[geocentrism] Re: Aether effects
- From: "Martin G. Selbrede" <mselbrede@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 09:49:33 -0500
Neville,
Viscosity conventionally considered is a measure of a frictional
coefficient (so-and-so centistokes, for example) related to
resistance to change in displacement, or, in other words, it is
velocity-dependent in its effect. Operationally, a workable aether
only resists change in velocity (its coefficient and higher order
terms are arrayed not with the first derivative of displacement with
respect to time, but with the second).
It was calculation of these factors when analyzing a hypothetical
liquid composed of maximon particles (maximon particles bear the
Planck density) that led Markov to the proof that such a liquid
comprises a "quasi-isotropic space" -- in other words, an aether
composed of such ultra-dense particles functions like "empty space"
as currently observed. Objects can travel through it freely without
impediment, but the aether resists acceleration while conserving
constant-velocity rectilinear motion. Newtonian macro observations
are thus preserved in the classical limit, and his three laws of
motion fall out of the properly normalized viscosity function. The
key factor is the nature of the coupling at this scale -- THAT is
what differs between matter-maximon interaction versus matter-matter
interaction (from where we get our conventional notions of viscosity
and its effects).
Markov published this work in the compendium "The Very Early
Universe," containing the Proceedings of the Nuffield Workshop held
in 1983; this volume was edited by Hawking, Sykos, and Gibbons. In
other words, these research results passed the scrutiny of Stephen
Hawking: there's nothing fishy with the physics. I cited this
material in a 1994 article which I believe is available at
www.geocentricity.com (I think Dr. Bouw identifies it as "A Response
to Drs. Nieto and North" by Martin Selbrede -- you have to drill down
a bit to find it).
In any event, we need to distinguish between conventional notions of
viscosity, and viscosity related to Markov-compliant aethers. The
terms are not equipollent, because different derivatives of the
spatial displacement are affected, respectively, in the two cases.
Martin
On Apr 22, 2007, at 4:31 PM, Dr. Neville Jones wrote:
Allen,
If the aether has a viscosity, then why do celestial objects that
move through the aether not slow down?
Neville.
Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
A spun up flywheel that stops takes less energy to bring back up to
the previous rpm then the energy required to bring it to that rpm
initially, as long as that is done within a limited time
frame....does it matter what the fly wheel is made of? In any case
that time multiplied by the entropy = efficiency or rate of energy
transfer or we could say the viscosity of the aether to that
ordinary matter……… Viscosity(aether) / Apparent motion or
gravitational rate should yield the necessary possibilities for the
frequency of gravity itself. The fact that the gravitational rate
will be the same regardless of the strength of gravity of more
massive/volumous bodies indicates that gravity is a function of
vibrations…where the rate/ frequency of those vibrations stays the
same but whose strength will be determined by the mass and size of
a body in question…….low frequencies push high frequencies shock.
This hold true even in the everyday world. Therefore the frequency
for gravity must be a low frequency as compared to ordinary matter
in space. The wave form must be at least longer then the most
massive clustering of bodies in space if the distribution of matter
is due to gravity. At least ~128 million parsecs or 420 million
light years from crest to crest the difficulty is that the source
should be located at the center not the peripheral unless either
gravity is not responsible for the overall structure
( ie ..structure do solely to a crystal lattice) and or a
peripheral source could somehow create interference patterns as we
observe in the matter distribution. If due to crystalline structure
rather then vibrations then the frequency should still be able to
be extrapolated from just viscosity of the aether and the
gravitational rate. That in turn should allow us to by trial and
error reproduce the observed distribution of mass and or correct
for the errors in distance, since the distance maps should have
some degree of accuracy even if just in terms of proportions or
distance ratios between bodies. The fact that the maps all show a
fractal structure which can only be explained in a ordered harmonic
universe in contrast to the assumed isotropic randomness expected
my MS indicates that the maps have some degree of accuracy if in
nothing more then the relative distances between the bodies not
necessarily the actually distances to the bodies. It might even
allow us to produce more accurate distance maps.
Yahoo! Answers - Got a question? Someone out there knows the
answer. Try it now.
Martin G. Selbrede
Chief Scientist
Uni-Pixel Displays, Inc.
8708 Technology Forest Place, Suite 100
The Woodlands, TX 77381
281-825-4500 main line (281) 825-4507 direct line (281) 825-4599
fax (512) 422-4919 cell
mselbrede@xxxxxxxxxxxxx / martin.selbrede@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Other related posts:
