[geocentrism] Re: acceleration calcs attachment

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 
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 
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. 

Other related posts: