[geocentrism] Re: 28 moons
- From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:11:38 -0700 (PDT)
I've added some emphisis i think are relevant and interesting i particularly
think the experiment is interesting in the third paper....?
Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: I went looking for something
a little different but came across this. I think the basic frame work here with
alot of tweaking ( vibrations are ineffect just the transfer/ transportaion of
Kinetic energy) is sound in the sense that it moves generaly in the right
direction and is a fair general bases for some of the underlying basics of
Aetheral Vibrational Gravitation notwithstanding the other reasons( O&E) I have
already given and will expound upon further perhaps latter when it comes up
again...Particularly the implications of the alias effect in gravitaional
modeling.... I do think his Grav Frequencies might be wrong. Further i believe
that only a examination of large scale structure of mass distribution is going
to yield the correct vibrational Frequency(ies) ......More to follow....
Nature 86: 130-132 (March 23, 1911) A Kinetic Theory of Gravitation
by Charles F. Brush
Ever since Sir Isaac Newton enunciated the law of universal gravitation, more
than 200 years ago, philosophers have speculated on the nature of that
mysterious agency which links every atom of mater in the universe with every
other atom. Newton found himself unable to offer any adequate explanation.
Since Newton?s time several theories of gravitation have been proposed; but
all, of which I am aware, are open to strong objections, and are not considered
even promising by physicists. Study of the nature of gravitation is beset
with unusual difficulties, because gravitation is ever with us and about us; it
is the one universal phenomenon, and we cannot escape from its influence --
cannot obtain any outside point of view. Gravitation is often described as a
feeble force: and so it is, from one point of view. It is difficult to measure,
or even to detect, attraction between two small bodies. But when the bodies are
pf planetary size the aggregate attraction of their
molecules is enormous. It is easy to calculate that the attraction between the
earth and the moon, which is just sufficient to retain the latter in its orbit,
would, if replaced by a steel cable, require that the cable be about 500 miles
in diameter in order to withstand the strain. Between the earth and sun, the
cable would have to be nearly as large in diameter as the earth: and attraction
between the components of double stars is millions of times greater than
between the earth and sun (Lodge). So tremendous a phenomenon as gravitation, a
phenomenon compared with which all others seem trivial, must have a mighty
origin. That gravitation is a phenomenon of the all-pervading aether is
beyond reasonable doubt. This is so generally conceded that it need not be
argued. But how does the gravitative influence originate? How is it transmitted
and maintained? What is the mechanism of gravitation? It is the purpose of this
paper to attempt an answer to these questions. Let us
consider what happens to a falling body. We know that it gathers kinetic
energy from some source, as evidenced by its acceleration; that this energy may
do external work or develop heat; that the amount of energy gathered is
measured directly by the distance fallen through (within the limits of uniform
gravitation), irrespective of the time or rate of falling. When the distance
fallen through is of inter-planetary magnitude, and the attracting body large,
the gathered energy is enormous, sufficient, if converted into heat, to
vaporize the most refractory falling body. We are here confronted with the
question, Whence comes the energy acquired by a falling body? Certainly it was
not inherent in the body before the fall, as evidenced by the fact that during
unimpeded fall none of the physical or chemical attributes of the body, aside
from the acquired motion, changes in the slightest degree. We have been
taught that before the fall the body was endowed with "potential
energy of position" which is converted into kinetic energy during the fall. I
think "energy of position" is an unfortunate term, because it is so very
inadequate. To me it explains nothing. The case is not like that of a flexed
spring, where there is internal molecular strain or displacement. Let us
imagine a pound-weight of iron, for instance, raised from the surface of the
earth to a point near the moon in a line joining the centers of the two bodies,
the point so chosen that the opposing attraction of the earth and the moon
shall exactly balance each other, leaving orbital motion out of consideration.
On the surface of the earth the two-pound weight had some so-called "potential
energy of position", because it was capable of falling into a pit; but in its
new position near the moon, this potential energy not only has not been
augmented, but has disappeared entirely; the pound-weight, left free to move,
remains stationary; and yet we must have expended more energy in
overcoming the attraction of the earth and lifting the weight to its new
position. This amount of energy would be sufficient to impart to the weight a
velocity more than 10 times greater than that of the swiftest cannon-ball, or,
if converted into heat, would be many times more than sufficient to raise the
iron weight to dazzling incandescence and then vaporize it. Now, in lifting the
weight, this large amount of energy has disappeared utterly. We cannot believe
that the whole or any part of it has been annihilated; it must, in some form,
be resident somewhere. I think no one will contend that this energy is
resident, in any form, in the cold, motionless pound-weight. I believe it was
absorbed by, and is now resident in, the aether through which it falls. This is
a fundamental idea to which I invite attention.
Faraday glimpsed it long ago, and others have appreciated it more clearly
since his time. But, so far as I am aware, no one has realized its
significance.
This view of gravitation implies that the aether is endowed with very great
intrinsic energy in some form.
vibrational waves.....
Many men of science now hold that the aether is so endowed, and that the
amount of this intrinsic energy is enormous. Sir Oliver Lodge ("The Ether of
Space") appears to regard this energy as potential in form, and estimates the
intrinsic energy of a single cubic millimeter of the aether to be almost
inconceivably vast. He says, "All potential energy exists in the ether". Sir
J.J. Thomson says, "All kinetic energy is kinetic energy of the ether".
I conceive the aetherial energy involved in gravitation to be kinetic rather
than potential, the latter involving strain or stress. Newton, and later
Maxwell, assumed that bodies produce a stress in the aether about them of such
nature as to account for gravitation, but they were unable to imagine any
physical cause for the stress. All the past theories of gravitation of which
I am aware, except the corpuscular theory of La Sage, appear to regard
gravitating matter as the seat of the gravitative influence, the surrounding
aether, by induced stress or otherwise, acting simply as the medium of
transmission. I cannot see that any of these theories account for the energy
acquired by a falling body. My own view of gravitation differs from these
radically. I believe that kinetic energy of the aether is the fundamental cause
of gravitation, and that a gravitating body plays a secondary role only in
disturbing the normally uniform distribution of the aether?s energy, in
manner I shall endeavor to explain later. Let us assume, then, that the
aether is endowed with very great kinetic energy normally uniform in
distribution. Kinetic energy implies motion of something possessed of
inertia. Now, inertia is a fundamental attribute of the aether. The aether is
highly elastic also, which, with its inertia, enables it to possess kinetic
energy in wave form, as exemplified in radiation. By the term wave, I mean
progressive motion locally periodic; doubtless the aether as a whole is
stationary. Hence we may consider the kinetic energy of the aether as
consisting in aether waves of some kind. These waves, vast in aggregate
energy, eternal in persistence, without finite source or destination, are
imagined as being propagated in straight lines in every conceivable direction.
The isotropic distribution of kinetic energy, essential to my theory of
gravitation, was, for me, a difficult conception until I reflected that
isotropic radiant energy is
approximately realized in the interior of any furnace with uniformly heated
walls. Any kind of waves capable of exerting motive action on the atoms or
molecules of matter will fulfill the requirements; but I shall first consider
the transverse, electromagnetic waves of radiation, because these are the kind
of aether waves we are familiar with. Of course, intrinsic aether waves, if
of the radiation kind, cannot be of any frequency at present known to us as
radiation, because then all bodies would become heated. But we can easily
imagine them of such extremely low frequency that the molecules or atoms of
matter cannot respond to them -- cannot vibrate in unison with them --
molecular resonance cannot be established; hence no conversion of the aether?s
energy directly into heat in the ordinary way can take place. We are familiar
with the dissipation or degeneration of the higher forms of energy into heat,
and the continual degradation of heat to lower degree; that is to
say, less violent molecular vibration and more general distribution. As is
well known, it is only through this degradation or running down of natural
energy that we are enabled to utilize some of it.
..............................Pink is interesting dont think i would go there
yet but very intersting never the less.............
Lord Kelvin called this function of energy "motivity" (we now call it
entropy), and said the motivity of the universe tends to zero.
We know that ordinary radiation waves in the aether persist indefinitely and
without change of frequency or direction until they encounter matter, when they
are absorbed and converted into heat, only to be radiated again, usually in
longer waves, to some cooler body. This degradation of wave frequency continues
until we can no longer follow it. I beg to suggest that the ultimate
destination of this wave energy is that vast reservoir of kinetic energy
intrinsic to the aether. We may liken the waves of radiant energy, which we
apprehend as light and heat, to wind ripples on the surface of water, which
continually degenerate in wave frequency until they are absorbed into and
become part of a mighty swell of the ocean. Thus we may, perhaps, regard the
aether?s intrinsic energy as energy in its lowest form -- Kelvin?s zero of
"motivity". But unfortunately we may, and do, get some of this energy back in
available form in many ways, as, for instance, when a falling body is
arrested and develops heat; some of our wind ripples are then returned to us.
.......................Pink is interesting dont think i would go there yet
but very intersting never the less.............
When two gigantic astronomical bodies collide under the influence of
gravitation, as sometimes happens, we witness in far distant space the birth of
a nebula. The inconceivably vast amount of heat developed by the collision
converts both bodies into luminous vapor, which expands with incredible
rapidity into the nebulous cloud. This heat energy must in course of time
degenerate back into the aether whence it came, though billions of years may be
required; and during all this time the energy has "motivity". We may picture
the stupendous result of the collision as only a local splash in the aether?s
mighty ocean of energy. Having postulated that the aether is endowed with
very great intrinsic kinetic energy in wave form of some kind, that the waves
are propagated in straight lines in every conceivable direction, i.e., the wave
energy is isotropic, and that this energy is distributed uniformly throughout
the universe except in so far as the distribution is disturbed by the
presence of matter, I shall endeavor to explain my conception of the mechanism
of gravitation. For illustration in terms of the known, let us imagine a
closed space having uniformly luminous walls of such character that every point
on their surface radiates light in all internal directions. The enclosed space
may be of any shape, but for the sake of simplicity let it be spherical or
cubical, and large, say as large as a lecture-room. The space will be filled
with isotropic radiant energy uniformly distributed -- any cubic centimeter of
space containing as much energy as any other.
.....Inadequate but familar/similar in respect to a stanging wave that
yeilds large scale structure......
Next let us picture a small opaque body suspended anywhere in our luminous
sphere. The body may be of any shape we may imagine an atom or molecule to
have; but, again for simplicity, let it be spherical -- say a small grain of
shot, and let it be located near the center of the space. The small body will
absorb the light which falls upon it, and will cast a spherical shadow, the
depth or intensity of which will vary inversely with the square of the distance
from the center of the body; and the shadow will extend to the confines of the
enclosure, however large the latter may be. We cannot perceive the shadow but
we know it is there. It is true that the body will soon acquire the temperature
of its surroundings, and radiate as much energy as it receives; but for the
purpose of this illustration let us consider only the high-frequency light
energy. As is well known, the aether waves of light will exert a slight
pressure on the body. But in the case supposed the pressure
will be equal on all sides, and no effort toward translation can result. Now
let us introduce a second small body, similar to the first, and some distance
from it. This will also cast a spherical shadow like the first. The first two
shadows will intersect, and each body will lie within the shadow of the other.
In other words, each body will be partially shielded by the other from the
aether waves coming from that direction.
.............Gravitaional Sheilding/ Alias effects Positon of CBs affecting
the grav waves...
Hence the light pressure will be less on that side of each body which faces
toward the other than on the side which is turned away, and the bodies will be
urged toward each other by the excess of light pressure on the side turned
away. This excess of pressure will vary with the inverse square of the distance
between the centers of the bodies so long as the ratio of distance to diameters
remains large.
The aether waves concerned in gravitation cannot, however, be like the light
wave I have just used for illustration, because light waves heat bodies on
which they fall; and their pressure is almost wholly superficial, it does not
reach molecules much below the surface, and hence bears little relation to
mass. But let us substitute for the short and feeble waves of light powerful
waves, still of the radiant kind, but of such great length and slow frequency
that, as before explained, they do not excite the molecular vibrations which we
appreciate as heat, and hence are not absorbed by matter; they pass freely
through all bodies, bathing the interior molecules as effectively as those on
the surface.
......Similar to my idea that the Frequencies don?t perfectly match so as
to allow aether and mass to perceive each other efficiently ......
Under these conditions each molecule or atom or unit of a gravitating body
will have its own spherical shadow or field of influence, and the gravitative
force acting on the body will vary directly with the sum of its units, i.e.,
with its mass. The spherical shadow which I have pictured as the field of
influence of each atom or material unit implies that the atom has caused,
principally in its immediate neighborhood, a diminution of the aether?s energy.
This is in effect the reason i stated i dont know where ther boundery limit
for mass and aether is......at the surface or molecular or atomic or somthing
else level
Let us further imagine this subtracted energy resident in the atom as
kinetic energy of translation in many paths, almost infinitesimally short and
in every direction, but without collisions, because neighboring atoms follow
very nearly parallel paths. We may then picture the collective atoms or
molecules of matter buffeted in every direction by the aether waves in which
they are entangled, like a suspended precipitate in turbulent water.
Each atom or molecule may be regarded as a center of activity due to its
kinetic energy of translation, with continual absorption and restitution of the
aether?s energy, normally equal in amount. The manner in which this molecular
activity maintains, in effect, the supposed spherical shadow, requires
explanation, which I shall attempt in a future paper. Of the several
components into which the composite motion of each atom can be resolved, that
one lying in the direction of an attracting body will be the greatest, because
the waves from that direction, being partially intercepted by the attracting
body, are weakest, and the atom will be pushed in that direction by the
superior waves behind it than it restores to the weaker waves in front, and
will thus acquire additional kinetic energy of translation in the line of fall,
measured directly by the number of waves involved, i.e., by the distance moved.
Conversely, if the atom be forced away from the attracting body,
restitution of energy will exceed absorption, and the energy expended in
moving the atom against attraction will be transferred to the aether. It will
be seen that gravitation is a push toward the attracting body, and not a pull.
It is clear, also, that the velocity which a falling body can acquire tends
asymptotically to a limit, which is the velocity of the aether waves which push
it -- the velocity of light, if transverse waves are involved
I argue for a velocity much, much higher
I have already intimated that any kind of aether waves capable of imparting
motion (not internal vibration) to the atoms of matter will fulfill the
requirements of my theory, but have thus far discussed only transverse waves.
Let us now consider longitudinal waves -- waves of compression and rarefaction,
like sound waves in air and in elastic liquids and solids. The "spherical
shadow" conception which I have employed in connection with transverse waves
applies equally well here. So far as I am aware, longitudinal waves in the
aether are unknown, but that such waves have not been observed is not
convincing argument that they do not exist. Assuming, then, that some, or
perhaps much, of the intrinsic energy of the aether is embodied in longitudinal
waves, we have only to find some motive action of such waves on atoms to
account for gravitation. Adequate motive connection may perhaps be effected by
the locally alternating flow and ebb -- acceleration and retardation of
the aether in which the atoms are enmeshed, incident to its wave motion. We
have ample reason for believing that does obtain a grip of some sort on the
atoms of an accelerating (falling) body and a retarding (rising) body, from
which it follows that accelerating and retarding aether, as in a wave of
compression, must grip a comparatively stationary atom. Certain facts of
astronomy apparently require that gravitational attraction between bodies,
however distant from each other, must, in effect, be instantaneous; that is to
say, the line of apparent attraction between them is a straight line adjoining
their centers. I believe my theory meets this condition, but shall reserve
discussion of the point for a future paper. I feel much diffidence in
presenting the foregoing rough draft of a theory of gravitation, but I cannot
avoid the belief that it contains some germs of truth, perhaps the real key to
the great mystery, though, if this be true, I have no doubt used the key
clumsily and imperfectly. If the aether theory of gravitation is, in the
main, the true one, it offers some hope of experimental verification.
I agree with the stament just not his following applincation
Provided the waves are of one principal frequency, or even of several, we may
find something, doubtless of molecular magnitude only, which will oscillate in
unison with them so that resonance can occasionally be established and a
cumulative effect be obtained sufficient to manifest itself as heat.
In searching for some natural phenomenon of this nature, I thought of the
thermal condition of the upper atmosphere as a possible case. The mean
molecular velocity of a gas at some temperature, in connection with the mean
free path of its molecules at some particular pressure or pressures, may
possibly afford the necessary conditions for fortuitous resonance, with
development of some slight amount of heat by the increased violence of
inter-molecular collisions. I have done much experimental work on these lines
during the past year, but, notwithstanding refinement of method and
manipulation, the results have thus far been unsatisfactory. The work is till
in progress, however, and investigation of other phenomena is contemplated.
---------------------------------
Nature (March 30, 1911) Letters to the Editor: Sir Oliver Lodge
Re: A Kinetic Theory of Gravitation The subject of Mr. Brush?s article in
Nature of March 23 (p. 129) is certainly of profound interest, and will
continue to be so until the problem as to the nature of gravitation is solved.
Meanwhile, a few questions raised are comparatively simple. Anyone asked, Where
lies the energy of a raised weight? Must surely reply, "In the aether", i.e.,
in the medium, whatever it is, that is driving the weight down towards the
earth. A critic who either doubts or asserts this will not be confused -- as
Mr. Brush suggests he will be -- by the suggestion that the weight might be
raised up so high as to reach the neutral point between the earth and moon -- a
suggestion which carries with it the tacit questions, "Where is the energy
now?" and "What has become of the work done?" -- for this case is no more
troublesome than the case of a weight raised and hung on a hook. Something --
some opposition force -- sustains the weight, i.e., opposes the pull
of the earth, and it matters little whether the opponent be a shelf beneath it
or the moon above it. The important thing to understand is the nature of the
downward propelling force -- indeed, of both the upward and the downward force
-- in either case. The question whether the energy of a raised weight is
potential or kinetic is of little or no importance. The energy is certainly
potential, according to our definition of potential. So is the energy of a
strained spring: for there also the atoms are separated against their mutual
(cohesive) attraction, and there again the energy really resides in the aether.
But that all energy may turn out to be ultimately kinetic -- when we come to
understand what elastive stress fundamentally is -- that proposition is not
negatived in the least. Mr. Brush proposes a shadow theory of gravitation, a
modification of Le Sages?s theory except that the pressure is supposed due to
the non-syntonic impact of waves traveling in all
direction, instead of to a bombardment of utterly minute particles flying at
random. There is nothing new in a shadow theory, and all such theories are
faced with the difficulty of plausibly explaining the absence of noticeable
screening -- a difficulty which is bound to reduce them to acquiescence in an
approximation. The contribution which Mr. Brush makes to the discussion is
the suggestion that the supposed gravitational aether-waves are the result of
accumulated thermal radiation from all past and present suns, the wave-lengths
having automatically increased during their long storage. To this view
several objections might be urged -- one of them being that in that case the
constant of gravitation would be secularly increasing; another, that it should
be greater in a hot enclosure, say the interior of a sun, than elsewhere; but a
more salient objection is raised by the inquiry as to which is cause and which
is effect. How did the bodies get hot and so radiate? Was
not their heat perhaps due to their having clashed together with gravitational
energy itself derived from the aether? The fact is that every question
concerning origin involves us always with insuperable puzzles, and that is just
the main difficulty about gravitation. An atom of matter, by its very
existence, sets up a fixed stress in the aether, varying directly as the mass
and inverse as the distance -- that is only another way of stating the law of
gravitation; we are trying to understand the nature and cause of that stress.
It appears to be one of the fundamental properties of matter, and until we can
understand what is meant by the generation or destruction of an atom -- i.e.,
of an electron if that is the fundamental unit -- we are hardly likely to
understand its gravitational influence more than any other of its fundamental
properties -- including, perhaps, existence itself. Let this not be
understood as a negative prediction or estimate of impossibility -- such
predictions are always absurd; it may be that when the structure of an
electron is understood, we shall see that an "even-powered" stress in the
surrounding aether is necessarily involved. What I do feel instinctively is
that this is the direction for discovery, and what is needed is something
internal and intrinsic, and that all attempts to explain gravitation as due to
the action of some external agency, whether flying particles or impinging
waves, are doomed to failure; for all these speculations regard the atom as a
foreign substance -- a sort of "grit" in the aether -- driven hither and
thither by forces alien to itself. When, some day, we understand the real
relation between matter and aether, I venture predict that we shall perceive
something more satisfying than that. Oliver Lodge
University of Birmingham
March 25, 1911
---------------------------------
Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc. 68: 55-68 (May 1929) Gravitation by
Charles F. Brush At the Minneapolis meeting of the American Association for
the Advancement of Science in December 1910, I had the honor to outline "A
Kinetic Theory of Gravitation" (Ref. 1). This was followed by a "Discussion" of
the theory in 1914 (Ref. 2) A second "Discussion" came in 1921 (Ref. 3) A third
"Discussion" in appeared in 1926 (Ref 4). The later paper contains a concise
synopsis of the theory and very convincing argument supporting my contention of
1910, that the energy acquired by falling bodies is derived from the ether.
This Kinetic Theory of Gravitation postulates that the ether is endowed with
vast intrinsic energy in the form of waves propagated continually in every
conceivable direction, so that the wave energy is isotropic. The belief
expressed is that all energy is primarily energy of the ether. The very
high-frequency ether waves, which embody most of the ether?s
intrinsic energy, pass freely through matter without obstruction except that
concerned in gravitation, and a very small heating effect (which will be
explained later). The ether waves exert motive action on atoms or particles of
matte whereby the latter are buffered about in all directions with some
absorption of ethereal energy. Thus a lump of matter casts a spherical energy
shadow into space, the depth of shadow diminishing with the square of the
distance from its origin. The energy shadows of two or more bodies interblend,
so that energy density between them is less than elsewhere, and they are pushed
toward each other by the superior wave energy from directions beyond them. The
1926 paper (Ref. 4) explains this at length. To aid in forming a mental
picture of the relation of the very high-frequency ether waves postulated as
the cause of gravitation,
I think they are low frequency most likly due to pussing effects.....but that
is hard to "nail down" without a proper anylisis of large scale structures
to other well-known classes of ether waves, I have prepared the chart of
ether-wave frequencies shown in Figure 1.
Each horizontal line in the scale of frequencies represents double the
frequency of the line below it, or half the frequency of the line above it.
Thus the scale of frequency increases upward by octaves as in music. Starting
at the bottom of the scale with a frequency of one ether wave per second, the
second line four waves per second, the third line eight waves per second, and
so on to the tenth doubling where we get a frequency of 1,024 waves per second
as shown. Continuing the doubling process another ten times we get a frequency
of 1,024 time 1,024, or 1,024 to the second power, and so on up the scale to
the third, fourth, and fifth, etc., powers of 1,024. Thus it is seen that the
indicated wave frequency increases with great rapidity as we ascend the scale.
At the 20th octave it is more than a million per second; at the 40th octave
more than a million million waves per second. I am indebted to a chart shown
a the British Exposition in 1925; to a chart by G.L.
Clark in 1927, and to a chart by W.E. Deming in 1929 for much of the material
shown in my chart. But I have arranged it somewhat differently, emphasizing
ether-wave frequency rather than wavelength. Frequency is converted into
wavelength by dividing the velocity of light per second by frequency of the
waves per second. Thus the frequency 1 at the bottom of the chart means one
wave per second, and its wavelength is the distance it would travel in one
second, before another wave started after it. This is the velocity of light,
about 186,000 miles, or about 300,000 kilometers. All ether waves travel at the
same velocity.
I would say there is a difference between waves in the aether itself and
waves that use the aether as a transport medium (Ie ocean waves v sound waves
in ocean) ... vibraions in the aether itself travel far faster, on the oerder
of ~10-44 sec per 15 billion ly. It is the ineffeciancy of the aether mass -
mass aether direct endrgy transfer that prohibit faster then light travel in
the non aetheral EM spectrum becuse EM is itself a resuliant of that aether
mass- mass aether endgery transfer......I Belive the EM band is the
manifestation of the effecincy of that/ any energy transfere between aether and
orindary matter/mass ..this is why most physics forumlas involving mass and
energy must utilise the value of c somwhere in the equasions to arive at
meaningfull results. (ie E=mc2 but this could just as well be part of the
formula for the efficiency coefficient of the energy transfere between aether
and mass and visa versa).....?
A wave train of this very low frequency and very great wavelength could
easily be launched into the ether by revolving a closed coil of wire on its own
diameter as an axis, in a magnetic field, at the rate of one revolution per
second. If we should increase its revolutions to ten per second, we would get a
frequency of ten, and a wavelength of 18,600 miles. Such mechanically generated
electric ether waves may be increased in frequency without much difficulty as
far up as shown in the chart. Next above we have Hertzian waves, covering
about 28 octaves, generated by the condensor and sparkgap method. The upper
half of of this long range of ether waves contains the waves used in radio
transmissions and music. Next above the Hertzian waves, of higher and higher
frequency and shorter and shorter wavelength, we find the infrared and heat
waves covering about 9 octaves. These waves embody most of the heat received
from the sun, and nearly all the heat radiated from hot
bodies below redness. Then we cone to the exceedingly interesting and
intensively studied light waves or rays. These cover barely one octave of the
scale, and their mean frequency is about 500 million million waves per second.
It seems unfortunate that the human eye is sensitive to such a short range of
ether vibrations only, while the human ear can perceive about 11 octaves of
sound, or air vibrations. Perhaps some animals or insects have a wider range of
vision than humans. Above the light waves we find about 5 octaves of
ultraviolet waves. The sun?s radiation includes the last three classes of
waves, though some of the ultraviolet is absorbed by our atmosphere and does
not reach the earth. The ultraviolet rays or waves promote chemical action and
are chiefly responsible for the ordinary photographic image. Next in the
growing range of frequency we have the well-known x-rays, so extensively used
in x-ray photography for therapeutic and industrial purposes. These
cover a long range of octaves in our chart, and overlap the upper part of the
ultraviolet range and the lower part of the gamma range. X-rays, particularly
those of the highest frequencies, pass rather freely through large thicknesses
of light substances such as wood, fabric, animal tissue and metals of low
atomic weight and density; but metals of large density and high atomic weight
absorb and obstruct them greatly. Thus a quarter inch of lead almost completely
stops x-rays of the highest frequency. The ability of x-rays to pass deeply
into or through matter, is called "penetrating power". Above the x-rays in
our chart are the gamma rays of radium, so extensively used in therapy. These
have a much greater penetrating power than the highest-frequency x-rays. All
the above described classes of ether waves have been demonstrated
experimentally, and doubtless all exist to some extent, permanently in the
ether of space. Particularly is this true of the heat waves, as I
pointed out in my 1927 paper (Proc. Am. Phil. Soc. LXVI, 1927). In that paper
I showed, conclusively I think, that a lump of matter far out in inter-stellar
space could not possibly fall to absolute zero by temperature radiation of all
its heat, as commonly supposed, but would soon acquire and then maintain the
"temperature of space" which I estimated to be something like 50* to 100* above
absolute zero. Above the gamma rays there are about 6 octaves which have not
been explored experimentally. Then we come to the cosmic rays, so ably
demonstrated and studied by Dr. Millikan. These cover considerably less than
one octave, and their mean frequency is about 5,000 million million million
waves per second. This is 10 million times greater frequency than light waves
possess; and yet there can be no doubt that cosmic rays are ether waves like
all the rest. As might be expected, cosmic waves, on account of their very much
higher frequency (shorter wave length), have far greater
penetrating power than the highest-frequency x-rays; in fact, about 300 times
greater, as they pass through 6 feet of lead. Starting considerably above
cosmic rays in the chart, I have drawn a long bracket with indeterminate ends.
Somewhere in this region lie the isotropic ether waves of gravitation, probably
having considerable range of frequency. The enormous frequency of these waves
enables them to pass freely through all kinds of matter without obstruction
except that concerned in gravitation. Probably most of the vast intrinsic
energy of the ether lies in the region of the gravitation waves. Until about
a year and a half ago, we had no experimental evidence of the gravitation waves
other than gravitation itself. But gravitation is a most impressive
demonstration of the ether waves which cause it, and of the very great energy
embodied in them. As illustrating both pints, I call attention to Lord Kelvin?s
graphic word-picture of collision of two large astronomical
bodies under the influence of their mutual gravitational attraction, which I
have quoted in my 1914 paper ((Ref. 2) and my 1926 paper (Ref. 4) As another
illustration of the enormous differential ether-wave push of astronomical
bodies toward each other, let us consider the case of the earth and moon. The
urge toward each other is commonly called gravitational attraction, which is
only another way of looking at it. If this attraction were absent, and the moon
were held in her orbit by a weightless steel cable, the cable would need to be
about 500 miles in diameter to stand the strain. Between the earth and sun, the
cable must be about 6,000 miles in diameter. And the attraction (push toward
each other) of the components of some double stars must be thousands of times
greater than this. Obviously, the ether waves of gravitation, and the other
classes of waves we have discussed, must be permanent attributes of the ether;
they cannot escape from either boundless or bounded
space. They must fill all space; and we may therefore regard gravitation as a
property of space, because wherever there are two or more particles or bodies
of mater, however small or large, however near or distant, they are urged
toward each other by the ever-present isotropic ether waves of gravitation.
Very high up in the chart I have tentatively drawn the line marked "Quanta
waves or rays", indicating a frequency of 6.54 x 1027. Experimental Evidence
of the Ether Waves of Gravitation: A year ago I had the honor of presenting a
paper under the title "Correlation of Continual Generation of Heat in Some
Substances, & Impairment of Their Gravitational Acceleration" (Proc. Am. Phil.
Soc. LXVI, No. 2, 1928). This division of papers is a continuation of last
year?s paper; and to save the reader the bother of looking up that paper and
its several references, I shall quote very freely from it and prior papers.
The third "Discussion" (1926; Ref. 4) contains in its title
"Some Experimental Evidence Supporting Theory; Continual Generation of Heat in
Some Igneous Rocks & Minerals". "Heat is often defined as an agitation of
atoms and molecules of matter, and measured by the total kinetic energy of such
agitation. The agitation consists partly in internal vibrations of the elastic
atoms and molecules and spinning about their various axes, and partly in very
rapid transitory motion among themselves. Thus they are supposed to dart about
in every conceivable direction, constantly colliding with each other and
rebounding or glancing in new directions. The kinetic energy of this
translatory motion constitutes sensible heat (not total heat) and is the
measure of temperature. Anything (such as absorbed radiation) which stimulates
the internal vibration of atoms or molecules likewise increases their
translatory velocities by the increased violence of rebound after collision,
and thus increases their temperature; and vice versa. "All the above is
known to be true of gases and vapors (kinetic theory of gases) and is
generally believed to be true of liquids and solids. "The ?mean free path?
and the ?mean velocity? between collisions of the molecules of many gases under
stated conditions have been computed. But it has also been shown mathematically
that the higher and lower velocities, and the longer and shorter paths, differ
greatly from the means, and may in each respect vary 20 or more times in
amount. Doubtles this is true also of liquids and solids. "From the
fortuitously wide variation I velocities and free paths of the billions of
vibrating atoms or molecules in their heterogenous movement, it follows that
collision frequencies must also vary greatly, but have a wide range of
frequencies as do the well-known x-rays. "With the foregoing in mind it is
easily conceivable that some kinds of matter may have atoms or simple molecules
or complex molecules of occasional vibration frequency corresponding with some
gravitation wave frequency, whereby fortuitous resonance can, for brief
instants, be established at various points. This would result in a slight
increase of vibrational activity and a cumulative rise of general temperature.
"A body of such matter, with some thermal insulation, would become and remain
permanently warmer than a neighboring body similarly circumstanced, but not
endowed, or less endowed with the permissive heat-generating quality". A
carefully designed calorimeter is illustrated and described in the paper
(1926), and details of many experiments given. These resulted in the discovery
that some rocks and minerals did generate an easily observable amount of heat.
In April 1927, I presented another paper on "Persistent Generation of Heat in
Some Rocks & Minerals" (Proc. Am. Phil. Soc. LXVI). This is a continuation of
the 1926 paper. It describes a new and different calorimeter, built in the
spring of 1926, and since known as the "Ice Calorimeter". It has
been in almost continuous use down to the present time (April 1928) and has
proved very satisfactory. With this calorimeter it has been found that some of
the natural heat-generating materials, and some of the artificial silicates
hereafter described, have retained their heat-generating activity unimpaired;
and none of these substances is more than minutely radioactive. Quoting from
the 1927 paper: "It is notable that all the materials which appear to be
endowed with persistent heat generating activity are complex silicates".
There follows a description of the preparation, in the wet way, of many complex
silicates, and their preliminary testing for heat generation. A silicate of the
protoxide of nickel and cobalt showed very large activity, larger than either
silicate alone: and this now appears to be permanent. Nickel and cobalt are
almost identical in atomic weight, and differ but one unit in atomic number.
Quoting again from the 1927 paper: "In the absence, at
present, of other explanation, it is thought that persistent heat generation
in some rocks and minerals is due to isotropic ether waves of great
penetration; very great indeed, if the generation goes on in the interior of
the sun and planets as it does at the surface of the earth". Quoting now from
the 1928 paper (Ref. 6): "It is now believed that the class of isotropic
ether waves postulated as the cause of persistent generation of heat in some
substances, is the same class, perhaps of very wide range of frequency,
postulated as the cause of gravitation. "Conversion into heat of some of the
energy of the gravitation ether waves, however little, might be expected to
impair to some extent the falling velocity of a heat generating substance; and
all such substances thus far tested have clearly shown impairment. "I have
yet found no exception to this remarkable phenomenon, though I have already
tested many natural and artificial minerals. Substances which have shown no
generation of heat in the calorimeter show no impairment of their falling
velocity when compared with lead. Substances exhibiting small, moderate or
large generation of heat have shown comparatively small, moderate or large
impairment of the gravitational acceleration. "In making the above indicated
comparisons of falling velocities I have largely used the method and apparatus
described and illustrated in my 1923 paper on "Some New Experiments in
Gravitation" (Proc. Am. Phil. Soc. LXII, No. 3; See also the 1924 paper of the
same title: Proc. Am. Phil. Soc. LXIII, No. 1) "Two aluminum containers are
used, alike in size, shape, weight and smoothness of surface, and dropped
simultaneously, side by side, through exactly the same distance (about 122 cm).
"Each container, at he end of its journey, breaks an electric circuit. But
the breaks of both containers are in series in the same circuit, so that the
break which occurs first produces a bright spark while the belated
break gives no spark because its circuit is already open "When the
containers are equally loaded with the same metal, there is no visible spark at
either break, or a very feeble spark at one or the other indifferently. But
when they are equally loaded with certain different metals, one container
persistently produces a bright spark, though containers are always reversed in
position for each trial. From this it seems clear that the container giving the
spark falls a little faster than the other. This sparking condition is clearly
manifested when the faster container reaches the end of its free path as little
as 0.0125 mm. ((0.0005 inch) in advance of its neighbor. "The 1923 paper also
describes how approximate quantitative measurements are made. These are very
tedious, especially when falling velocity differences are large. "To
facilitate estimation of the larger falling velocity differences I am
perfecting a photographic method of observation. After falling about 110
cm the small lower ends of the containers are photographed in silhouette
against a white background having many horizontal lines, and illuminated by a
very bright electric spark". Then follows several pages of text, with figures
and pates, describing the apparatus admits operation, too lengthy to quote
here. Resuming quotation from last year?s paper (1928): "The camera lens is
located about 37 cm in front of the white surface, and the photographic plate
about an equal distance behind the lens; so that the image is about equal in
size to parts photographed. "The plate holder moves vertically in guides, and
rests on a pin in one of eight equally spaced holes 1.6 cm apart in the
backboard of the camera. This backboard has a horizontal opening 1.4 cm wide,
which limits the exposed portion of the plate to a strip of this width. Thus
eight pictures of the falling container tips are made on one plate. The
containers are reversed in right and left position after each
exposure. "Plate III shows a series of photographs. Each container weighted
approximately 30.6 grams. One was marked with a white spot on its top for
identification. This one, lettered S on the plate, was filled with silicate of
nickel and cobalt, which weighed 13.6 grams, or about 30.8 % of the total
weight of the loaded container. The unmarked container was loaded with lead
sawdust, held tightly in the lower end by a short closely fitting cork above
it, until it very closely equaled the marked container in weight. "Each of
the eight photographs on the plate, when magnified, clearly shows the S
container (Silicate) slower than its companion. Six more similar plates have
been made with the same loaded containers, and all show the same effect. It
will be noticed that the amount of retardation of the S container varies
considerably in the eight exposures of Plate III. This was principally due to
small lateral air currents in the room which acted unequally on the two
containers when one shielded the other; as was demonstrated with another plate
by purposefully increasing the lateral air currents. I shall eliminate lateral
air currents in future work. "Of course I tried exchange of loads in the
containers, but without observably affecting the result; the container holding
the silicate was always slow. "The observed retardation o the silicate
container must be due to impaired gravitational acceleration of the silicate as
compared with the lead sawdust in the other container; and as the silicate
constitutes only 30.8% of the total mass undergoing acceleration, we must
multiply the observed retardation by 3.25 to find the full impairment of the
silicate alone. "In the apparatus as set up, the centers of the container
tips are about 1.6 cm in front of the lined background; hence tips and lines
cannot both be sharply in focus of the camera lens. In Plate III the focal
plane of the camera was about half way between the tips and the
lines. Sharpness of lowest part of the curve of the tips was greatly enhanced
by permanently covering all of the camera lens except a horizontal strip 2 mm
wide across its center. "The comparison lines in Plate III are spaced one mm
apart between centers. I am installing another white background with very much
finer lines spaced only half a mm apart, and far better adapted to micrometer
measurement of container tip differences of level. "The Bureau of Standards,
with a calorimeter of its own design, is working with some of the
heat-generating substances for the purpose of checking my findings." Since
writing the 1928 paper I have continued work on the fascinating subject of
"Correlation of continual generation of heat in some substances and impairment
of their gravitational acceleration". These phenomena appear to be related as
cause and effect. I have gathered considerable new evidence, all affirmative,
so that I now feel justified in dismissing doubt. In the
quest for more evidence, however, I have reversed the order of procedure;
i.e., instead of hunting more or less at random, for new substances exhibiting
generation of heat in the calorimeters, which is a very slow and tedious
process, I have first tested many new substances for impaired gravitational
acceleration, which is comparatively rapid and easy. In these tests I have made
more than 50 new plates, and feel well rewarded for the labor. In my former
experiments it had appeared that silicates of the iron group of metals
exhibited much greater impairment of acceleration than silicates and compounds
of the metals of lower atomic weight. So I chose silicates and other compounds
of metals of still higher atomic weight, viz., Barium, Lead and Bismuth as most
promising materials to work with. In all the artificial silicates there was
some sodium silicate. Lead silicate gave a moderate effect, but after ignition
none. Bismuth silicate behaved in the same way. Lead acetate
gave a moderate effect. The barium compounds were found very interesting,
and were more fully investigated. Barium hydroxide, Ba(OH)2, 8H2O gave rather
large effect, but required lining of the container on account of its powerful
corrosive action on metallic aluminum. BaO (anhydrous; effect moderate. BaO,
8H2O, effect small but certain. BaCl2, 2H2O, effect small. BaBr2, 2H2O, effect
very small if any. BaSO4; effect very moderate. Ba3(PO4)2; effect small.
Ba(SCN)2, 2H2O; effect very small if any. The Barium Aluminates were the most
interesting of all the compounds examined. Three grades were prepared:
(BaO)2Al2O3, BaO, Al2O3 and BaO(Al2O3)2. All, after air drying to constant
weight, lost several % of hydroscopic moisture when dried at 100o C. and
several more % of combined water when gently ignited. After ignition they were
but very slightly hygroscopic. The BaO, Al2O3, dried at 100o C., gave largest
effect; but after ignition the effect was somewhat reduced. Plate I
shows the impairment of gravitational acceleration in the BaO, Al2O3, not
ignited, as compare with lead in the usual way. The upper two of the usual
eight photographic strips are omitted, in order to permit enlargement of the
remaining six strips about 50%. The black lines on the white background against
which the lower tips of the two falling containers are photographed, are spaced
exactly half a millimeter apart between centers, and are as fine as it was
found practicable to make them. As before explained, neither the lines nor the
tips of the rapidly falling containers are sharply in focus of the camera lens.
The tip of the container holding the Barium Aluminate is marked S (slow) on the
plate; and the containers were reversed in position after each dropping as
indicated. As easily seen on the plate, the S container is unevenly slow in the
six photographs, and even very slightly fast in the first. This unevenness is
attributable to variation in the exceedingly slight
friction of the containers in their guiding tubes during the first millimeter
of their fall. The containers are perfectly free after that. S For
accurate measurement of falling velocity differences of the containers in all
plates, I have used a binocular microscope of low magnifying power, having a
very large stage provided with a high-precision micrometer specially designed
and built for this purpose. In finding the average impairment of
gravitational acceleration of the S container in the six photographs of Plate
I, all were measured with the micrometer, the five affirmative values were
added together, the slight negative value o the first one subtracted from the
sum, and the remainder divided by six. This gave the mean slowness of the S
container -- 0.099 mm, say one tenth of a millimeter. This is one part in
11,000 of the distance fallen (110 cm). But the Barium Aluminate constituted
only 40.3 % of the total weight of the loaded container. Hence, impairment of
falling velocity of the barium Aluminate alone, as compared with equal weight
of lead in the other container, was one part in 4450. When a companion plate
was made with the container loads exchanged (as customary in all tests),
slowness of the Barium Aluminate was found closely the same. Of the several
compounds described and tested for impairment of falling velocity, only two
have been tested in the ice calorimeter for continual generation of heat.
Barium Sulphate, the first of these, was chosen because of its undoubted
stability, although it had shown but very moderate impairment of falling
velocity. It exhibited very moderate but steady and satisfactory generation of
heat during a long run in the calorimeter. The second calorimeter test was made
with barium Aluminate like that used for Plate I; but after preparation it was
only air dried at room temperature, to avoid any unstability that might arise
from hot air-drying, or ignition. The specimen was prepared about two
months ago, and has been in the calorimeter during the last six weeks, where
it continues to show rather large and steady generation of heat. It appears to
be quite stable. More than a year ago the Bureau of Standards very kindly
offered to repeat some of my experiments on "continued generation of heat in
some substances". A special ice calorimeter, quite different from mine, was
designed and built for the purpose. After much time spent in perfecting and
calibrating the calorimeter, a specimen of the air-dried Sandusky clay describe
din some of my earlier papers, was tested during the last few months; and I
have very recently received official announcement that this substance does
continually generate a measurable amount of heat. The Bureau is about to
commence testing the comparatively active Nickel-Cobalt Silicate described in
my last two papers. Correlation of continual generation of heat in some
substances and impairment of their gravitational acceleration, is
regarded as very strong evidence in support of the kinetic theory of
gravitation; and we seem now well on the way of finding out something definite
about the nature of gravitation, which has been by far the greatest of all
outstanding physical problems.
---------------------------------
Bibliography Dictionary of American Biography, Suppl. 1,2; p. 29
Science (March 10, 1911) Nature 86 (2160): 130-132 (March 23, 1911); ibid.,
86 (2161) (March 30, 1911); Letter, Sir Oliver Lodge Proc. Royal Soc. (Series
A) 93 (1917); ibid., 95 (with Sir Robert A. Hadfield & S.A> Main) Proc. Amer.
Philos. Soc. 50 (3), 1926; ibid., 53 (213), Jan.-May, 1914; ibid., 54
(May-July, 1921; ibid., 60 (2): 43-61 (1921); ibid., 62 (3): 75-89 (Sept. 29,
1923); ibid., 63 (1): 57-61 (1924); ibid., 66 (3): 251-166 (1927); ibid., 67
(2): 105-117 (1928); ibid., 68: 55-68 (May 1929) Amer. J. Sci. 88: 118-128
(Jan.-May 1914) J. Franklin Inst. 206 (1232): 143-150 (Aug. 1928) Phys.
Rev. 9 (2), 1917 US Patents:
#337,299 (Battery)
#1,698,669 (Jan. 8, 1929), Piezo-electric crystals
# 1,823,864 (Sept., 1915)
Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Robert in Bold Purple...... ME IN BOLD BLUE
1. What graphic editor is producing your diagrams, Allen?
Power Point.. convert to JPEG? I know I don?t do good spell check there
eitherJ
2. Why can?t the ?pushing and squeezing? be the result of continuous
aether flow radially inward, rather than vibrations?
I don?t see how you can have Continuous flow radially indefinitely in a
elastic membrane
Your model is an elastic membrane, mine is a stream of fluid. The source of
the flow is Daniel 7:10 , as expounded in Chap 11 of GWW.
I don?t have a problem with a stream of fluid maybe I misunderstood you about
the elastic membrane, but in any case flow from a higher pressure to a lower
one would only be possible if it had someplace to go and could do that for
6000 + years?I dont calim your model cant be true but in essence the differnece
is in where you make the divison of the supernatural to the "natural" you just
do at a diferent point then I do....but streams themselves can?t account for a
natural attraction of grav nor would pressure not nearly as easily as
Vibrations. Dan 7:10 could justa s eaisily be the source for any number of
aspects of the Fermement and may have nothing to do with any kind of radial
flow of anything to do with grav.. Im not saying that it could not be just that
there is not enough data in the text to even imply that. On the other hand the
text does state specificaly that Hebrews 11:3. Through faith we understand
that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that
things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.
2Peter 3: 7. But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word
are kept in store,
I could just as well make the case that since all energy , work and light
move and have being in vibrations and God spoke the worlds in to existence and
when you speak you in essence create vibrations and we are in the image of God
that the fundamental foundation is to be found in vibrations as energy force
and light.
( not to mention the problem of where does it go and what happens to it and
?the where it came from? once it gets to where it is going)???
Good questions?. TBD
??.Simply adding pressure via a elstic membrane does not create gravity nor
would it make you haevier any more then increasing the atmospheric pressure in
a chamber would. If the elastic membrane were the cause of gravity then it
would have to affect all exposed surfaces to the aether with the same ?elastic
pressure?.. hence when I jumped up I would then be weightless??.All you do with
a elastic membrane is create pressure not a downward force just as in a
atmospheric chamber other wise the analogy has no bases in observable reality
?????? I do see how a continuous vibration would indefinitely create a downward
?force? attracting bodies to bodies indefinitely as long as the vibration is
powered?..
How does vibration cause a continuous(constant) force?
Same as sound board if the vibration is turned off the particles will keep
their existing position of the board but any introduction of a particle will
not yield the effects of the attraction as seen when the board is turned on? as
long as the vibration is active the "tuning fork effect" will be manifest More
on this latter but ref to this i think is found in some of Maxwells and Teslas
work as it might relate to grav
3. How do the aether vibs know that they are near an object and should
compress- or where they should start to compres ? the boundary?
Know? The same way the ripples in a pond do or any waves in a fluid medium
do.. the only difference is the properties of the fluid medium with wave forms
travailing in it not the mechanics?
4. Is it reflection from the mass surface? Then why isn?t there an
interference pattern, instead of a continuous density variation?
How could you say/ Know that there is no interference pattern??
Because interference patterns are variations in intensity, not a continuous
density variation
Garvity is a demonstration of variations of intensity...? vibrations
themslevs folow a inverse square relationship... Maxwell even talks about this
under Gravity in the Britanica 1889 9th eddition im working on specific
references
You can't measure the vibrations directly speed are near instantaneous as I
said before you could not construct a physical apparatus to measure vibrations
and as a consequence interference patterns either traveling at those speeds 15
billion ly per 10-44 sec all would be imperceptible one and the same thing
although in reality effects at and on different scales..
I suggest that the interference patterns are the causes of the Alias effect
among other things?. There has not been enough experimentation to know those
things exactly but what has been done shows fluid ? yes - and wave ??
properties?..That is my point the wave properties have not been exhausted. Your
question is good but the available data is lacking to make a case on that issue?
5. Why is the compression variation exponential? Truthfully it seems
more like an elastic medium, which compresses when continuously pushed against
solid matter?? which is the aether flow model.
I would suggest that an elastic medium is not only unnecessary when
vibrations can accomplish the same thing but the grav slingshots; Gyroscope
effect and Aspned ; aether flow can not be explained in a elastic membrane
certainly not gravity ..
Agreed, But then why are you using an elastic membrane model?
Maybe I keep getting that mixed up with yours ..? but you did state
"Truthfully it seems more like an elastic medium", but then again i understand
that better now that Martin covered this in his Lecture.. the issue is not so
much the elasticness of but rather the fact that pressure alone will not yeild
grav.. elastic or not that would not prevent my point although i think of it as
noncompresable like water not realy elastic.. but that may not be a issue
either way at least right now
but flow as in a current in a fluid can all while still prorogating grav
aetheral waves.. including the ones that ripple and compress when they confront
mass ? the feed back of the previous effects indicate that aether affects mass
and mass affects aether as in vortices that are the cause of Aspned effect
which is essentially the same effect for gravity slingshots because only a
?current?/ vortices could explain that .. then there is also the Gyroscopic
effect makes perfect sense using the same mechanics as grav slingshots and
Aspned effects..
6. How many types of aether are there? RB Biblical model has 3 types.
I can live with that for now??I?m not trying to sort out all the different
types until we can even ascertain or settle on what must be accomplished first
in general by the aether or aether(s) ( take your pick at this point although I
would argue for a singular firmament but in any case, other then scriptural
interpretations , that issue I would suggest is a non issue at this point?.. im
open to ideas on that) Once we can establish and how and what work is to be
done then I will focus more on how many and which ones do what..
7. How does your model explain the zero gravity zone ? the
GeoStationary Distance?
As I stated before there is a clear ?division of labor? between local and
universal gravity effects (same basic ?force? Vibrations) the difference is
one of scale?.Effects on the macro v effects on the micro scale ..The moon is
in grav influence with the earth geostat by definition is inertialy neutral as
I have discussed earlier if it is due to balance between the moon and earth
there is a lot of problems with that every time the moon moves over head and
if the moon is responsible for tides???.and thus any model must be able to
explain how grav can affect earth/moon but not affect satellite orbit every
time moon orbits earth ..
Why do you reject/ignore the model of counter-rotating fluids.. which
predict zero gravity at the boundary?
I don?t , I?m only pointing out that direct measurement of where that
boundary is starts and ends has not been done (ieMM) as a result you cant
depend on a boundary to explain a given phenomena where 1. There is no
objective measurement of its physical dimensions 2.inherently unstable in a
fluid for the reasons that follow (tieds and grav influence at greater
distances) 3. Even if there was such a boundary, (I think there is for the
reasons I gave and give aspend effect ect) it does not indicate your
explanation of grav ? you are going to run into great difficulties in
invoking radial flow in a dynamically active (currents) fluid to account for
grav effects 1. you cant be sure it is elastic rather then incompressible (
although this is really a minor issue at best since most of this is theoretical
extrapolation anyway however my model is not dependent on that) 2. currents
themselves will not allow for the transfer of radial flow through currents of
presumably varying
densities even if it is elastic?Why? ....The radial flow itself is a
current??. you are in essence attempting to create simultaneous currents that
traverse each other at 90 0 angles at different speeds and varying densities?I
don?t see how that is possible at all. However vibrations can do this same work
without any of those difficulties even with variable densities and direction of
currents, vibrations can traverse currents at 90 degrees or even diametrically
in the opposite direction of any current itself.. I think in the short term you
have a big problem and in the long term that model is too restrictive.
Vibrations are the way to go, interacting with mass that is travailing via
currents in the aether this I believe is the stronger model.
Further, what I think you Miss is the fact that even with a counter rotating
fluid in your explanation (not mine) of zero grav at the geostat distance, the
moon and sun are still exerting Grav influence at their distance ??. If you
argue that their grav influence is direct then you can?t claim zero at geosat
distance and if you claim it is indirect as I do you have no mechanism to
account for it?.. this is the significance of the Alias effect in any model.
??. in my model there are two primary forces at work one is fluid flow which
accounts for grav slingshots and aspeden effect and gyroscopic effects and
the/ any counter rotaion of aether below geosat distance,......the other is
vibration as the prime force of grav with different effects at different
scales?However these two are independent. Your model does not make a
distinction which I think is going to cause a lot of problems namely with
gravitational anomalies and how local and universal grav relate....you still
have a DM&DE problem to address. Becuse, even if you assume the inverse square
law in your model for local gravity it would not account for any large scale
structures at least not using gravity.., then you too will be forced to either
accept DM & DE to account for anything as big or bigger then galaxy structures
or simply invoke just as an arbitrary limit on the extent of grav influence
because the alias effect demonstrates that the moon and sun are in
gravitational influence with the earth the only question, point and
explanation I raise is how and specifically that although the grav influence
is real it is a secondary variable not a primary one due to position , ? but
where do you draw the line at real grav influence and how arbitrary is your
boundary limits not to mention the inherent instability of such a boundary, I
think...?Your radial flow will not account for any macro gav effects.. I know
some would say the problem is created by MS because they evoke eons of stellar
evolution. However, the issue of time as a argument is not a good one because
2Peter 3:5. For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God
the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the
water:
??. mine can account for all that without compromising scripture in any shape
fashion or form.
I believe my ripples in the pond can demonstrate how a large body/satellite
at a given distance will only bob up and down in the water while a
closer/smaller satellite/body will be drawn to the boat via wave compressions
against the boat?
Good. When does the ?can demonstrate? become ?will demonstrate??
I would argue that my model is far less arbitray certainly not more
so........You can perform this in any pond as long as the ripples are
continuously powered ??This has already been done with tuning forks and mass
attraction deriving a inverse square relationship of attraction...a Lot more on
this to come .......Maxwell and others ?..Im working on more detailed specific
ref,... ....the basic mechanics is one of a tuning fork .. size and mass of
object determines harmonics/ the interacting effects.
I model the force for CB mechanics is two fold one is the smaller motions
of the bodies driven by currents the other is the structure of the currents and
bodies themselves driven by a Grav vibrations..... local gravity is due to
micro effects of vibrational wave compression against a CB where overall
structure of universe is macro effects of the Grav vibration......grav
slingshots and orbital mechanics are primarily driven by currents not gravity
although the grv vibrations would affect the currents as in any fluid the two
are symbiotic but function independently as well.
8. How does your model explain the counter-rotating aether on either
side of the GSD boundary?
Counter rotating aether is a theoretical construct based on aether flow that
is yet to be definitively shown experimentally (Ie MM type )
Not true Allen. All CBs from the Moon out rotate westward; all artificial
satellites at less than GSD rotate eastward. This is an experimental fact which
we have discussed before and Paul D has even partially graphed. Why do you
prefer speculation to experimental proof?I have cited experimental reasons not
sure what speculation i am depening on......... I'm not aruging those facts
about satilites only pointing out the weakness in actual measurments of any
suposed counter rotation. Martin pointed out at the conference that no one has
actualy ever measured any gradiant for aetheral rotation... I firmlybelive it
is there but that is speculation that in any case should hold true in your
model as well.......I dont see it as a big problem since it is one of
incomplete/lack of data/ experimentation rather then conflicting data, which is
a real problem....... In My model i do prefer proof over speculation and have
experiment to back up my explanations...I would argue far more
so then in any other model......One is the aspend effect the earth drags
aether as aether rotates against it ( created current)...just as in the case of
the motor and gyroscopes do, the difference is that since the earth is
stationary the aether drag is opposite of the direction of the aether rotation
where in CBs that rotate also appear to drag it in the direction of their
apparent spin ...That dragging creates a current and the current that accounts
for grav slingshots in the direction of the CB?s spin and even the
aether/earth?s relative spin???.Currents are real but they are not gravity and
gravity cant be explained very believably to me via a current only (radial
flow).....
but having said that even if it were true ( I kinda think it could be) AVGM
does not in any way deny or prevent flow as in currents on the contrary it
demands them but to support a non fluid elastic aether poses far more problems
for that issue then a dynamic fluid with vibrations as the cause of large scale
structure on the macro scale and a kind of ?surface tension? due to ripple or
wave compression against mass at the micro scale.. Scripture only affirms the
bodies set or placed in the firmament it does not go into any detail as to how
or why they hold or were set/ put into those positions in the first place..
that is the point of discovery here.
My question is why did God create the CBs first and then the firmament to
put them in? Where were they after being first created but before being set in
the firmament?
The only other case of creation and then relocation is Adam himself. He was
created before being placed in Eden. Is there some deep significance to these
two creation and relocation events ? What meaning is intended by this reversal
of sequence?
Maybe Robert S or Martin S (aka Martian) has the exegesis.
Robert B
Why do you prefer speculation to experimental proof?
Why do you think the CBs were created first somewhere else?.... I could just
as well say that I built my ceramic shop made some potery and placed them in it
?????.this does not demand that the potery was made in some other location then
the shop itself. We might consider the natural sequence in at least what we
observe in our everyday lives as shop to pottery?.. but not shop poterey
somewhere else then into shop......
Because......
Gen 1: 6. And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters,
and let it divide the waters from the waters. 7. And God made the firmament,
and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which
were above the firmament: and it was so.
8. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were
the second day.14. And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the
heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for
seasons, and for days, and years:
Clearly implies the firmament was already there becuse God spoke them into
existance into the fimament...... well if He spoke them into the fimament then
either the firmament was already there or created at the same
time....??Creation day events were of Speech not physical process??The Issue
here may be perhaps an attempt to draw to much based on too little. You can
argue a couple of different ways and my point is, you can't make the case you
put forward using just the text without assumtions. The construct does not
demand that they were created in some other location then the location in which
they were spoken into existance, which was the fimament..I don't see how you
can make that argument.
Gen 2:8. And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he
put the man whom he had formed.
man was formed on the earth, not in the garden, the garden was planted after
the earth was created ......again a natural sequence of events.....foundation/
frame work to finished product
I would say your question assumes an imperative that does not exist.
Other related posts:
