[geocentrism] Re: Aether effects

Allen, You have been reading too much de palmer . and not enough basic 
physics..  

I cannot relate to anything you are saying ..  Gravity has nothing to with 
causing    motion except to a falling object. and there is no frequency of 
motion except in a vibrating object..  Philip.
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Allen Daves 
  To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 3:30 PM
  Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Aether effects


  Clarification: The frequency of motion & or the gravity wave is the carrier 
wave in which all motion/ information is allowed to pass through....(since 
gravity causes motion as well)


  Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
    1. I meant EMR. Electromagnetic radiation)....... EMP is  Electromagnetic 
pulse
    2. "vibrations are a physical phenomenon. of vibrating matter. Show me 
where or how to measure the vibrations of gravity  ??? Light is a vibration 
..... that moves through the very Medium under discussion if you mean has 
physical effects well gravity is a physical effect so is lights effects on 
matter...now take sound it is a vibration though air water metal or any medium 
capable of carrying its frequency...sound is not a actually physical anything 
it is only a wave form ...
    3. Gravity is a vibration in the aether for all the reasons previously 
discussed ..in short there is only one demonstratable & or reproducible 
demonstration of the nature of gravity and its effects... 
    If the aether is as dense as suspected  and I believe that it is,  due to 
the necessity for it to traverse ~instantaneously across the universe. It must 
be a very long wave form ( also long wave forms go further and do more 
pushing).now ordinary mater has a entirely different density then the aether 
does therefore the range of frequencies that can be carried by the two are not 
all the same. The aether being so dense can cary wave forms that cannot be 
carried by ordinary matter because the frequencies would be to small for matter 
to perceive directly or the frequencies would be too large for ordinary matter 
to measure such as the gravity wave which must be a very long wave form perhaps 
as large a half the size of the universe itself. No instrument of ordinary 
mater would be able to measure  a wave form 7 billion light years long, 
although matter would feel/ be subject to its effect ..obviously.. Go bac to 
the sound board and sand. The waves  used to produce some of the paterns were 
far larger then the objects on the board You could not physicaly measure a wave 
whos dimentions were 2X as large as the sun.but feeling the effect is not the 
same a measuring it. Although, you can measure the effect you cant measure the 
wave itself directly. It is way too large ..I also suggest a very large wave 
form for gravity due to the fact that larger wave forms travel further and push 
harder then shorter wave forms. since ordinary mater is of less density and 
different material the frequency rage for the aether and ordinary matter is not 
all the same. However, there must be overlap. It is that overlap that enables 
interaction between the two.. 
     

    4. You cannot call an alternating electrical current a vibration except by 
way of analogy..  You can convert it to vibrations through a suitable 
transducer..   I am not talking solely about the frequency of the current ie 
60HZ... I am talking about the frequency that the electrons themselves are 
vibrating and moving in when they are in a "free flow" verse a non flow state 


    Carrying the thought process forward from my last post about how matter can 
move through a dense medium........Now the kicker...... what if the frequency 
for all motion is the same frequency as the one for gravity the only difference 
is 1.origin ( non universal & or symmetrical as compared to gravity ) 2.focus 
(ie laser v light bulb), 3.intensity (strength the force required to bring it 
to full stop) ...Why not?..If you did not stop the motion it would go all the 
way to the end of the universe (Inertia)?..If gravity is a function of matter 
in the vibrating aether,  then why couldn't matter produce that same wave form 
since in AVGM the wave form must interact with matter to yield the observable 
effect of gravity ..might it not work visa versa.?..perhaps this long wave form 
is the perfect overlapped frequency for both ordinary matter and aether. In 
that way motion of one would affect the other in perfect  or almost perfect 
synchronicity. what we measrue i spin is the slight deviation from perfect 
syncronisity,  where all other frequencies would  be far more limited in their 
ability to traverse back and forth between matter and aether and aether to 
matter..... The gravitational wave is the same as the one for motion. This is 
the only truly nearly perfectly synchronous frequency between matter and the 
aether............?


    Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: 
      We all seem to have this difficulty in trying to explain how matter can 
move throughout the aether. But I think we have it all backwards again. I would 
argue that motion of any kind is it self a vibration that utilizes the aether 
as its medium for propagation ... The question should not be how can matter 
move through the aether. But, rather what is the necessary frequency for 
ordinary matter to allow for movement within the aether.. This would explain 
inertia in more detail give it a physical reaction of the frequency of motion 
to the medium of aether.just as in the case of Light and EMP and other wave 
forms that utilize the aether as a medium the frequency will determine the 
speed and the distance that the wave form can travel ..now light is restricted 
by speed but also distance a s function of intensity. where the frequency of 
motion would be allowed to travel the whole distance of the aether medium but 
the speed is determined by the intensity of the wave form that created the 
motion. ..in this way the appearance of inertia is obtained where any body in 
motion will remain in motion until either 
        1.. it reaches the outer boundary of the aether or 
        2.. B. it is acted upon by a equal or greater force.
      It is not "How things could move through the aether of such density?" but 
rather "How could anything move at all wihout such a dense medium to allow for 
motion"

      There I go again attempting to redefine all of physics bad allen.. BAD 
ALLEN!.J 


      Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: 
        All EMP are vibrations and the magnetic force lines too resonate just 
as sound is a vibration through air EMP and all other magnetic force lines are 
vibrations ..just like gravity is a vibration the only difference between them 
is the frequencies and what enables all those various ranges of frequencies to 
form and propagate some so small ordinary mater cannot interact directly with 
(wavelength shorter then any ordinary mater) and so large ordinary mater cannot 
detect directly (wavelength larger then any ordinary mater) ...........is I 
would argue the aether...and although ordinary Hydrogen cannot perceive these 
vibrations directly, these vibrations still affect ordinary maters interactions 
with other mater as well as the various forms of energy. That is why the energy 
capacity in the Aether although infinitely greater then the energy stored in 
ordinary matter does not achieve equilibrium because the frequency range and 
the degree to which that transmission of energy in those frequencies is 
limited. Certain frequencies allow for motion while others allow for 
electromagnetic effects while yet others preclude the possibility of thermal 
equilibrium even though there is a energy leak/manifestation of 3.5degreesK in 
the background radiation which it self propagates at a given frequency range.. 
Regardless of how hot the aether is you can only see 3.5degreesK. of it which 
when you thing about it further demonstrates the extremely low efficiency of 
energy transmission from aether to matter assuming that the 3.5 degrees is not 
just the amount of heat energy that is transported in the aether but actually 
represents some of the energy of the aether..?


        philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: 
          Allen I should have explained it better.  To understand light 
propagation , I prefer to use radio because the longer wavelength, and the 
antenna elements are more practical to examine. 

          You know what I mean if I said that if a unit North pole were placed 
near to a North magnetic pole it would be repelled away even through a vacuum. 
(it has nowhere else to go)

          In the case of radio EMR the transmitting element produces a sequence 
(at the given frequency) of electrically and magnetically polarised "envelopes" 
. which are aligned with "like" polarities opposing , which as a result repell 
each other away from the antennae. these have no weight, hence the speed of 
propagation is at the speed of light. Why this limitation is another subject, 
our aether, and not involved in this current explanation. 

          So I meant that because of the law of like poles repel, the generated 
envelopes of electromagnetic energy as electrical and magnetic lines of force 
in quadrature have nowhere else to go but be repelled away from the continueing 
successive like polarity envelopes and from the antenna itself.  As these 
envelopes of force move further away from the centre, they have to stretch ..  
This is the action which mathmatically gives us the inverse square law.  The 
fields are contiguous, and contradicts any idea of a corpuscle or particle 

          So that is why I said  it can only go one way and that is away from 
the source. and by way of explaining that this could happen without the need 
for any hypothetical fluid medium. 

          This still leaves us with the need to explain how force acts through 
(supposedly) empty space.. to which I offered elsewhere, IT IS NOT REALLY EMPTY.

          The antiaetherans try to say that the field is itself an entity..  
This I reject as pure supposition.  The field is a ficticious entity used to 
explain the action of a force. Lines of force are graphical representation of 
this action.  I expect that to be understood in my explanation above, lest I be 
seen to contradict myself. 

          On an aside, you said,
          If it has nowhere to go it might not go anywhere just as sound dose 
not travel in a vacuum my voice would have no where to go and thus it would go 
nowhere.

          Sound is a ficticious word.. It is a subjective thing like sight..  
It is the biological animals reaction as hearing of a vibration. But the nature 
of physical vibration cannot be anything but analogously compared to 
electromagnetic cycles, which cannot be technically called a vibration. If the 
vibration of your voice was converted into electrical cycles, it would indeed 
be propagated in a vacuum. 

          This is the reason why there are regulations controlling the audio 
power in the hearing aid loops of theatres and buildings.  Why ? because they 
can interfere with radio reception in aircraft that may be overhead...  

          Philip.   
            ----- Original Message ----- 
            From: Allen Daves 
            To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
            Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:37 AM
            Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Aether effects


            Comments in blue
            (p)"EMR propagates because it has nowhere to go but away from its 
source. Its exactly like two like poles trying to occupy the same space. It is 
self propagating. Its wave like properties, is due to the nature of the two 
fields of which it is composed.. they stretch." 

            1. If it has nowhere to go it might not go anywhere just as sound 
dose not travel in a vacuum my voice would have no where to go and thus it 
would go nowhere.
            2.Experiments demonstrate something that has properties doing 
something that makes it hard to write it off as just nothing.
            3. Scripture plainly outlines a Something out there that every 
thing out there is imbedded into...


            philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: 
              Martin, first up I want to say that I have the utmost respect for 
you, as I have come to experience your written word. Whilst I may not accept 
all that you teach, or say, you have been a cause in re-igniting my curiosity 
to learn and venture in new directions of all philosophy in science.  I admire 
your command of the language. Thus it is in the spirit of learning and of my 
ignorance, that I make the following comment. 

               You seem to be trying very hard to make the aether fit with some 
quantistic theory to make it conform with the ancient hypothesis of the aether 
being a hypothetical medium/fluid with properties that are due to a special 
type of material  ..Why are you opposed to the idea that it does not have to be 
a material substance at all, and that wave propagation "through"  it is due to 
an entirely different and new concept.  I said "through" in quotation marks 
because I dispense with the term medium. 

              EMR propagates because it has nowhere to go but away from its 
source. Its exacly like two like poles trying to occupy the same space. It is 
self propagating. Its wave like properties, is due to the nature of the two 
fields of which it is composed..  they stretch. 

              OK yes I know you were about inertia and momentum, not EMR but, 

              Why does "aether" have to be a special material with a new and 
special viscosity, that applies differently to matter at constant velocity  to 
that which has acceleration? 

              Last time I heard viscosity is a property inherent to a fluid.

              You seem to be trying to invent a fluid (via quantum mechanics) 
with discretionary properties as regards inertia, which to my mind means it is 
not a fluid at all. At the practical level for the purpose of trying to prove a 
fluids existence perhaps that makes for a possible hypotheses, but maybe 
unnecessarily so. 

              Somehow it seems to me that we must get back to basics from 
scripture when trying to reason out how a geocentric universe can rotate with 
an aetheric firmament. To venture into using quantum theory to explain it 
appears to me to be no different to those creation scientists who try to 
justify evolution as intelligent design, on the one hand and on the other try 
to prove the universe is new , of only 7000 years or so old..  

              This latter way of thinking is of the Devil, at worst, or a 
weakness of faith at best, because it denies the omnipotent God as having the 
power to create a natural world. A world that would need in the natural order 
of science at least millions of years to have developed  IF He had so desired 
to do it that way. BUT

              God  tells us specifically that He side stepped all of that 
developement and created the world in six days, and it was an aged universe 
that he created, with light shining from stars that were light years away..  
Yes for the unimaginative among you I say, he put in place in an instant the 
stars, with rays of light that were light years long, to shine on the earth in 
that day. This probably was the only time ever, when light was made to travel 
at infinite speed.

              Likewise He said , and I know I am being repetitive, "Before 
Abram was I AM. " 

              To me that explains the aether, or else I am truly nuts.  

              Philip. 
                ----- Original Message ----- 
                From: Martin G. Selbrede 
                To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
                Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 8:51 AM
                Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Aether effects




                On Apr 24, 2007, at 5:21 PM, Dr. Neville Jones wrote:


                  If maximons DO couple with matter:

                  My original point was that if material objects are carried 
along by a rotating aether (such that net kinetic energy imparted is zero, as 
you state), then there must be a noticeable effect when those objects travel 
through, or against, this aether (even allowing for Allen's novel suggestion of 
currents within the aether), for then the flux must produce far more maximons 
"pushing against" our material object. 


                This was what Markov was countering in regard to a liquid 
composed of maximons. This liquid has the intriguing property of having zero 
viscosity with regard to constant velocities, but non-zero viscosity in 
reaction to objects with changing velocities. (Again, I personally don't hold 
to either a LeSagean gas or a Markov liquid, but the extreme density form of 
these two models, where the mean free path constrains the underlying aetherons 
-- of whatever construction -- to stay localized near their current lattice 
positions due to crowding from their neighbors. The net flux through any 
material object is always zero: aether flux is conserved in this model, 
although the Bouw/Hanson approach to LeSage does not conserve flux since it 
treats matter as shielding that flux, rather than considering that matter 
shields acoustic pressure transmitted through the lattice. The effects are 
identical in either case, but with the rarefied aethers incumbent upon LeSage 
gas protagonists to support, there is no clear identification of the Planck 
Density with any element of the current universe at the subquantum domain. If 
these connections have been since established, I've not seen them reported.) 



                  If maximons DO NOT couple with matter:

                  How would such an aether carry any material object along 
within itself?



                I think I mentioned this already, that inertial drag is to 
matter in the aether as Fresnel drag is to light rays in glass.  


                I think in all fairness, Neville, your task is complicated 
because every person here on the forum has a completely different idea of what 
the aether is and how it should behave. So, interacting with Allen may or may 
not translate to an adequate response to Martin, or to Phil.  You've got five 
blind men and an elephant, in effect. Your challenge, then, is to not tar with 
too broad a brush, but since knowledge of another person's views comes in to 
you piece-meal (usually by way of the person objecting to your criticisms), 
you've got something akin to vague, moving targets with poorly-defined 
outlines. So, I'm sympathetic with the challenges of pinning us aether guys 
down. It's like the old saw that if you have five economists, you'll have six 
opinions.


                Martin


                P.S.  This reminds me of a comedian's commentary about all the 
out-of-focus photos of the legendary Bigfoot here in North America:  "Bigfoot 
IS blurry. He's a creature with soft edges running around in the wilderness -- 
you can't get a sharp photograph of him."  So it is with the aether theorists.  
The best you can do is pin one down at a time and figure out what his 
particular conceit is.  That's just the nature of the beast. No pun intended.







----------------------------------------------------------------

                No virus found in this incoming message.
                Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
                Version: 7.5.463 / Virus Database: 269.6.0/775 - Release Date: 
24/04/2007 5:43 PM




--------------------------------------------------------------------

            No virus found in this incoming message.
            Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
            Version: 7.5.463 / Virus Database: 269.6.1/776 - Release Date: 
25/04/2007 12:19 PM











------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
  Version: 7.5.463 / Virus Database: 269.6.1/776 - Release Date: 25/04/2007 
12:19 PM

Other related posts: