[geocentrism] Re: 28 moons
- From: "philip madsen" <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 09:44:00 +1000
I just noticed that this letter by Charles F. Brush was written in 1911. Isn't
it refreshing to read superb English, about real science written in such
careful and studious a manner. I was born only 24 years later, and perhaps this
explains why my education was so much better than that available today.
His explanation of gravity as push not pull, and the manner in which he
described how the pressure and shadows permeating even into every molecule and
atom was brilliant. Yet somehow it got pushed into the oblivion of time.
Just another little proof of the degeneration of man as fortold in Scripture.
Especially when we know that as good as education was in Mr. Brush's time, even
then it had seriously declined since the age of enlightenment, when educated
man was not only word perfect in his own tongue, but acomplished in Latin and
classical Greek, plus two, three or even more other European languages. We
shudder today when our president/prime ministers cannot even articulate in
their own tongue.
Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: Allen Daves
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2007 4:18 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: 28 moons
I went looking for something a little different but came across this. I think
the basic frame work here with alot of tweaking ( vibrations are ineffect just
the transfer/ transportaion of Kinetic energy) is sound in the sense that it
moves generaly in the right direction and is a fair general bases for some of
the underlying basics of Aetheral Vibrational Gravitation notwithstanding the
other reasons( O&E) I have already given and will expound upon further perhaps
latter when it comes up again...Particularly the implications of the alias
effect in gravitaional modeling.... I do think his Grav Frequencies might be
wrong. Further i believe that only a examination of large scale structure of
mass distribution is going to yield the correct vibrational Frequency(ies)
......More to follow....
Nature 86: 130-132 (March 23, 1911)
A Kinetic Theory of Gravitation
by
Charles F. Brush
Ever since Sir Isaac Newton enunciated the law of universal gravitation, more
than 200 years ago, philosophers have speculated on the nature of that
mysterious agency which links every atom of mater in the universe with every
other atom. Newton found himself unable to offer any adequate explanation.
Since Newton's time several theories of gravitation have been proposed; but
all, of which I am aware, are open to strong objections, and are not considered
even promising by physicists.
Study of the nature of gravitation is beset with unusual difficulties,
because gravitation is ever with us and about us; it is the one universal
phenomenon, and we cannot escape from its influence -- cannot obtain any
outside point of view.
Gravitation is often described as a feeble force: and so it is, from one
point of view. It is difficult to measure, or even to detect, attraction
between two small bodies. But when the bodies are pf planetary size the
aggregate attraction of their molecules is enormous. It is easy to calculate
that the attraction between the earth and the moon, which is just sufficient to
retain the latter in its orbit, would, if replaced by a steel cable, require
that the cable be about 500 miles in diameter in order to withstand the strain.
Between the earth and sun, the cable would have to be nearly as large in
diameter as the earth: and attraction between the components of double stars is
millions of times greater than between the earth and sun (Lodge). So tremendous
a phenomenon as gravitation, a phenomenon compared with which all others seem
trivial, must have a mighty origin.
That gravitation is a phenomenon of the all-pervading aether is beyond
reasonable doubt. This is so generally conceded that it need not be argued. But
how does the gravitative influence originate? How is it transmitted and
maintained? What is the mechanism of gravitation? It is the purpose of this
paper to attempt an answer to these questions.
Let us consider what happens to a falling body. We know that it gathers
kinetic energy from some source, as evidenced by its acceleration; that this
energy may do external work or develop heat; that the amount of energy gathered
is measured directly by the distance fallen through (within the limits of
uniform gravitation), irrespective of the time or rate of falling. When the
distance fallen through is of inter-planetary magnitude, and the attracting
body large, the gathered energy is enormous, sufficient, if converted into
heat, to vaporize the most refractory falling body.
We are here confronted with the question, Whence comes the energy acquired by
a falling body? Certainly it was not inherent in the body before the fall, as
evidenced by the fact that during unimpeded fall none of the physical or
chemical attributes of the body, aside from the acquired motion, changes in the
slightest degree.
We have been taught that before the fall the body was endowed with "potential
energy of position" which is converted into kinetic energy during the fall. I
think "energy of position" is an unfortunate term, because it is so very
inadequate. To me it explains nothing. The case is not like that of a flexed
spring, where there is internal molecular strain or displacement.
Let us imagine a pound-weight of iron, for instance, raised from the surface
of the earth to a point near the moon in a line joining the centers of the two
bodies, the point so chosen that the opposing attraction of the earth and the
moon shall exactly balance each other, leaving orbital motion out of
consideration.
On the surface of the earth the two-pound weight had some so-called
"potential energy of position", because it was capable of falling into a pit;
but in its new position near the moon, this potential energy not only has not
been augmented, but has disappeared entirely; the pound-weight, left free to
move, remains stationary; and yet we must have expended more energy in
overcoming the attraction of the earth and lifting the weight to its new
position. This amount of energy would be sufficient to impart to the weight a
velocity more than 10 times greater than that of the swiftest cannon-ball, or,
if converted into heat, would be many times more than sufficient to raise the
iron weight to dazzling incandescence and then vaporize it. Now, in lifting the
weight, this large amount of energy has disappeared utterly. We cannot believe
that the whole or any part of it has been annihilated; it must, in some form,
be resident somewhere. I think no one will contend that this energy is
resident, in any form, in the cold, motionless pound-weight. I believe it was
absorbed by, and is now resident in, the aether through which it falls. This is
a fundamental idea to which I invite attention. Faraday glimpsed it long ago,
and others have appreciated it more clearly since his time. But, so far as I am
aware, no one has realized its significance.
This view of gravitation implies that the aether is endowed with very great
intrinsic energy in some form. Many men of science now hold that the aether is
so endowed, and that the amount of this intrinsic energy is enormous. Sir
Oliver Lodge ("The Ether of Space") appears to regard this energy as potential
in form, and estimates the intrinsic energy of a single cubic millimeter of the
aether to be almost inconceivably vast. He says, "All potential energy exists
in the ether". Sir J.J. Thomson says, "All kinetic energy is kinetic energy of
the ether".
I conceive the aetherial energy involved in gravitation to be kinetic rather
than potential, the latter involving strain or stress. Newton, and later
Maxwell, assumed that bodies produce a stress in the aether about them of such
nature as to account for gravitation, but they were unable to imagine any
physical cause for the stress.
All the past theories of gravitation of which I am aware, except the
corpuscular theory of La Sage, appear to regard gravitating matter as the seat
of the gravitative influence, the surrounding aether, by induced stress or
otherwise, acting simply as the medium of transmission. I cannot see that any
of these theories account for the energy acquired by a falling body.
My own view of gravitation differs from these radically. I believe that
kinetic energy of the aether is the fundamental cause of gravitation, and that
a gravitating body plays a secondary role only in disturbing the normally
uniform distribution of the aether's energy, in manner I shall endeavor to
explain later.
Let us assume, then, that the aether is endowed with very great kinetic
energy normally uniform in distribution.
Kinetic energy implies motion of something possessed of inertia. Now, inertia
is a fundamental attribute of the aether. The aether is highly elastic also,
which, with its inertia, enables it to possess kinetic energy in wave form, as
exemplified in radiation. By the term wave, I mean progressive motion locally
periodic; doubtless the aether as a whole is stationary. Hence we may consider
the kinetic energy of the aether as consisting in aether waves of some kind.
These waves, vast in aggregate energy, eternal in persistence, without finite
source or destination, are imagined as being propagated in straight lines in
every conceivable direction. The isotropic distribution of kinetic energy,
essential to my theory of gravitation, was, for me, a difficult conception
until I reflected that isotropic radiant energy is approximately realized in
the interior of any furnace with uniformly heated walls.
Any kind of waves capable of exerting motive action on the atoms or molecules
of matter will fulfill the requirements; but I shall first consider the
transverse, electromagnetic waves of radiation, because these are the kind of
aether waves we are familiar with.
Of course, intrinsic aether waves, if of the radiation kind, cannot be of any
frequency at present known to us as radiation, because then all bodies would
become heated. But we can easily imagine them of such extremely low frequency
that the molecules or atoms of matter cannot respond to them -- cannot vibrate
in unison with them -- molecular resonance cannot be established; hence no
conversion of the aether's energy directly into heat in the ordinary way can
take place.
We are familiar with the dissipation or degeneration of the higher forms of
energy into heat, and the continual degradation of heat to lower degree; that
is to say, less violent molecular vibration and more general distribution. As
is well known, it is only through this degradation or running down of natural
energy that we are enabled to utilize some of it. Lord Kelvin called this
function of energy "motivity" (we now call it entropy), and said the motivity
of the universe tends to zero.
We know that ordinary radiation waves in the aether persist indefinitely and
without change of frequency or direction until they encounter matter, when they
are absorbed and converted into heat, only to be radiated again, usually in
longer waves, to some cooler body. This degradation of wave frequency continues
until we can no longer follow it. I beg to suggest that the ultimate
destination of this wave energy is that vast reservoir of kinetic energy
intrinsic to the aether. We may liken the waves of radiant energy, which we
apprehend as light and heat, to wind ripples on the surface of water, which
continually degenerate in wave frequency until they are absorbed into and
become part of a mighty swell of the ocean.
Thus we may, perhaps, regard the aether's intrinsic energy as energy in its
lowest form -- Kelvin's zero of "motivity". But unfortunately we may, and do,
get some of this energy back in available form in many ways, as, for instance,
when a falling body is arrested and develops heat; some of our wind ripples are
then returned to us.
When two gigantic astronomical bodies collide under the influence of
gravitation, as sometimes happens, we witness in far distant space the birth of
a nebula. The inconceivably vast amount of heat developed by the collision
converts both bodies into luminous vapor, which expands with incredible
rapidity into the nebulous cloud. This heat energy must in course of time
degenerate back into the aether whence it came, though billions of years may be
required; and during all this time the energy has "motivity". We may picture
the stupendous result of the collision as only a local splash in the aether's
mighty ocean of energy.
Having postulated that the aether is endowed with very great intrinsic
kinetic energy in wave form of some kind, that the waves are propagated in
straight lines in every conceivable direction, i.e., the wave energy is
isotropic, and that this energy is distributed uniformly throughout the
universe except in so far as the distribution is disturbed by the presence of
matter, I shall endeavor to explain my conception of the mechanism of
gravitation.
For illustration in terms of the known, let us imagine a closed space having
uniformly luminous walls of such character that every point on their surface
radiates light in all internal directions. The enclosed space may be of any
shape, but for the sake of simplicity let it be spherical or cubical, and
large, say as large as a lecture-room. The space will be filled with isotropic
radiant energy uniformly distributed -- any cubic centimeter of space
containing as much energy as any other.
Next let us picture a small opaque body suspended anywhere in our luminous
sphere. The body may be of any shape we may imagine an atom or molecule to
have; but, again for simplicity, let it be spherical -- say a small grain of
shot, and let it be located near the center of the space.
The small body will absorb the light which falls upon it, and will cast a
spherical shadow, the depth or intensity of which will vary inversely with the
square of the distance from the center of the body; and the shadow will extend
to the confines of the enclosure, however large the latter may be. We cannot
perceive the shadow but we know it is there. It is true that the body will soon
acquire the temperature of its surroundings, and radiate as much energy as it
receives; but for the purpose of this illustration let us consider only the
high-frequency light energy.
As is well known, the aether waves of light will exert a slight pressure on
the body. But in the case supposed the pressure will be equal on all sides, and
no effort toward translation can result.
Now let us introduce a second small body, similar to the first, and some
distance from it. This will also cast a spherical shadow like the first. The
first two shadows will intersect, and each body will lie within the shadow of
the other. In other words, each body will be partially shielded by the other
from the aether waves coming from that direction. Hence the light pressure will
be less on that side of each body which faces toward the other than on the side
which is turned away, and the bodies will be urged toward each other by the
excess of light pressure on the side turned away. This excess of pressure will
vary with the inverse square of the distance between the centers of the bodies
so long as the ratio of distance to diameters remains large.
The aether waves concerned in gravitation cannot, however, be like the light
wave I have just used for illustration, because light waves heat bodies on
which they fall; and their pressure is almost wholly superficial, it does not
reach molecules much below the surface, and hence bears little relation to
mass.
But let us substitute for the short and feeble waves of light powerful waves,
still of the radiant kind, but of such great length and slow frequency that, as
before explained, they do not excite the molecular vibrations which we
appreciate as heat, and hence are not absorbed by matter; they pass freely
through all bodies, bathing the interior molecules as effectively as those on
the surface.
Under these conditions each molecule or atom or unit of a gravitating body
will have its own spherical shadow or field of influence, and the gravitative
force acting on the body will vary directly with the sum of its units, i.e.,
with its mass.
The spherical shadow which I have pictured as the field of influence of each
atom or material unit implies that the atom has caused, principally in its
immediate neighborhood, a diminution of the aether's energy. Let us further
imagine this subtracted energy resident in the atom as kinetic energy of
translation in many paths, almost infinitesimally short and in every direction,
but without collisions, because neighboring atoms follow very nearly parallel
paths. We may then picture the collective atoms or molecules of matter buffeted
in every direction by the aether waves in which they are entangled, like a
suspended precipitate in turbulent water.
Each atom or molecule may be regarded as a center of activity due to its
kinetic energy of translation, with continual absorption and restitution of the
aether's energy, normally equal in amount. The manner in which this molecular
activity maintains, in effect, the supposed spherical shadow, requires
explanation, which I shall attempt in a future paper.
Of the several components into which the composite motion of each atom can be
resolved, that one lying in the direction of an attracting body will be the
greatest, because the waves from that direction, being partially intercepted by
the attracting body, are weakest, and the atom will be pushed in that direction
by the superior waves behind it than it restores to the weaker waves in front,
and will thus acquire additional kinetic energy of translation in the line of
fall, measured directly by the number of waves involved, i.e., by the distance
moved. Conversely, if the atom be forced away from the attracting body,
restitution of energy will exceed absorption, and the energy expended in moving
the atom against attraction will be transferred to the aether.
It will be seen that gravitation is a push toward the attracting body, and
not a pull. It is clear, also, that the velocity which a falling body can
acquire tends asymptotically to a limit, which is the velocity of the aether
waves which push it -- the velocity of light, if transverse waves are involved
I have already intimated that any kind of aether waves capable of imparting
motion (not internal vibration) to the atoms of matter will fulfill the
requirements of my theory, but have thus far discussed only transverse waves.
Let us now consider longitudinal waves -- waves of compression and
rarefaction, like sound waves in air and in elastic liquids and solids. The
"spherical shadow" conception which I have employed in connection with
transverse waves applies equally well here.
So far as I am aware, longitudinal waves in the aether are unknown, but that
such waves have not been observed is not convincing argument that they do not
exist.
Assuming, then, that some, or perhaps much, of the intrinsic energy of the
aether is embodied in longitudinal waves, we have only to find some motive
action of such waves on atoms to account for gravitation. Adequate motive
connection may perhaps be effected by the locally alternating flow and ebb --
acceleration and retardation of the aether in which the atoms are enmeshed,
incident to its wave motion. We have ample reason for believing that does
obtain a grip of some sort on the atoms of an accelerating (falling) body and a
retarding (rising) body, from which it follows that accelerating and retarding
aether, as in a wave of compression, must grip a comparatively stationary atom.
Certain facts of astronomy apparently require that gravitational attraction
between bodies, however distant from each other, must, in effect, be
instantaneous; that is to say, the line of apparent attraction between them is
a straight line adjoining their centers. I believe my theory meets this
condition, but shall reserve discussion of the point for a future paper.
I feel much diffidence in presenting the foregoing rough draft of a theory of
gravitation, but I cannot avoid the belief that it contains some germs of
truth, perhaps the real key to the great mystery, though, if this be true, I
have no doubt used the key clumsily and imperfectly.
If the aether theory of gravitation is, in the main, the true one, it offers
some hope of experimental verification. Provided the waves are of one principal
frequency, or even of several, we may find something, doubtless of molecular
magnitude only, which will oscillate in unison with them so that resonance can
occasionally be established and a cumulative effect be obtained sufficient to
manifest itself as heat.
In searching for some natural phenomenon of this nature, I thought of the
thermal condition of the upper atmosphere as a possible case. The mean
molecular velocity of a gas at some temperature, in connection with the mean
free path of its molecules at some particular pressure or pressures, may
possibly afford the necessary conditions for fortuitous resonance, with
development of some slight amount of heat by the increased violence of
inter-molecular collisions. I have done much experimental work on these lines
during the past year, but, notwithstanding refinement of method and
manipulation, the results have thus far been unsatisfactory. The work is till
in progress, however, and investigation of other phenomena is contemplated.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nature (March 30, 1911)
Letters to the Editor: Sir Oliver Lodge
Re: A Kinetic Theory of Gravitation
The subject of Mr. Brush's article in Nature of March 23 (p. 129) is
certainly of profound interest, and will continue to be so until the problem as
to the nature of gravitation is solved. Meanwhile, a few questions raised are
comparatively simple. Anyone asked, Where lies the energy of a raised weight?
Must surely reply, "In the aether", i.e., in the medium, whatever it is, that
is driving the weight down towards the earth. A critic who either doubts or
asserts this will not be confused -- as Mr. Brush suggests he will be -- by the
suggestion that the weight might be raised up so high as to reach the neutral
point between the earth and moon -- a suggestion which carries with it the
tacit questions, "Where is the energy now?" and "What has become of the work
done?" -- for this case is no more troublesome than the case of a weight raised
and hung on a hook. Something -- some opposition force -- sustains the weight,
i.e., opposes the pull of the earth, and it matters little whether the opponent
be a shelf beneath it or the moon above it. The important thing to understand
is the nature of the downward propelling force -- indeed, of both the upward
and the downward force -- in either case.
The question whether the energy of a raised weight is potential or kinetic is
of little or no importance. The energy is certainly potential, according to our
definition of potential. So is the energy of a strained spring: for there also
the atoms are separated against their mutual (cohesive) attraction, and there
again the energy really resides in the aether. But that all energy may turn out
to be ultimately kinetic -- when we come to understand what elastive stress
fundamentally is -- that proposition is not negatived in the least.
Mr. Brush proposes a shadow theory of gravitation, a modification of Le
Sages's theory except that the pressure is supposed due to the non-syntonic
impact of waves traveling in all direction, instead of to a bombardment of
utterly minute particles flying at random. There is nothing new in a shadow
theory, and all such theories are faced with the difficulty of plausibly
explaining the absence of noticeable screening -- a difficulty which is bound
to reduce them to acquiescence in an approximation.
The contribution which Mr. Brush makes to the discussion is the suggestion
that the supposed gravitational aether-waves are the result of accumulated
thermal radiation from all past and present suns, the wave-lengths having
automatically increased during their long storage.
To this view several objections might be urged -- one of them being that in
that case the constant of gravitation would be secularly increasing; another,
that it should be greater in a hot enclosure, say the interior of a sun, than
elsewhere; but a more salient objection is raised by the inquiry as to which is
cause and which is effect. How did the bodies get hot and so radiate? Was not
their heat perhaps due to their having clashed together with gravitational
energy itself derived from the aether?
The fact is that every question concerning origin involves us always with
insuperable puzzles, and that is just the main difficulty about gravitation. An
atom of matter, by its very existence, sets up a fixed stress in the aether,
varying directly as the mass and inverse as the distance -- that is only
another way of stating the law of gravitation; we are trying to understand the
nature and cause of that stress. It appears to be one of the fundamental
properties of matter, and until we can understand what is meant by the
generation or destruction of an atom -- i.e., of an electron if that is the
fundamental unit -- we are hardly likely to understand its gravitational
influence more than any other of its fundamental properties -- including,
perhaps, existence itself.
Let this not be understood as a negative prediction or estimate of
impossibility -- such predictions are always absurd; it may be that when the
structure of an electron is understood, we shall see that an "even-powered"
stress in the surrounding aether is necessarily involved. What I do feel
instinctively is that this is the direction for discovery, and what is needed
is something internal and intrinsic, and that all attempts to explain
gravitation as due to the action of some external agency, whether flying
particles or impinging waves, are doomed to failure; for all these speculations
regard the atom as a foreign substance -- a sort of "grit" in the aether --
driven hither and thither by forces alien to itself. When, some day, we
understand the real relation between matter and aether, I venture predict that
we shall perceive something more satisfying than that.
Oliver Lodge
University of Birmingham
March 25, 1911
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc. 68: 55-68 (May 1929)
Gravitation
by
Charles F. Brush
At the Minneapolis meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of
Science in December 1910, I had the honor to outline "A Kinetic Theory of
Gravitation" (Ref. 1). This was followed by a "Discussion" of the theory in
1914 (Ref. 2) A second "Discussion" came in 1921 (Ref. 3) A third "Discussion"
in appeared in 1926 (Ref 4).
The later paper contains a concise synopsis of the theory and very convincing
argument supporting my contention of 1910, that the energy acquired by falling
bodies is derived from the ether.
This Kinetic Theory of Gravitation postulates that the ether is endowed with
vast intrinsic energy in the form of waves propagated continually in every
conceivable direction, so that the wave energy is isotropic. The belief
expressed is that all energy is primarily energy of the ether.
The very high-frequency ether waves, which embody most of the ether's
intrinsic energy, pass freely through matter without obstruction except that
concerned in gravitation, and a very small heating effect (which will be
explained later). The ether waves exert motive action on atoms or particles of
matte whereby the latter are buffered about in all directions with some
absorption of ethereal energy. Thus a lump of matter casts a spherical energy
shadow into space, the depth of shadow diminishing with the square of the
distance from its origin. The energy shadows of two or more bodies interblend,
so that energy density between them is less than elsewhere, and they are pushed
toward each other by the superior wave energy from directions beyond them. The
1926 paper (Ref. 4) explains this at length.
To aid in forming a mental picture of the relation of the very high-frequency
ether waves postulated as the cause of gravitation, to other well-known classes
of ether waves, I have prepared the chart of ether-wave frequencies shown in
Figure 1.
Each horizontal line in the scale of frequencies represents double the
frequency of the line below it, or half the frequency of the line above it.
Thus the scale of frequency increases upward by octaves as in music.
Starting at the bottom of the scale with a frequency of one ether wave per
second, the second line four waves per second, the third line eight waves per
second, and so on to the tenth doubling where we get a frequency of 1,024 waves
per second as shown. Continuing the doubling process another ten times we get a
frequency of 1,024 time 1,024, or 1,024 to the second power, and so on up the
scale to the third, fourth, and fifth, etc., powers of 1,024. Thus it is seen
that the indicated wave frequency increases with great rapidity as we ascend
the scale. At the 20th octave it is more than a million per second; at the 40th
octave more than a million million waves per second.
I am indebted to a chart shown a the British Exposition in 1925; to a chart
by G.L. Clark in 1927, and to a chart by W.E. Deming in 1929 for much of the
material shown in my chart. But I have arranged it somewhat differently,
emphasizing ether-wave frequency rather than wavelength.
Frequency is converted into wavelength by dividing the velocity of light per
second by frequency of the waves per second. Thus the frequency 1 at the bottom
of the chart means one wave per second, and its wavelength is the distance it
would travel in one second, before another wave started after it. This is the
velocity of light, about 186,000 miles, or about 300,000 kilometers. All ether
waves travel at the same velocity.
A wave train of this very low frequency and very great wavelength could
easily be launched into the ether by revolving a closed coil of wire on its own
diameter as an axis, in a magnetic field, at the rate of one revolution per
second. If we should increase its revolutions to ten per second, we would get a
frequency of ten, and a wavelength of 18,600 miles. Such mechanically generated
electric ether waves may be increased in frequency without much difficulty as
far up as shown in the chart.
Next above we have Hertzian waves, covering about 28 octaves, generated by
the condensor and sparkgap method. The upper half of of this long range of
ether waves contains the waves used in radio transmissions and music.
Next above the Hertzian waves, of higher and higher frequency and shorter and
shorter wavelength, we find the infrared and heat waves covering about 9
octaves. These waves embody most of the heat received from the sun, and nearly
all the heat radiated from hot bodies below redness.
Then we cone to the exceedingly interesting and intensively studied light
waves or rays. These cover barely one octave of the scale, and their mean
frequency is about 500 million million waves per second. It seems unfortunate
that the human eye is sensitive to such a short range of ether vibrations only,
while the human ear can perceive about 11 octaves of sound, or air vibrations.
Perhaps some animals or insects have a wider range of vision than humans.
Above the light waves we find about 5 octaves of ultraviolet waves. The sun's
radiation includes the last three classes of waves, though some of the
ultraviolet is absorbed by our atmosphere and does not reach the earth. The
ultraviolet rays or waves promote chemical action and are chiefly responsible
for the ordinary photographic image.
Next in the growing range of frequency we have the well-known x-rays, so
extensively used in x-ray photography for therapeutic and industrial purposes.
These cover a long range of octaves in our chart, and overlap the upper part of
the ultraviolet range and the lower part of the gamma range. X-rays,
particularly those of the highest frequencies, pass rather freely through large
thicknesses of light substances such as wood, fabric, animal tissue and metals
of low atomic weight and density; but metals of large density and high atomic
weight absorb and obstruct them greatly. Thus a quarter inch of lead almost
completely stops x-rays of the highest frequency. The ability of x-rays to pass
deeply into or through matter, is called "penetrating power".
Above the x-rays in our chart are the gamma rays of radium, so extensively
used in therapy. These have a much greater penetrating power than the
highest-frequency x-rays.
All the above described classes of ether waves have been demonstrated
experimentally, and doubtless all exist to some extent, permanently in the
ether of space. Particularly is this true of the heat waves, as I pointed out
in my 1927 paper (Proc. Am. Phil. Soc. LXVI, 1927). In that paper I showed,
conclusively I think, that a lump of matter far out in inter-stellar space
could not possibly fall to absolute zero by temperature radiation of all its
heat, as commonly supposed, but would soon acquire and then maintain the
"temperature of space" which I estimated to be something like 50* to 100* above
absolute zero.
Above the gamma rays there are about 6 octaves which have not been explored
experimentally. Then we come to the cosmic rays, so ably demonstrated and
studied by Dr. Millikan. These cover considerably less than one octave, and
their mean frequency is about 5,000 million million million waves per second.
This is 10 million times greater frequency than light waves possess; and yet
there can be no doubt that cosmic rays are ether waves like all the rest. As
might be expected, cosmic waves, on account of their very much higher frequency
(shorter wave length), have far greater penetrating power than the
highest-frequency x-rays; in fact, about 300 times greater, as they pass
through 6 feet of lead.
Starting considerably above cosmic rays in the chart, I have drawn a long
bracket with indeterminate ends. Somewhere in this region lie the isotropic
ether waves of gravitation, probably having considerable range of frequency.
The enormous frequency of these waves enables them to pass freely through all
kinds of matter without obstruction except that concerned in gravitation.
Probably most of the vast intrinsic energy of the ether lies in the region of
the gravitation waves.
Until about a year and a half ago, we had no experimental evidence of the
gravitation waves other than gravitation itself. But gravitation is a most
impressive demonstration of the ether waves which cause it, and of the very
great energy embodied in them. As illustrating both pints, I call attention to
Lord Kelvin's graphic word-picture of collision of two large astronomical
bodies under the influence of their mutual gravitational attraction, which I
have quoted in my 1914 paper ((Ref. 2) and my 1926 paper (Ref. 4) As another
illustration of the enormous differential ether-wave push of astronomical
bodies toward each other, let us consider the case of the earth and moon. The
urge toward each other is commonly called gravitational attraction, which is
only another way of looking at it. If this attraction were absent, and the moon
were held in her orbit by a weightless steel cable, the cable would need to be
about 500 miles in diameter to stand the strain. Between the earth and sun, the
cable must be about 6,000 miles in diameter. And the attraction (push toward
each other) of the components of some double stars must be thousands of times
greater than this.
Obviously, the ether waves of gravitation, and the other classes of waves we
have discussed, must be permanent attributes of the ether; they cannot escape
from either boundless or bounded space. They must fill all space; and we may
therefore regard gravitation as a property of space, because wherever there are
two or more particles or bodies of mater, however small or large, however near
or distant, they are urged toward each other by the ever-present isotropic
ether waves of gravitation.
Very high up in the chart I have tentatively drawn the line marked "Quanta
waves or rays", indicating a frequency of 6.54 x 1027.
Experimental Evidence of the Ether Waves of Gravitation:
A year ago I had the honor of presenting a paper under the title "Correlation
of Continual Generation of Heat in Some Substances, & Impairment of Their
Gravitational Acceleration" (Proc. Am. Phil. Soc. LXVI, No. 2, 1928).
This division of papers is a continuation of last year's paper; and to save
the reader the bother of looking up that paper and its several references, I
shall quote very freely from it and prior papers.
The third "Discussion" (1926; Ref. 4) contains in its title "Some
Experimental Evidence Supporting Theory; Continual Generation of Heat in Some
Igneous Rocks & Minerals".
"Heat is often defined as an agitation of atoms and molecules of matter, and
measured by the total kinetic energy of such agitation. The agitation consists
partly in internal vibrations of the elastic atoms and molecules and spinning
about their various axes, and partly in very rapid transitory motion among
themselves. Thus they are supposed to dart about in every conceivable
direction, constantly colliding with each other and rebounding or glancing in
new directions. The kinetic energy of this translatory motion constitutes
sensible heat (not total heat) and is the measure of temperature. Anything
(such as absorbed radiation) which stimulates the internal vibration of atoms
or molecules likewise increases their translatory velocities by the increased
violence of rebound after collision, and thus increases their temperature; and
vice versa.
"All the above is known to be true of gases and vapors (kinetic theory of
gases) and is generally believed to be true of liquids and solids.
"The 'mean free path' and the 'mean velocity' between collisions of the
molecules of many gases under stated conditions have been computed. But it has
also been shown mathematically that the higher and lower velocities, and the
longer and shorter paths, differ greatly from the means, and may in each
respect vary 20 or more times in amount. Doubtles this is true also of liquids
and solids.
"From the fortuitously wide variation I velocities and free paths of the
billions of vibrating atoms or molecules in their heterogenous movement, it
follows that collision frequencies must also vary greatly, but have a wide
range of frequencies as do the well-known x-rays.
"With the foregoing in mind it is easily conceivable that some kinds of
matter may have atoms or simple molecules or complex molecules of occasional
vibration frequency corresponding with some gravitation wave frequency, whereby
fortuitous resonance can, for brief instants, be established at various points.
This would result in a slight increase of vibrational activity and a cumulative
rise of general temperature.
"A body of such matter, with some thermal insulation, would become and remain
permanently warmer than a neighboring body similarly circumstanced, but not
endowed, or less endowed with the permissive heat-generating quality".
A carefully designed calorimeter is illustrated and described in the paper
(1926), and details of many experiments given. These resulted in the discovery
that some rocks and minerals did generate an easily observable amount of heat.
In April 1927, I presented another paper on "Persistent Generation of Heat in
Some Rocks & Minerals" (Proc. Am. Phil. Soc. LXVI). This is a continuation of
the 1926 paper. It describes a new and different calorimeter, built in the
spring of 1926, and since known as the "Ice Calorimeter". It has been in almost
continuous use down to the present time (April 1928) and has proved very
satisfactory. With this calorimeter it has been found that some of the natural
heat-generating materials, and some of the artificial silicates hereafter
described, have retained their heat-generating activity unimpaired; and none of
these substances is more than minutely radioactive. Quoting from the 1927
paper:
"It is notable that all the materials which appear to be endowed with
persistent heat generating activity are complex silicates".
There follows a description of the preparation, in the wet way, of many
complex silicates, and their preliminary testing for heat generation. A
silicate of the protoxide of nickel and cobalt showed very large activity,
larger than either silicate alone: and this now appears to be permanent. Nickel
and cobalt are almost identical in atomic weight, and differ but one unit in
atomic number. Quoting again from the 1927 paper:
"In the absence, at present, of other explanation, it is thought that
persistent heat generation in some rocks and minerals is due to isotropic ether
waves of great penetration; very great indeed, if the generation goes on in the
interior of the sun and planets as it does at the surface of the earth".
Quoting now from the 1928 paper (Ref. 6):
"It is now believed that the class of isotropic ether waves postulated as the
cause of persistent generation of heat in some substances, is the same class,
perhaps of very wide range of frequency, postulated as the cause of
gravitation.
"Conversion into heat of some of the energy of the gravitation ether waves,
however little, might be expected to impair to some extent the falling velocity
of a heat generating substance; and all such substances thus far tested have
clearly shown impairment.
"I have yet found no exception to this remarkable phenomenon, though I have
already tested many natural and artificial minerals. Substances which have
shown no generation of heat in the calorimeter show no impairment of their
falling velocity when compared with lead. Substances exhibiting small, moderate
or large generation of heat have shown comparatively small, moderate or large
impairment of the gravitational acceleration.
"In making the above indicated comparisons of falling velocities I have
largely used the method and apparatus described and illustrated in my 1923
paper on "Some New Experiments in Gravitation" (Proc. Am. Phil. Soc. LXII, No.
3; See also the 1924 paper of the same title: Proc. Am. Phil. Soc. LXIII, No.
1)
"Two aluminum containers are used, alike in size, shape, weight and
smoothness of surface, and dropped simultaneously, side by side, through
exactly the same distance (about 122 cm).
"Each container, at he end of its journey, breaks an electric circuit. But
the breaks of both containers are in series in the same circuit, so that the
break which occurs first produces a bright spark while the belated break gives
no spark because its circuit is already open
"When the containers are equally loaded with the same metal, there is no
visible spark at either break, or a very feeble spark at one or the other
indifferently. But when they are equally loaded with certain different metals,
one container persistently produces a bright spark, though containers are
always reversed in position for each trial. From this it seems clear that the
container giving the spark falls a little faster than the other. This sparking
condition is clearly manifested when the faster container reaches the end of
its free path as little as 0.0125 mm. ((0.0005 inch) in advance of its
neighbor.
"The 1923 paper also describes how approximate quantitative measurements are
made. These are very tedious, especially when falling velocity differences are
large.
"To facilitate estimation of the larger falling velocity differences I am
perfecting a photographic method of observation. After falling about 110 cm the
small lower ends of the containers are photographed in silhouette against a
white background having many horizontal lines, and illuminated by a very bright
electric spark".
Then follows several pages of text, with figures and pates, describing the
apparatus admits operation, too lengthy to quote here. Resuming quotation from
last year's paper (1928):
"The camera lens is located about 37 cm in front of the white surface, and
the photographic plate about an equal distance behind the lens; so that the
image is about equal in size to parts photographed.
"The plate holder moves vertically in guides, and rests on a pin in one of
eight equally spaced holes 1.6 cm apart in the backboard of the camera. This
backboard has a horizontal opening 1.4 cm wide, which limits the exposed
portion of the plate to a strip of this width. Thus eight pictures of the
falling container tips are made on one plate. The containers are reversed in
right and left position after each exposure.
"Plate III shows a series of photographs. Each container weighted
approximately 30.6 grams. One was marked with a white spot on its top for
identification. This one, lettered S on the plate, was filled with silicate of
nickel and cobalt, which weighed 13.6 grams, or about 30.8 % of the total
weight of the loaded container. The unmarked container was loaded with lead
sawdust, held tightly in the lower end by a short closely fitting cork above
it, until it very closely equaled the marked container in weight.
"Each of the eight photographs on the plate, when magnified, clearly shows
the S container (Silicate) slower than its companion. Six more similar plates
have been made with the same loaded containers, and all show the same effect.
It will be noticed that the amount of retardation of the S container varies
considerably in the eight exposures of Plate III. This was principally due to
small lateral air currents in the room which acted unequally on the two
containers when one shielded the other; as was demonstrated with another plate
by purposefully increasing the lateral air currents. I shall eliminate lateral
air currents in future work.
"Of course I tried exchange of loads in the containers, but without
observably affecting the result; the container holding the silicate was always
slow.
"The observed retardation o the silicate container must be due to impaired
gravitational acceleration of the silicate as compared with the lead sawdust in
the other container; and as the silicate constitutes only 30.8% of the total
mass undergoing acceleration, we must multiply the observed retardation by 3.25
to find the full impairment of the silicate alone.
"In the apparatus as set up, the centers of the container tips are about 1.6
cm in front of the lined background; hence tips and lines cannot both be
sharply in focus of the camera lens. In Plate III the focal plane of the camera
was about half way between the tips and the lines. Sharpness of lowest part of
the curve of the tips was greatly enhanced by permanently covering all of the
camera lens except a horizontal strip 2 mm wide across its center.
"The comparison lines in Plate III are spaced one mm apart between centers. I
am installing another white background with very much finer lines spaced only
half a mm apart, and far better adapted to micrometer measurement of container
tip differences of level.
"The Bureau of Standards, with a calorimeter of its own design, is working
with some of the heat-generating substances for the purpose of checking my
findings."
Since writing the 1928 paper I have continued work on the fascinating subject
of "Correlation of continual generation of heat in some substances and
impairment of their gravitational acceleration". These phenomena appear to be
related as cause and effect. I have gathered considerable new evidence, all
affirmative, so that I now feel justified in dismissing doubt.
In the quest for more evidence, however, I have reversed the order of
procedure; i.e., instead of hunting more or less at random, for new substances
exhibiting generation of heat in the calorimeters, which is a very slow and
tedious process, I have first tested many new substances for impaired
gravitational acceleration, which is comparatively rapid and easy. In these
tests I have made more than 50 new plates, and feel well rewarded for the
labor.
In my former experiments it had appeared that silicates of the iron group of
metals exhibited much greater impairment of acceleration than silicates and
compounds of the metals of lower atomic weight. So I chose silicates and other
compounds of metals of still higher atomic weight, viz., Barium, Lead and
Bismuth as most promising materials to work with.
In all the artificial silicates there was some sodium silicate. Lead silicate
gave a moderate effect, but after ignition none. Bismuth silicate behaved in
the same way. Lead acetate gave a moderate effect.
The barium compounds were found very interesting, and were more fully
investigated. Barium hydroxide, Ba(OH)2, 8H2O gave rather large effect, but
required lining of the container on account of its powerful corrosive action on
metallic aluminum. BaO (anhydrous; effect moderate. BaO, 8H2O, effect small but
certain. BaCl2, 2H2O, effect small. BaBr2, 2H2O, effect very small if any.
BaSO4; effect very moderate. Ba3(PO4)2; effect small. Ba(SCN)2, 2H2O; effect
very small if any.
The Barium Aluminates were the most interesting of all the compounds
examined. Three grades were prepared: (BaO)2Al2O3, BaO, Al2O3 and BaO(Al2O3)2.
All, after air drying to constant weight, lost several % of hydroscopic
moisture when dried at 100o C. and several more % of combined water when gently
ignited. After ignition they were but very slightly hygroscopic. The BaO,
Al2O3, dried at 100o C., gave largest effect; but after ignition the effect was
somewhat reduced.
Plate I shows the impairment of gravitational acceleration in the BaO, Al2O3,
not ignited, as compare with lead in the usual way. The upper two of the usual
eight photographic strips are omitted, in order to permit enlargement of the
remaining six strips about 50%. The black lines on the white background against
which the lower tips of the two falling containers are photographed, are spaced
exactly half a millimeter apart between centers, and are as fine as it was
found practicable to make them. As before explained, neither the lines nor the
tips of the rapidly falling containers are sharply in focus of the camera lens.
The tip of the container holding the Barium Aluminate is marked S (slow) on the
plate; and the containers were reversed in position after each dropping as
indicated. As easily seen on the plate, the S container is unevenly slow in the
six photographs, and even very slightly fast in the first. This unevenness is
attributable to variation in the exceedingly slight friction of the containers
in their guiding tubes during the first millimeter of their fall. The
containers are perfectly free after that.
S
For accurate measurement of falling velocity differences of the containers in
all plates, I have used a binocular microscope of low magnifying power, having
a very large stage provided with a high-precision micrometer specially designed
and built for this purpose.
In finding the average impairment of gravitational acceleration of the S
container in the six photographs of Plate I, all were measured with the
micrometer, the five affirmative values were added together, the slight
negative value o the first one subtracted from the sum, and the remainder
divided by six. This gave the mean slowness of the S container -- 0.099 mm, say
one tenth of a millimeter. This is one part in 11,000 of the distance fallen
(110 cm). But the Barium Aluminate constituted only 40.3 % of the total weight
of the loaded container. Hence, impairment of falling velocity of the barium
Aluminate alone, as compared with equal weight of lead in the other container,
was one part in 4450. When a companion plate was made with the container loads
exchanged (as customary in all tests), slowness of the Barium Aluminate was
found closely the same.
Of the several compounds described and tested for impairment of falling
velocity, only two have been tested in the ice calorimeter for continual
generation of heat. Barium Sulphate, the first of these, was chosen because of
its undoubted stability, although it had shown but very moderate impairment of
falling velocity. It exhibited very moderate but steady and satisfactory
generation of heat during a long run in the calorimeter. The second calorimeter
test was made with barium Aluminate like that used for Plate I; but after
preparation it was only air dried at room temperature, to avoid any unstability
that might arise from hot air-drying, or ignition. The specimen was prepared
about two months ago, and has been in the calorimeter during the last six
weeks, where it continues to show rather large and steady generation of heat.
It appears to be quite stable.
More than a year ago the Bureau of Standards very kindly offered to repeat
some of my experiments on "continued generation of heat in some substances". A
special ice calorimeter, quite different from mine, was designed and built for
the purpose. After much time spent in perfecting and calibrating the
calorimeter, a specimen of the air-dried Sandusky clay describe din some of my
earlier papers, was tested during the last few months; and I have very recently
received official announcement that this substance does continually generate a
measurable amount of heat. The Bureau is about to commence testing the
comparatively active Nickel-Cobalt Silicate described in my last two papers.
Correlation of continual generation of heat in some substances and impairment
of their gravitational acceleration, is regarded as very strong evidence in
support of the kinetic theory of gravitation; and we seem now well on the way
of finding out something definite about the nature of gravitation, which has
been by far the greatest of all outstanding physical problems.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bibliography
Dictionary of American Biography, Suppl. 1,2; p. 29
Science (March 10, 1911)
Nature 86 (2160): 130-132 (March 23, 1911); ibid., 86 (2161) (March 30,
1911); Letter, Sir Oliver Lodge
Proc. Royal Soc. (Series A) 93 (1917); ibid., 95 (with Sir Robert A. Hadfield
& S.A> Main)
Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc. 50 (3), 1926; ibid., 53 (213), Jan.-May, 1914;
ibid., 54 (May-July, 1921; ibid., 60 (2): 43-61 (1921); ibid., 62 (3): 75-89
(Sept. 29, 1923); ibid., 63 (1): 57-61 (1924); ibid., 66 (3): 251-166 (1927);
ibid., 67 (2): 105-117 (1928); ibid., 68: 55-68 (May 1929)
Amer. J. Sci. 88: 118-128 (Jan.-May 1914)
J. Franklin Inst. 206 (1232): 143-150 (Aug. 1928)
Phys. Rev. 9 (2), 1917
US Patents:
#337,299 (Battery)
#1,698,669 (Jan. 8, 1929), Piezo-electric crystals
# 1,823,864 (Sept., 1915)
Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Robert in Bold Purple...... ME IN BOLD BLUE
1. What graphic editor is producing your diagrams, Allen?
Power Point.. convert to JPEG. I know I don't do good spell check there
eitherJ
2. Why can't the 'pushing and squeezing' be the result of continuous
aether flow radially inward, rather than vibrations?
I don't see how you can have Continuous flow radially indefinitely in a
elastic membrane
Your model is an elastic membrane, mine is a stream of fluid. The source of
the flow is Daniel 7:10 , as expounded in Chap 11 of GWW.
I don't have a problem with a stream of fluid maybe I misunderstood you
about the elastic membrane, but in any case flow from a higher pressure to a
lower one would only be possible if it had someplace to go and could do that
for 6000 + years.I dont calim your model cant be true but in essence the
differnece is in where you make the divison of the supernatural to the
"natural" you just do at a diferent point then I do....but streams themselves
can't account for a natural attraction of grav nor would pressure not nearly as
easily as Vibrations. Dan 7:10 could justa s eaisily be the source for any
number of aspects of the Fermement and may have nothing to do with any kind of
radial flow of anything to do with grav.. Im not saying that it could not be
just that there is not enough data in the text to even imply that. On the other
hand the text does state specificaly that
Hebrews 11:3. Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by
the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do
appear.
2Peter 3: 7. But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word
are kept in store,
I could just as well make the case that since all energy , work and light
move and have being in vibrations and God spoke the worlds in to existence and
when you speak you in essence create vibrations and we are in the image of God
that the fundamental foundation is to be found in vibrations as energy force
and light.
( not to mention the problem of where does it go and what happens to it and
"the where it came from" once it gets to where it is going)...
Good questions.. TBD
...Simply adding pressure via a elstic membrane does not create gravity nor
would it make you haevier any more then increasing the atmospheric pressure in
a chamber would. If the elastic membrane were the cause of gravity then it
would have to affect all exposed surfaces to the aether with the same "elastic
pressure".. hence when I jumped up I would then be weightless...All you do with
a elastic membrane is create pressure not a downward force just as in a
atmospheric chamber other wise the analogy has no bases in observable reality
...... I do see how a continuous vibration would indefinitely create a downward
"force" attracting bodies to bodies indefinitely as long as the vibration is
powered...
How does vibration cause a continuous(constant) force?
Same as sound board if the vibration is turned off the particles will keep
their existing position of the board but any introduction of a particle will
not yield the effects of the attraction as seen when the board is turned on. as
long as the vibration is active the "tuning fork effect" will be manifest More
on this latter but ref to this i think is found in some of Maxwells and Teslas
work as it might relate to grav
3. How do the aether vibs know that they are near an object and
should compress- or where they should start to compres - the boundary?
Know? The same way the ripples in a pond do or any waves in a fluid medium
do.. the only difference is the properties of the fluid medium with wave forms
travailing in it not the mechanics.
4. Is it reflection from the mass surface? Then why isn't there an
interference pattern, instead of a continuous density variation?
How could you say/ Know that there is no interference pattern?.
Because interference patterns are variations in intensity, not a continuous
density variation
Garvity is a demonstration of variations of intensity...? vibrations
themslevs folow a inverse square relationship... Maxwell even talks about this
under Gravity in the Britanica 1889 9th eddition im working on specific
references
You can't measure the vibrations directly speed are near instantaneous as
I said before you could not construct a physical apparatus to measure
vibrations and as a consequence interference patterns either traveling at
those speeds 15 billion ly per 10-44 sec all would be imperceptible one and the
same thing although in reality effects at and on different scales..
I suggest that the interference patterns are the causes of the Alias effect
among other things.. There has not been enough experimentation to know those
things exactly but what has been done shows fluid - yes - and wave ??
properties...That is my point the wave properties have not been exhausted. Your
question is good but the available data is lacking to make a case on that issue.
5. Why is the compression variation exponential? Truthfully it seems
more like an elastic medium, which compresses when continuously pushed against
solid matter.. which is the aether flow model.
I would suggest that an elastic medium is not only unnecessary when
vibrations can accomplish the same thing but the grav slingshots; Gyroscope
effect and Aspned ; aether flow can not be explained in a elastic membrane
certainly not gravity ..
Agreed, But then why are you using an elastic membrane model?
Maybe I keep getting that mixed up with yours ..? but you did state
"Truthfully it seems more like an elastic medium", but then again i understand
that better now that Martin covered this in his Lecture.. the issue is not so
much the elasticness of but rather the fact that pressure alone will not yeild
grav.. elastic or not that would not prevent my point although i think of it as
noncompresable like water not realy elastic.. but that may not be a issue
either way at least right now
but flow as in a current in a fluid can all while still prorogating grav
aetheral waves.. including the ones that ripple and compress when they confront
mass . the feed back of the previous effects indicate that aether affects mass
and mass affects aether as in vortices that are the cause of Aspned effect
which is essentially the same effect for gravity slingshots because only a
"current"/ vortices could explain that .. then there is also the Gyroscopic
effect makes perfect sense using the same mechanics as grav slingshots and
Aspned effects..
6. How many types of aether are there? RB Biblical model has 3
types.
I can live with that for now..I'm not trying to sort out all the different
types until we can even ascertain or settle on what must be accomplished first
in general by the aether or aether(s) ( take your pick at this point although I
would argue for a singular firmament but in any case, other then scriptural
interpretations , that issue I would suggest is a non issue at this point... im
open to ideas on that) Once we can establish and how and what work is to be
done then I will focus more on how many and which ones do what..
7. How does your model explain the zero gravity zone - the
GeoStationary Distance?
As I stated before there is a clear "division of labor" between local and
universal gravity effects (same basic "force" Vibrations) the difference is
one of scale..Effects on the macro v effects on the micro scale ..The moon is
in grav influence with the earth geostat by definition is inertialy neutral as
I have discussed earlier if it is due to balance between the moon and earth
there is a lot of problems with that every time the moon moves over head and
if the moon is responsible for tides....and thus any model must be able to
explain how grav can affect earth/moon but not affect satellite orbit every
time moon orbits earth ..
Why do you reject/ignore the model of counter-rotating fluids.. which
predict zero gravity at the boundary?
I don't , I'm only pointing out that direct measurement of where that
boundary is starts and ends has not been done (ieMM) as a result you cant
depend on a boundary to explain a given phenomena where 1. There is no
objective measurement of its physical dimensions 2.inherently unstable in a
fluid for the reasons that follow (tieds and grav influence at greater
distances) 3. Even if there was such a boundary, (I think there is for the
reasons I gave and give aspend effect ect) it does not indicate your
explanation of grav .
you are going to run into great difficulties in invoking radial flow in a
dynamically active (currents) fluid to account for grav effects 1. you cant be
sure it is elastic rather then incompressible ( although this is really a minor
issue at best since most of this is theoretical extrapolation anyway however my
model is not dependent on that) 2. currents themselves will not allow for the
transfer of radial flow through currents of presumably varying densities even
if it is elastic.Why? ....The radial flow itself is a current... you are in
essence attempting to create simultaneous currents that traverse each other at
90 0 angles at different speeds and varying densities.I don't see how that is
possible at all. However vibrations can do this same work without any of those
difficulties even with variable densities and direction of currents, vibrations
can traverse currents at 90 degrees or even diametrically in the opposite
direction of any current itself.. I think in the short term you have a big
problem and in the long term that model is too restrictive. Vibrations are the
way to go, interacting with mass that is travailing via currents in the aether
this I believe is the stronger model.
Further, what I think you Miss is the fact that even with a counter
rotating fluid in your explanation (not mine) of zero grav at the geostat
distance, the moon and sun are still exerting Grav influence at their distance
... If you argue that their grav influence is direct then you can't claim zero
at geosat distance and if you claim it is indirect as I do you have no
mechanism to account for it... this is the significance of the Alias effect in
any model.
... in my model there are two primary forces at work one is fluid flow
which accounts for grav slingshots and aspeden effect and gyroscopic effects
and the/ any counter rotaion of aether below geosat distance,......the other is
vibration as the prime force of grav with different effects at different
scales.However these two are independent. Your model does not make a
distinction which I think is going to cause a lot of problems namely with
gravitational anomalies and how local and universal grav relate....you still
have a DM&DE problem to address. Becuse, even if you assume the inverse square
law in your model for local gravity it would not account for any large scale
structures at least not using gravity.., then you too will be forced to either
accept DM & DE to account for anything as big or bigger then galaxy structures
or simply invoke just as an arbitrary limit on the extent of grav influence
because the alias effect demonstrates that the moon and sun are in
gravitational influence with the earth the only question, point and explanation
I raise is how and specifically that although the grav influence is real it is
a secondary variable not a primary one due to position , .
but where do you draw the line at real grav influence and how arbitrary is
your boundary limits not to mention the inherent instability of such a
boundary, I think....Your radial flow will not account for any macro gav
effects.. I know some would say the problem is created by MS because they evoke
eons of stellar evolution. However, the issue of time as a argument is not a
good one because 2Peter 3:5. For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by
the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the
water and in the water:
... mine can account for all that without compromising scripture in any
shape fashion or form.
I believe my ripples in the pond can demonstrate how a large body/satellite
at a given distance will only bob up and down in the water while a
closer/smaller satellite/body will be drawn to the boat via wave compressions
against the boat.
Good. When does the "can demonstrate" become "will demonstrate"?
I would argue that my model is far less arbitray certainly not more
so........You can perform this in any pond as long as the ripples are
continuously powered ..This has already been done with tuning forks and mass
attraction deriving a inverse square relationship of attraction...a Lot more on
this to come .......Maxwell and others ...Im working on more detailed specific
ref,... ....the basic mechanics is one of a tuning fork .. size and mass of
object determines harmonics/ the interacting effects.
I model the force for CB mechanics is two fold one is the smaller motions
of the bodies driven by currents the other is the structure of the currents and
bodies themselves driven by a Grav vibrations..... local gravity is due to
micro effects of vibrational wave compression against a CB where overall
structure of universe is macro effects of the Grav vibration......grav
slingshots and orbital mechanics are primarily driven by currents not gravity
although the grv vibrations would affect the currents as in any fluid the two
are symbiotic but function independently as well.
8. How does your model explain the counter-rotating aether on either
side of the GSD boundary?
Counter rotating aether is a theoretical construct based on aether flow
that is yet to be definitively shown experimentally (Ie MM type )
Not true Allen. All CBs from the Moon out rotate westward; all artificial
satellites at less than GSD rotate eastward. This is an experimental fact which
we have discussed before and Paul D has even partially graphed. Why do you
prefer speculation to experimental proof?I have cited experimental reasons not
sure what speculation i am depening on......... I'm not aruging those facts
about satilites only pointing out the weakness in actual measurments of any
suposed counter rotation. Martin pointed out at the conference that no one has
actualy ever measured any gradiant for aetheral rotation... I firmlybelive it
is there but that is speculation that in any case should hold true in your
model as well.......I dont see it as a big problem since it is one of
incomplete/lack of data/ experimentation rather then conflicting data, which is
a real problem.......
In My model i do prefer proof over speculation and have experiment to back
up my explanations...I would argue far more so then in any other model......One
is the aspend effect the earth drags aether as aether rotates against it (
created current)...just as in the case of the motor and gyroscopes do, the
difference is that since the earth is stationary the aether drag is opposite of
the direction of the aether rotation where in CBs that rotate also appear to
drag it in the direction of their apparent spin ...That dragging creates a
current and the current that accounts for grav slingshots in the direction of
the CB's spin and even the aether/earth's relative spin....Currents are real
but they are not gravity and gravity cant be explained very believably to me
via a current only (radial flow).....
but having said that even if it were true ( I kinda think it could be)
AVGM does not in any way deny or prevent flow as in currents on the contrary it
demands them but to support a non fluid elastic aether poses far more problems
for that issue then a dynamic fluid with vibrations as the cause of large scale
structure on the macro scale and a kind of "surface tension' due to ripple or
wave compression against mass at the micro scale.. Scripture only affirms the
bodies set or placed in the firmament it does not go into any detail as to how
or why they hold or were set/ put into those positions in the first place..
that is the point of discovery here.
My question is why did God create the CBs first and then the firmament to
put them in? Where were they after being first created but before being set in
the firmament?
The only other case of creation and then relocation is Adam himself. He was
created before being placed in Eden. Is there some deep significance to these
two creation and relocation events ? What meaning is intended by this reversal
of sequence?
Maybe Robert S or Martin S (aka Martian) has the exegesis.
Robert B
Why do you prefer speculation to experimental proof?
Why do you think the CBs were created first somewhere else?.... I could
just as well say that I built my ceramic shop made some potery and placed them
in it ......this does not demand that the potery was made in some other
location then the shop itself. We might consider the natural sequence in at
least what we observe in our everyday lives as shop to pottery... but not shop
poterey somewhere else then into shop......
Because......
Gen 1: 6. And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the
waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 7. And God made the
firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the
waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
8. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning
were the second day.14. And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of
the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for
seasons, and for days, and years:
Clearly implies the firmament was already there becuse God spoke them into
existance into the fimament...... well if He spoke them into the fimament then
either the firmament was already there or created at the same
time......Creation day events were of Speech not physical process..The Issue
here may be perhaps an attempt to draw to much based on too little. You can
argue a couple of different ways and my point is, you can't make the case you
put forward using just the text without assumtions. The construct does not
demand that they were created in some other location then the location in which
they were spoken into existance, which was the fimament..I don't see how you
can make that argument.
Gen 2:8. And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he
put the man whom he had formed.
man was formed on the earth, not in the garden, the garden was planted
after the earth was created ......again a natural sequence of
events.....foundation/ frame work to finished product
I would say your question assumes an imperative that does not exist.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.20/919 - Release Date: 26/07/2007
9:56 AM
Other related posts:
