[geocentrism] Re: Aether effects
- From: "philip madsen" <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 18:34:41 +1000
Allen, You have been reading too much de palmer . and not enough basic
physics..
I cannot relate to anything you are saying .. Gravity has nothing to with
causing motion except to a falling object. and there is no frequency of
motion except in a vibrating object.. Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: Allen Daves
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 3:30 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Aether effects
Clarification: The frequency of motion & or the gravity wave is the carrier
wave in which all motion/ information is allowed to pass through....(since
gravity causes motion as well)
Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
1. I meant EMR. Electromagnetic radiation)....... EMP is Electromagnetic
pulse
2. "vibrations are a physical phenomenon. of vibrating matter. Show me
where or how to measure the vibrations of gravity ??? Light is a vibration
..... that moves through the very Medium under discussion if you mean has
physical effects well gravity is a physical effect so is lights effects on
matter...now take sound it is a vibration though air water metal or any medium
capable of carrying its frequency...sound is not a actually physical anything
it is only a wave form ...
3. Gravity is a vibration in the aether for all the reasons previously
discussed ..in short there is only one demonstratable & or reproducible
demonstration of the nature of gravity and its effects...
If the aether is as dense as suspected and I believe that it is, due to
the necessity for it to traverse ~instantaneously across the universe. It must
be a very long wave form ( also long wave forms go further and do more
pushing).now ordinary mater has a entirely different density then the aether
does therefore the range of frequencies that can be carried by the two are not
all the same. The aether being so dense can cary wave forms that cannot be
carried by ordinary matter because the frequencies would be to small for matter
to perceive directly or the frequencies would be too large for ordinary matter
to measure such as the gravity wave which must be a very long wave form perhaps
as large a half the size of the universe itself. No instrument of ordinary
mater would be able to measure a wave form 7 billion light years long,
although matter would feel/ be subject to its effect ..obviously.. Go bac to
the sound board and sand. The waves used to produce some of the paterns were
far larger then the objects on the board You could not physicaly measure a wave
whos dimentions were 2X as large as the sun.but feeling the effect is not the
same a measuring it. Although, you can measure the effect you cant measure the
wave itself directly. It is way too large ..I also suggest a very large wave
form for gravity due to the fact that larger wave forms travel further and push
harder then shorter wave forms. since ordinary mater is of less density and
different material the frequency rage for the aether and ordinary matter is not
all the same. However, there must be overlap. It is that overlap that enables
interaction between the two..
4. You cannot call an alternating electrical current a vibration except by
way of analogy.. You can convert it to vibrations through a suitable
transducer.. I am not talking solely about the frequency of the current ie
60HZ... I am talking about the frequency that the electrons themselves are
vibrating and moving in when they are in a "free flow" verse a non flow state
Carrying the thought process forward from my last post about how matter can
move through a dense medium........Now the kicker...... what if the frequency
for all motion is the same frequency as the one for gravity the only difference
is 1.origin ( non universal & or symmetrical as compared to gravity ) 2.focus
(ie laser v light bulb), 3.intensity (strength the force required to bring it
to full stop) ...Why not?..If you did not stop the motion it would go all the
way to the end of the universe (Inertia)?..If gravity is a function of matter
in the vibrating aether, then why couldn't matter produce that same wave form
since in AVGM the wave form must interact with matter to yield the observable
effect of gravity ..might it not work visa versa.?..perhaps this long wave form
is the perfect overlapped frequency for both ordinary matter and aether. In
that way motion of one would affect the other in perfect or almost perfect
synchronicity. what we measrue i spin is the slight deviation from perfect
syncronisity, where all other frequencies would be far more limited in their
ability to traverse back and forth between matter and aether and aether to
matter..... The gravitational wave is the same as the one for motion. This is
the only truly nearly perfectly synchronous frequency between matter and the
aether............?
Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
We all seem to have this difficulty in trying to explain how matter can
move throughout the aether. But I think we have it all backwards again. I would
argue that motion of any kind is it self a vibration that utilizes the aether
as its medium for propagation ... The question should not be how can matter
move through the aether. But, rather what is the necessary frequency for
ordinary matter to allow for movement within the aether.. This would explain
inertia in more detail give it a physical reaction of the frequency of motion
to the medium of aether.just as in the case of Light and EMP and other wave
forms that utilize the aether as a medium the frequency will determine the
speed and the distance that the wave form can travel ..now light is restricted
by speed but also distance a s function of intensity. where the frequency of
motion would be allowed to travel the whole distance of the aether medium but
the speed is determined by the intensity of the wave form that created the
motion. ..in this way the appearance of inertia is obtained where any body in
motion will remain in motion until either
1.. it reaches the outer boundary of the aether or
2.. B. it is acted upon by a equal or greater force.
It is not "How things could move through the aether of such density?" but
rather "How could anything move at all wihout such a dense medium to allow for
motion"
There I go again attempting to redefine all of physics bad allen.. BAD
ALLEN!.J
Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
All EMP are vibrations and the magnetic force lines too resonate just
as sound is a vibration through air EMP and all other magnetic force lines are
vibrations ..just like gravity is a vibration the only difference between them
is the frequencies and what enables all those various ranges of frequencies to
form and propagate some so small ordinary mater cannot interact directly with
(wavelength shorter then any ordinary mater) and so large ordinary mater cannot
detect directly (wavelength larger then any ordinary mater) ...........is I
would argue the aether...and although ordinary Hydrogen cannot perceive these
vibrations directly, these vibrations still affect ordinary maters interactions
with other mater as well as the various forms of energy. That is why the energy
capacity in the Aether although infinitely greater then the energy stored in
ordinary matter does not achieve equilibrium because the frequency range and
the degree to which that transmission of energy in those frequencies is
limited. Certain frequencies allow for motion while others allow for
electromagnetic effects while yet others preclude the possibility of thermal
equilibrium even though there is a energy leak/manifestation of 3.5degreesK in
the background radiation which it self propagates at a given frequency range..
Regardless of how hot the aether is you can only see 3.5degreesK. of it which
when you thing about it further demonstrates the extremely low efficiency of
energy transmission from aether to matter assuming that the 3.5 degrees is not
just the amount of heat energy that is transported in the aether but actually
represents some of the energy of the aether..?
philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Allen I should have explained it better. To understand light
propagation , I prefer to use radio because the longer wavelength, and the
antenna elements are more practical to examine.
You know what I mean if I said that if a unit North pole were placed
near to a North magnetic pole it would be repelled away even through a vacuum.
(it has nowhere else to go)
In the case of radio EMR the transmitting element produces a sequence
(at the given frequency) of electrically and magnetically polarised "envelopes"
. which are aligned with "like" polarities opposing , which as a result repell
each other away from the antennae. these have no weight, hence the speed of
propagation is at the speed of light. Why this limitation is another subject,
our aether, and not involved in this current explanation.
So I meant that because of the law of like poles repel, the generated
envelopes of electromagnetic energy as electrical and magnetic lines of force
in quadrature have nowhere else to go but be repelled away from the continueing
successive like polarity envelopes and from the antenna itself. As these
envelopes of force move further away from the centre, they have to stretch ..
This is the action which mathmatically gives us the inverse square law. The
fields are contiguous, and contradicts any idea of a corpuscle or particle
So that is why I said it can only go one way and that is away from
the source. and by way of explaining that this could happen without the need
for any hypothetical fluid medium.
This still leaves us with the need to explain how force acts through
(supposedly) empty space.. to which I offered elsewhere, IT IS NOT REALLY EMPTY.
The antiaetherans try to say that the field is itself an entity..
This I reject as pure supposition. The field is a ficticious entity used to
explain the action of a force. Lines of force are graphical representation of
this action. I expect that to be understood in my explanation above, lest I be
seen to contradict myself.
On an aside, you said,
If it has nowhere to go it might not go anywhere just as sound dose
not travel in a vacuum my voice would have no where to go and thus it would go
nowhere.
Sound is a ficticious word.. It is a subjective thing like sight..
It is the biological animals reaction as hearing of a vibration. But the nature
of physical vibration cannot be anything but analogously compared to
electromagnetic cycles, which cannot be technically called a vibration. If the
vibration of your voice was converted into electrical cycles, it would indeed
be propagated in a vacuum.
This is the reason why there are regulations controlling the audio
power in the hearing aid loops of theatres and buildings. Why ? because they
can interfere with radio reception in aircraft that may be overhead...
Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: Allen Daves
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:37 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Aether effects
Comments in blue
(p)"EMR propagates because it has nowhere to go but away from its
source. Its exactly like two like poles trying to occupy the same space. It is
self propagating. Its wave like properties, is due to the nature of the two
fields of which it is composed.. they stretch."
1. If it has nowhere to go it might not go anywhere just as sound
dose not travel in a vacuum my voice would have no where to go and thus it
would go nowhere.
2.Experiments demonstrate something that has properties doing
something that makes it hard to write it off as just nothing.
3. Scripture plainly outlines a Something out there that every
thing out there is imbedded into...
philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Martin, first up I want to say that I have the utmost respect for
you, as I have come to experience your written word. Whilst I may not accept
all that you teach, or say, you have been a cause in re-igniting my curiosity
to learn and venture in new directions of all philosophy in science. I admire
your command of the language. Thus it is in the spirit of learning and of my
ignorance, that I make the following comment.
You seem to be trying very hard to make the aether fit with some
quantistic theory to make it conform with the ancient hypothesis of the aether
being a hypothetical medium/fluid with properties that are due to a special
type of material ..Why are you opposed to the idea that it does not have to be
a material substance at all, and that wave propagation "through" it is due to
an entirely different and new concept. I said "through" in quotation marks
because I dispense with the term medium.
EMR propagates because it has nowhere to go but away from its
source. Its exacly like two like poles trying to occupy the same space. It is
self propagating. Its wave like properties, is due to the nature of the two
fields of which it is composed.. they stretch.
OK yes I know you were about inertia and momentum, not EMR but,
Why does "aether" have to be a special material with a new and
special viscosity, that applies differently to matter at constant velocity to
that which has acceleration?
Last time I heard viscosity is a property inherent to a fluid.
You seem to be trying to invent a fluid (via quantum mechanics)
with discretionary properties as regards inertia, which to my mind means it is
not a fluid at all. At the practical level for the purpose of trying to prove a
fluids existence perhaps that makes for a possible hypotheses, but maybe
unnecessarily so.
Somehow it seems to me that we must get back to basics from
scripture when trying to reason out how a geocentric universe can rotate with
an aetheric firmament. To venture into using quantum theory to explain it
appears to me to be no different to those creation scientists who try to
justify evolution as intelligent design, on the one hand and on the other try
to prove the universe is new , of only 7000 years or so old..
This latter way of thinking is of the Devil, at worst, or a
weakness of faith at best, because it denies the omnipotent God as having the
power to create a natural world. A world that would need in the natural order
of science at least millions of years to have developed IF He had so desired
to do it that way. BUT
God tells us specifically that He side stepped all of that
developement and created the world in six days, and it was an aged universe
that he created, with light shining from stars that were light years away..
Yes for the unimaginative among you I say, he put in place in an instant the
stars, with rays of light that were light years long, to shine on the earth in
that day. This probably was the only time ever, when light was made to travel
at infinite speed.
Likewise He said , and I know I am being repetitive, "Before
Abram was I AM. "
To me that explains the aether, or else I am truly nuts.
Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: Martin G. Selbrede
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 8:51 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Aether effects
On Apr 24, 2007, at 5:21 PM, Dr. Neville Jones wrote:
If maximons DO couple with matter:
My original point was that if material objects are carried
along by a rotating aether (such that net kinetic energy imparted is zero, as
you state), then there must be a noticeable effect when those objects travel
through, or against, this aether (even allowing for Allen's novel suggestion of
currents within the aether), for then the flux must produce far more maximons
"pushing against" our material object.
This was what Markov was countering in regard to a liquid
composed of maximons. This liquid has the intriguing property of having zero
viscosity with regard to constant velocities, but non-zero viscosity in
reaction to objects with changing velocities. (Again, I personally don't hold
to either a LeSagean gas or a Markov liquid, but the extreme density form of
these two models, where the mean free path constrains the underlying aetherons
-- of whatever construction -- to stay localized near their current lattice
positions due to crowding from their neighbors. The net flux through any
material object is always zero: aether flux is conserved in this model,
although the Bouw/Hanson approach to LeSage does not conserve flux since it
treats matter as shielding that flux, rather than considering that matter
shields acoustic pressure transmitted through the lattice. The effects are
identical in either case, but with the rarefied aethers incumbent upon LeSage
gas protagonists to support, there is no clear identification of the Planck
Density with any element of the current universe at the subquantum domain. If
these connections have been since established, I've not seen them reported.)
If maximons DO NOT couple with matter:
How would such an aether carry any material object along
within itself?
I think I mentioned this already, that inertial drag is to
matter in the aether as Fresnel drag is to light rays in glass.
I think in all fairness, Neville, your task is complicated
because every person here on the forum has a completely different idea of what
the aether is and how it should behave. So, interacting with Allen may or may
not translate to an adequate response to Martin, or to Phil. You've got five
blind men and an elephant, in effect. Your challenge, then, is to not tar with
too broad a brush, but since knowledge of another person's views comes in to
you piece-meal (usually by way of the person objecting to your criticisms),
you've got something akin to vague, moving targets with poorly-defined
outlines. So, I'm sympathetic with the challenges of pinning us aether guys
down. It's like the old saw that if you have five economists, you'll have six
opinions.
Martin
P.S. This reminds me of a comedian's commentary about all the
out-of-focus photos of the legendary Bigfoot here in North America: "Bigfoot
IS blurry. He's a creature with soft edges running around in the wilderness --
you can't get a sharp photograph of him." So it is with the aether theorists.
The best you can do is pin one down at a time and figure out what his
particular conceit is. That's just the nature of the beast. No pun intended.
----------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.463 / Virus Database: 269.6.0/775 - Release Date:
24/04/2007 5:43 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.463 / Virus Database: 269.6.1/776 - Release Date:
25/04/2007 12:19 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.463 / Virus Database: 269.6.1/776 - Release Date: 25/04/2007
12:19 PM
Other related posts:
