ok ...good...........You show a noticable change because the bomb was at rest (one inertial state) and then began to accelerate to a differnt inertial state ( all that changing takes time to "settle down").....the earth's supposed orbit changes accelerations states back and fourth constently because its orbit is not a perfect circle....a accelerometer as you just demonstrated only demonstrates differnces wrt accelerations or inertial states...the earth's inertial state/ acceleration is not a constant 32 f per sec per sec....it changes constently .............everytime it does there must be detectable change....otherwise the changes from one inertial acceleration state to the next cannot be claimed to exist.............the changes can be said to be very small but they exist and should be detectable if they exist..... ----- Original Message ---- From: Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx> To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Wednesday, May 7, 2008 2:49:38 PM Subject: [geocentrism] Re: acceleration calcs attachment Allen D I was considering whether I would (or even could) respond to you post last night -- From Allen Daves Tue May 6 22:19:38 2008 -- when this one arrived. I'll cancel last night's -- there wasn't much chance I was going to be able to decipher it anyway -- and address this one instead. Here again, I can't say with any confidence that I can understand most of this post either -- I hesitate to suggest that you are talking nonsense but prefer to think that it is just an inability to express what you are thinking. Instead I'll re-visit my illustration -- Accelerometer. To that end, I've added to it and will now describe the sequence of events it depicts. 1. Left hand depiction in the left hand pane. The bomb is hanging from a sky-hook in a one gravity field -- 9.8m/s/s. You will note that I have now added a scale graduated in 1 'g' increments and added a pointer on the reference mass. In case you are wondering, it has also been calibrated against standards which trace their origin to the NATA labs. You will notice that it indicates a displacement of - 1 'g' as one would expect. This is because the reference mass is free to move in a line to the centre of the Earth by expanding the upper spring, helped by the lower spring compression, until the downward force of gravity is balanced by upward force of the springs. The bomb however is held in a fixed position by the sky hook against the same gravity which has displaced the reference mass. 2. Right hand depiction in the left hand pane. The link to the sky hook has been severed at some small time in the past. This is evident by the fact that the reference mass registers a steady 0 'g'. This is the condition where gravity is exerting a force which accelerates the bomb casing at 9.8m/s/s ie the same rate that it is accelerating the reference mass. It is a steady reading because, despite there having been only a small elapsed time, the design of the system has taken into account the magnitude of the reference mass and the strength and the Q of the springs, and chosen integrating, differentiating and critical damping constants so as to optimise settling time and minimise any tendency to oscillate. 3. Right hand pane. The time since free fall began has increased and a small rocket which has the power to accelerate itself, the bomb casing and the reference mass at a rate of 0.95 'g' is firing. The rocket has been firing longer than the settling time of the accelerometer and so it indicates + 0.95 'g', again as one would expect. When the rocket has expended its fuel, and the settling time has again expired, the accelerometer will again read 0 'g' as depicted in right hand of the left pane. I am unable to see where I have anything mis-oriented as you suggest. Paul D ----- Original Message ---- From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Wednesday, 7 May, 2008 3:45:31 PM Subject: [geocentrism] Re: acceleration calcs attachment I'm going here and now to go back and begin in much more detail to address the error here using Paulʼs diagram of an accelerometer and mass....first...... I will ask a question to everyone.....if i am on a planet of one earth mass that is falling toward the sun will i have any weight and how much will i weigh and why?..... lets take a look back at Pauls diagram (attached as "accelerometer") and ask one more question.... Is gravity pulling on all parts of the bomb and planet equally and simultaneously or not?...if it is then why would the scale ever change the weight it registers? The pressure that the sale had before should be the same since gravity is pulling on the mass and the bomb and all the parts in the scale at the same time to the same degrees... If gravity were pulling it all equally at the same time to the same degree then how and with what force (other then the force that is pulling everything downward equally to all parts).....would any of the spacial relationships between the bomb the mass and the spring be affected if they are all being pulled equally and simultaneously?...if the spacial relationships were not disturbed then how could it register a different reading....we only have one force action on our bomb/mass accelerometer gravity it is the same force before the drop as it was after the drop, that is to say that gravity is pulling on everything equally to all parts simultaneously before and after the drop ..so what is the force is changing any of the spacial relationships between the mas spring and bomb?...... If gravity is the only force acting on a mass but is supposedly pulling to all parts of any mass (earth oceans or bomb spring accelerometer)then there could never ever be any relative motion within that mass to a gravitational acceleration period.( )(free fall)and grav pulling on all parts of that mass and everything on and in it equally and simultaneously then when you drop it nothing can move relative to each other and as such there could be no change in the weight of the mass suspended in the bomb or the weight of a person on that planet of one earth mass falling toward the sun! where would the force be coming from to cause things to drift from their original spacial positions within that mass?!You can't be equal to all parts simultaneously and at the same time cause a change of relative position of anything within or on that mass being pulled on equally and simultaneously. If grav is the only force acting on a mass Now look at "slide1" ( attached..this is where the previous diagram erred) and for the reasons i already gave to philip....Gravity only pulls at the same rate for all objects it does not pull equally to all parts of anything!..for crying out loud that is why satilites drift and comets tumble....irregular pull on a irregular mass If the scale showed 30 gms before the drop ...then we drop and then the scale shows 0 grms....that by definition is a change....the cause of that change can only be shown to be the fact that we were first hanging with no velocity and then begining to move at a velocity other then what we were hanging at!!!.....Then demonstrate not just assert what the cause of the change was......When we had 0 velocity then we have 32 ft per sec per sec going from 0 to 32ft per sec per sec is what caused the change...Your the one imagigning that the states of weigtlessness and velocity are reversed.!?... The simple answer to why and how MS could have it all so wrong is that you guys not only are looking at the conditions all backwards, but you are also contridicting your own principles of grav in your applications of depending on the size & or magnitude of your examples............ ________________________________ Get the name you always wanted with the new y7mail email address.