <!---// starts the script, //---> closes it.http://meami.org/ No ifs. Just the most correct unified theory to date. Aether and matter are different states of the same material. I named this material mæther. Aether is displaced by matter. Displacement creates pressure. Gravity is pressure exerted by æther displaced by matter. Gravitation, the 'Dark Matter' Effect and the Fine Structure Constant http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0401047 "There we see the first arguments that indicate the logical necessity for quantum behaviour, at both the spatial level and at the matter level. There space is, at one of the lowest levels, a quantumfoam system undergoing ongoing classicalisation. That model suggest that gravity is caused by matter changing the processing rate of the informational system that manifests as space, and as a consequence space effectively flows towards matter. However this is not a flow of some form of matter through space, as previously considered in the aether models or in the random particulate Le Sage kinetic theory of gravity, rather the flow is an ongoing rearrangement of the quantum-foam patterns that form space, and indeed only have a geometrical description at a coarse-grained level. Then the flow in one region is relative only to the patterns in nearby regions, and not relative to some a priori background geometrical space" The pressure exerted by the æther in nearby regions towards the matter doing the displacing is described, inadequately, as "[æther] effectively flows towards matter". What is described as "space effectively flows towards matter" is the pressure exerted by the aether towards the matter. "Then the flow in one region is relative only to the patterns in nearby regions" is the pressure exerted by the aether in nearby regions displaced by the matter.
From: PD on 4 May 2010 11:33 On May 3, 8:29 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > On May 2, 9:21 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:> On May 2, 4:24 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > On Apr 26, 10:54 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Dear mpc755: "Wrong is WRONG, no matter who said it!" NoEinstein > > > You have your own definition of 'aether drag' which is different than > > what is generally accepted. > > Dear mpc755: It is 'generally accepted' that no one (until yours > truly) has found the one, simple energy-force mechanism that will > explain everything in the Universe. So, if anything is... "generally > accepted" that would be a near certain PROOF that such is WRONG! It's generally accepted that 5+17=22, NoEinstein. Since you have been claiming that other things that are taught to elementary school kids is wrong, like Newton's 2nd law, perhaps you'd be willing to claim that this is nearly certainly wrong, too. If 5+17=22 is nearly certainly wrong, what then is the correct answer? > "Varying ether flow and density" accounts for: light; gravity; the EM > force; mass; inertia; weight; all chemical reactions; all biological > constructs; and every object(s) or effect(s) ever observed. > Understand the ether, and its 'tangles' and 'untangles', and you will > know the Universe! NoEinstein > > > > >'Aether drag' is in reference to the > > interaction of aether and matter. The subsequent effect is the effect > > 'aether drag' has on light. > > > The pressure exerted by the aether in nearby regions towards the > > matter doing the displacing is described, weakly, as "space > > effectively flows towards matter". > > > Aether and matter are different states of the same material. > > Aether is displaced by matter. > > Displacement creates pressure. > > Gravity is pressure exerted by aether displaced by matter. > > > Gravitation, the 'Dark Matter' Effect and the Fine Structure Constanthttp://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0401047 > > > "There we see the first arguments that indicate the logical necessity > > for quantum behaviour, at both the spatial level and at the matter > > level. There space is, at one of the lowest levels, a quantumfoam > > system undergoing ongoing classicalisation. That model suggest that > > gravity is caused by matter changing the processing rate of the > > informational system that manifests as space, and as a consequence > > space effectively flows towards matter. However this is not a flow > > of some form of matter through space, as previously considered in > > the aether models or in the random particulate Le Sage kinetic > > theory of gravity, rather the flow is an ongoing rearrangement of the > > quantum-foam patterns that form space, and indeed only have a > > geometrical description at a coarse-grained level. Then the flow in > > one region is relative only to the patterns in nearby regions, and not > > relative to some a priori background geometrical space" > > > What is described as "space effectively flows towards matter" is the > > pressure exerted by the aether towards the matter. > > > "Then the flow in one region is relative only to the patterns in > > nearby regions" is the pressure exerted by the aether in nearby > > regions displaced by the matter. > >
From: PD on 4 May 2010 11:38 On May 3, 9:43 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > On May 3, 11:51 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote:> On May 1, 8:25 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > On May 1, 11:00 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Dear PD, the Parasite Dunce: You just said that "physics isn't > > > determined by logic". Of course, you would think that! That's > > > because you don't know HOW to reason! > > > Well, it's because physics is a science, which means that it invokes > > the scientific method, and it determines truth by experimental test, > > not by logic. > > Dear PD: WHERE was the "scientific method" when Lorentz proposed his > ANTI-ENGINEERING, "rubber ruler" explanation for the nil results of M- > M? Lorentz's proposal was subject to experimental test, NoEinstein. That's how science works. And what on earth makes you think that this stuff is "anti- engineering"? Perhaps you don't know that engineers make use of relativity in their designs whenever it is needed? If it's anti-engineering, why are engineers happy to use it as needed? > And where was the scientific method when both Coriolis and > Einstein wrote energy equations that were exponential, and thus in > violation of the Law of the Conservation of Energy? Those energy equations have also been thoroughly tested in experiment, John, exactly as I was stating. You on the other hand are trying to rule them out with your bandy-legged logic, rather than considering independently verified experimental tests. > When the truth be > known, PD, is this low I. Q. flunky who compensates by constantly > faulting his superiors. He has never stated a single contribution > that he has made to science. For one who devotes so much time to... > 'science' shouldn't PD have... "something" to show for it? > NoEinstein What do you think I should have to show for it, John? PD
From: PD on 4 May 2010 11:39
On May 3, 9:49 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > On May 3, 11:53 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On May 1, 8:33 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > On May 1, 11:04 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Nice "try" PD: Like I've told you a hundred times, PARAPHRASE, or > > > copy, what you want me to read. You, an imbecile, don't qualify to > > > tell me (who's off the top of the I. Q. chart) what I should do. You > > > can only dream that I would care to follow your instructions, in any > > > regard. NoEinstein > > > OK, so I take it that you refuse to do one of these steps > > 1) Vacate your chair > > 2) Take your butt to the library > > 3) Open the book to the pages I mentioned > > 4) Read > > either because you're incapable of it or you are too lazy. > > > Sorry, but I am not a nursemaid, and I don't cut other people's meat > > for them, and I don't serve their meat on a rubber coated spoon, even > > if they whine that they won't eat it any other way. Starve, if you > > like. > > Dear PD, the Parasite Dunce: I'm not "starving" for any information > that you are unwilling to provide. And I'm pretty certain that the > readers aren't starving for what you have to say, either. Other readers don't seem to have the same phobias about opening books that you do, John. > The few > times that you've opened your mouth and said anything at all about > science, youve put your foot in you mouth. You must be surviving > on... toenails, PD. Ha, ha, HA! NoEinstein > > > > > > > On Apr 30, 10:13 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > > On Apr 30, 3:40 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Dear PD, the Parasite Dunce: I, sir, am King of the Hill in science. > > > > > If you would like for the readers to see some "textbook definition" > > > > > which you claim is more valid than my F. & W. Standard College > > > > > Dictionary, then copy and paste your definition for the world to see. > > > > > *** Put up or shut up, PD! *** You've done nothing to even hint that > > > > > you have objectivity in scienceonly empty bluster. NoEinstein > > > > > Good grief. OK, I'll come part way. You do some work too. > > > > Go to the library and ask for Giancoli, Physics, any edition more > > > > recent than than the 4th. > > > > See sections 2-2 and 2-3. In my copy, that's pages 21-23. > > > > There, I have made the search bonehead simple for you. All you have to > > > > do is > > > > 1) Vacate your chair > > > > 2) Take your butt to the library > > > > 3) Open the book to the pages I mentioned > > > > 4) Read- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > |