[geocentrism] Re: Geosynchronous satellites paper

Jelly?.....fluid?......Well I point out that the observable effects in nature 
strongly suggest to me a fluid like aether and that gravity is a nothing more 
then a vibration in the aether. It is important to note that the Firmament aka 
aether is firm weather or not it is a fluid or solid/jelly but the best analogy 
as to its actual interactions with mass and mass in turn to it to me most 
strongly resembles fluid like properties.... Having said that it is important 
to realize that in water if there was no disturbance in the water and no other 
external forces that something placed in water could not/ would not move at all 
it would just be fixed in the water it is only the wave action or disturbance 
of the water that enables free floating objects to move around in water..and 
except for drag and such if you push a boat in the pond it will almost always 
keep moving till it reaches the other side ( inertia) ...I would argue, the 
only difference is the properties of the fluid not
 the fact that we are indeed looking a fluid aether perhaps the most basic 
fluid of them all with no forces external of it ( save God himself) to act on 
it .. Further, in fact it is why fluids act the way they do they are just a 
subornate form of...
   
  Now take the ocean for example there is wave/current action there too and 
those waves/ current traverse the entire ocean (universal) but the interaction 
of any given wave on a large or small vessel is not going to have an effect on 
any other boat unless it is close enough to it to have an effect such as coming 
into contact with another ships wake or the curent it creates when a ship 
sinks....Currents can be created by large objects but also affect larger 
objects differently then smaller ones but all of the basic dynamics can be 
described in term of fluids...surface tension itself is a local effect who?s 
origin rest universally in the fluid......Now weather or not it is a fluid the 
dynamics being similar it seems to me the best approach to pursue it as since 
if it is something so exotic that cannot be compared too then it will be 
infinitely more difficult if possible at all to develop any meaningful and 
demonstratable nature. I think there is still a lot more that needs to
 be looked at and examined but i firmly believe that we can more accurately 
describe the actual mechanics of the gravitational force itself in terms of 
vibrations (which would also include currents) I suggest the Feedbck 
description I pointed out in observable experiments i think would be a good 
place to begin in exploring the properties of aether or whater this fluid like 
thing is....
   
  On the maco larger bodies are arranged in the patterns observed(accurately at 
least to some extent) in mass distribution of the macro universe ..in smaller 
bodies the vibrations would have the same effect as they do in the ocean a 
large swell might move a small boat but would leave a small piece of trash 
relatively unmoved just bobbing up and down in the water ..it all depends on 
the size frequency of the waves in the fluid ..the fluids viscosity/overall 
Properties.....the size of the boat and the size of the trash in the water but 
the basic asymmetry still holds true for larger and smaller objects.......I 
believe that if you use the spacial distribution of mass in the universe with 
the relative sizes of the bodies in the universe along with observable 
phenomenon such as the aspeden motor and others along with the satellite 
maneuvering data we should be able to Extrapolate some more basic properties of 
the aether and the frequency and intensity of the gravitational
 vibrations so as to reproduce what we see in the observable universe......
   
  Again, i would like to point out that even MS is startled by the fact that 
large scale structures of the visible universe appear to be fractal......this 
modeling i know would be complicated and i don?t even know if it could be done 
outside of a Cray supercomputer like RED STORM which is used for global weather 
modeling ...I don?t mean to be a downer but although I think we can deduce much 
of it philosophically, however, the smallest nuts and bolts are going to 
require a lot more brain power then the math I can muster...........having said 
that,however,  i'm more then willing, eager and excited to let Nevile, 
Robert(s), Selbrede and crew crunch the big numbers...:)


Jack Lewis <jack.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:          Dear Dave,
  This is almost beyond me but your analogy with a ship moving through the sea 
is easy to understand. Are you suggesting that the aether is acting like a 
jelly and that any gravitational effect close to a body or mass is gradually 
dissipated through some kind of 'slip' taking place in the aether?
   
  Jack
   
    ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Allen Daves 
  To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 12:15 AM
  Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Geosynchronous satellites paper
  

  I think we are not as far apart as your conclusions might at first suggest, 
with a little "tweaking"  .......... It is/could be possible to 
explain/describe a localized only gravitational effect who?s ultimate cause is 
still "universal"... In this way there would be no need to through out 
instantaneous action at a distance or deep space travel or inertia as 
classically defined.(how it is described not explained)
   

Other related posts: