[geocentrism] Re: Aether & geostats
- From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 20:53:33 -0700 (PDT)
" Equivalent": Mass can be converted to energy. However, the first "law" of
thermodynamics still describes or governs this process.
"Free space" the aether has physical properties they were measured by Fressnel
and others.This not to mention the effects on the MM experiment which showed a
0 velocity through the aether for the earth around the sun where the MG
experiment showed the movement of the "free space" or the aether around the
earth with the exact expected value. I don?t know how you can say it cannot be
felt mechanically. I do not, however, believe that the aether directly moves
the mass in it. The aether governs at lest the flow of Energy. The "function"
between mass and EM Energy results in "forces". The aether caries EM Energy; EM
Energy carries mass. Mass interacts with mass as a function of mass and EM
Energy. Since the EM Energy is carried around the earth by the aether, the EM
Energy, as a consequence, carries the mass around with it. However the aether
itself would not directly affect the mass. We are left with a hierarchy of
functions. This is demonstrated in everyday life as well.
P: "This pressure also is responsible for inertia"
A: I don?t believe that any pressure or anything else at all is responsible for
Inertia. Inertia is just the natural state absent of any "force" which would be
a function of the energy in the aether and mass. EXAMPLE: As darkness is to
Light; Even though it is used as a noun, it is literally nothingness, the
absence of something, light. If a ball in motion is not acted on by a "force"
it will neither move nor stop nor change direction. This is because only a
"force" can do work. But inertia is the absence of "force". If the ball strikes
another ball then "force" is generated but to which object? It may stop one
object while simultaneously put another object into motion. Answer: It is
irrelevant, because "force" is a function of the masses and the Energy in the
aether; not either or both of the masses themselves. A body absent of any force
will continue in its present state indefinitely or until acted upon by a force.
This is what I believe inertia really "is".
P: "I have said hypothetically, that it is a property of the fourth dimension
of this universe, which can be "felt" by electromagnetic phenomena, but not
seen or felt mechanically, by us because we are three dimensional sensory
beings. This is a temporal phenomenon.
A: Electrostatic spin demonstrates this Phenomenon quite elegantly. It is and
can be felt mechanically however as a function of the mass and EM Energy. I
believe the eather is created, not apart of God he said as much and gave it a
name. Everything is a different manifestation of the simplest of things. I
think you may be thinking too complex with fourth dimensions and such. I think
that approach, makes things more complicated than they really are and you would
find it difficult, if not impossible, to prove anything anyway. Consider how
identical geometric proportions show up in everything the human face, sea
shells even plant leaves. I think this is why you are having these problems
with your ethereal thought experiments and understanding of Geo-stationary
satellites.
P: Will there be any centripetal force by the wheel on the arm attaching it to
the spindle?
A: The aether would not have anything to do with mass directly. This to me is
impossible as it is incompatible with experimentation and observation. However,
there is experimental and observations impetus for the hierarchy as I have
outlined above.
Geo-stationary satellites are held up by an equilibrium of this function of
mass and the currents of EM Energy, at that distance from earth. However, as
the Aether is spinning around the earth and caries the EM Energy within it and
the energy is carrying the mass, that function creates among other things the
"force" we would call "Centrifugal". And the rocket must be launched in such a
way as to counter that "force". I said "other things" because there are may
dynamics to EM Energy its not all the same intensity or frequency or scale and
such. All other "forces that would act upon the satellite would result from
that function as well. As the distance from the earth or other masses is
increased or decreased the dynamics and "forces" acting on it, due to the, EM
Makeup, to include different currents and Eddies, would change. The
aether/Plenum/ whatever you decide to call it would not directly affect mass.
Differing mass with differing make ups would be affected by different cur
rents
and eddies with different properties. (I.e. Frequency and intensity of the
Eddie and the mass of the body.) Since all mass have there own harmonics mass
are kept in there respective currents and eddies, overall, due the fact that a
particular mass is TUNED to a particular set of currents and eddies. I say
"overall" because there are and would be some interference/ perturbations,
which is why such things as wobble are observed.
P: How else can we explain prophecy, and the words, "Before Abraham was born, I
AM." .
A: As for Prophecy God made the mass, energy and the aether and gave it a name,
he is not bound by it. Hebrews 11:????. 3. By faith we understand that the
worlds were framed by the word of God,?? The Mechanics would built into it.
A: Phillip, We are in total agreement with the Aether penetrating the earth.
What we don?t know is what the nature of the terminal end is, or how it fastens
itself to the earth. Except to say that it allows the universe to behave like a
tabletop gyroscope.
Allen
Philip <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In light of what I said re inertia, here is a speculative model for the
geostationary satellite. What do you think would happen to the thing. Would it
be a good simulation?
Let's have a 12inch record turntable turning at 78 rpm clockwise. This is the
plenum. The spindle shaft is stationary.
Next take an arm out from the spindle to a position 6 inches out with a motor
driven wheel on the end resting on the turntable. It will be driven up to speed
clockwise in the opposite direction to the turntables motion, so that it equals
the peripheral speed at that point.
It will of course be stationary with respect to the spindle. and to us the
observers. It will be a geostationary satellite.
The question is. Will there be any centripetal force by the wheel on the arm
attaching it to the spindle?
I'm laughing, because I don't really know. I think it would still want to fly
out into space if it was released.
And thus I do vindicate Roberts inertia position, which I failed to see
originally, using a washing machine analogy. Sorry Robert. You did say I'd see
it eventually if I thought hard enough.
If you all concur, then I will next apply this to catching the moon.
and landing on it.
No offence Neville,
Philip.
Other related posts:
