[geocentrism] Re: Grew
- From: "philip madsen" <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 18:52:51 +1000
vibrational harmonic effects themselvs between masses, (not just the difstance
between the center of masses)....ref the sound board or diferent size rocks in
a vibrating jar
. We could call it Aetheral Vibrational Gravitational Model AVGM..anyone...
or maybe FVGM...
That is pseudo scientific mumbo jumbo.. some people even talk about the
harmonic vibration in H20 when trying to electrolyse it for free energy.. Are
you into that stuff?
Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: Allen Daves
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 1:01 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Grew
No, in New/Ein gravity, shape is only relevant for calculating the center of
mass not the strength/rate of gravity itself between masses (save the slight
difference due to shape from that center)... Where shape and size/volume is
most definitely directly a major factor in the strength/rate/type of
vibrational harmonic effects themselvs between masses, (not just the difstance
between the center of masses)....ref the sound board or diferent size rocks in
a vibrating jar
. We could call it Aetheral Vibrational Gravitational Model AVGM..anyone...
or maybe FVGM... Firmament Vibrational Gravitational Model for us Bible
folk..? :)
philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Allen the Newtonian/Einsteinian gravity is calculated upon the centre of
gravity, which does and has to take into consideration those factors of shape
volume etc. .. or so I believed.
----- Original Message -----
From: Allen Daves
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 7:50 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Grew
In Newtonian/Einsteinian gravity the strength or pull of gravity is based
solely on the mass of the object where I would argue for VG theory ... In VG
theory gravity is a function of the mass as well as shape/ volume of the
object(s) in question like the sand on the sound boards shape/volume is just as
important as mass/density.... if the earth were 1/3 the size it is now the
gravitational effects would not be that much different since the relative
distance to the center of mass would be nearly the same when accounting for the
increase in density that a earth 1/3 the size would have. Although water does
not compress generally, the density of tap water is less than the density of
sea water, the density of the earths crustal core with a hydration of say .007%
would be far more dense then the water itself. In this way if the earth
stretched due to a sudden catastrophic release of say ~1/7 of that water
(popcorn effect) the density would decrease while the volume would increase
this would account for the apparent increase in gravity
(http://www.nealadams.com/EarthProject/antipangea.html) although the total mass
of the earth would have stayed the same. Floating on the flood waters the
effects for Noah would be nothing more then a ride on a conventional elevator.
It has been calculated that the heat distribution of rain water itself is not
sufficient for the task as well as the fact that scripture go to a lot of
emphasis about the fountains of the great deep. If the catastrophic release
were a nonlinear curve of water release ( Genisis 7:11 in that day all the
fountains of the great deep broken up) then it is quite reasonable to suspect
that the earth was flooded primarily due to the volume of water release greater
than the expansion rate until such time as the water release came began to stop
then the expansion overtook the water volume and the flood waters subsided into
the now ocean basins. The weight of the water over the cracks at some point
would keep the water from spewing out into space and given the gravitational
effects for the earth at 1/3 size the necessary force for escaping the
gravitational pull would be greater since the differences in gravity would not
be a strict linear curve in a VG enviroment..... I cannot ignore the fact that
the contents only fit together on a smaller globe and the geology is one of
stretching not subduction unless you assume it first and ignore everything
else,......in fact there is no engine for subduction except the overall
"gravitational' effects of HC cosmology.. Umm.... Where a popcorned
(Relatively slowly primarily say over 1 year) earth would explain how and
why so many fossils are found on land and were not simply all wiped away in to
the ocean basins themselves particularly since if the flood took place on the
earth at its current size ..well do the math the present surface of the earth
is 80% water the erosion of all of the land masses would have dissolved almost
entirely into the oceans themselves unless the land mass was much greater in
the past but that poses a whole new set of problems in any explanation as well
as the fact that the continents do mach up together, one simple must ignore the
patterns....... other such evidence such a palladium halos, the fossile record
(size of animals and insects note there were giants in those days Genisis
6:4...ummm ...decrease in gravity would have that affect on a normal 6-7 foot
tall man today & dinos too, maybe even affect longevity ?) testify to the
quickness & totality of the event as well as the narratives of the food story
which demand a sudden catastrophic event rather then any mild gradualistic
event which also must take into account the recessional effects of the water
which would be quite different if the water flowed in to a basin that opened at
a rate almost consistent with the volume of water created rather then a volume
of water over the whole earth that recesses into a gaping basin the erosion
factors/ effects are entirely different. That would be the effect if the size
of the earth were the same and the water that covered the whole earth is now
all contained in the oceans..unless of course you are to argue that some of the
water that was then does not now exist here on earth......Quite simply there is
no other mechanical explanation that can account for all the necessary
variables that this model can intrinsically and with what is observed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjgidAICoQI
Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The earths crust is .05% or .005% (I cant remember which) water right
now. A realese of only 2/5ths of what is curently contained in the rocks would
accout for all of todays oceans ......
Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjgidAICoQI
You have to see this the more i think about it the more sense it
makes from a biblical stand point the whole quickness of the water level rise
and fall in the flood thing as well as gravity oxegen density dinos and ???..I
dont belive what I see this.."yoohoo"... actualy figured it out minus a few
details like the age of the earth.......look at the strech marks..I cant belive
what thoughts I have had over the last several hours.....!
http://www.nealadams.com/challenge.html
Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I ran across this by accident, I have never heard of this , I'm
certainly not endorsing this, but in terms of perportions, ratios and such
there are some interesting underlying ideas. Granted they may led nowhere but
his basic idea bings to mind the biblical flood/water issues..I have seen
Walter Brown's model and others which have many strengths but still problems,
however the basic idea here as far fetched and crazy as it may seem strikes me
very curiously....at first I thought this was a joke and did not think much
about it.....this guy is a entertainer not a professional scientist but after
reading much of the supporting pages and arguments and issues, it occurred to
me that by hook or by crook these wacked out ideas/theories may be worth the
effort & time to tear apart............
http://www.nealadams.com/nmu.html
http://www.nealadams.com/EarthProject/newest.html
http://www.nealadams.com/EarthProject/fromthedesky.html
http://www.nealadams.com/EarthProject/antipangea.html
http://www.nealadams.com/PhysicsOfGrow.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.0.0/751 - Release Date: 7/04/2007
10:57 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.0.0/751 - Release Date: 7/04/2007
10:57 PM
Other related posts:
