[geocentrism] Re: Aether effects

  • From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2007 17:49:27 -0700 (PDT)

  (N)then why do celestial objects that move through the aether not slow down?
   
  (A)They do  
   
  1.The viscosity is demonstrated in and can be measured in the following 
experiments
  A.DePalma spinning ball drop/ spinning gyro drop GWW CH12 ,Pg 861  equiv 
force diference is  .33% 
  A ball spinning at 27,000 RPM and a non-spinning ball were
catapulted side-by-side with equal momentum and projection angle. In
defiance of all who reject the ether asrealistic, the spinning ball actually
weighed less, and traveled higher than its non-spinning counterpart.
Those who attribute thisto an aerodynamic or atmospheric effect, please
note that it works just as well in a vacuum. Also note, this effect has
since been verified by other [enlightened] researchers.
The decrease in weight of the spinning ball ? anti-gravity ? can
explain why the spinning object goes higher and falls faster than the
identical non-rotating control. Current thinking is that there is no special
interaction between rotation and gravity. The behavior of rotating objects
is simply the addition of ether energy to whatever motion the rotating
object is making.
Is this a harnessing of torsional ether waves by rotation? Both
balls draw energy into themselves from an unseen source, but the
rotating ball absorbs more of this ethereal energy than its counterpart ?
energy that would be manifest asgravity, moving down into the Earth.
With a decrease in torsional ether above the ball, there is a slight
decrease in gravity, the ball gets slightly lighter. Needless to say, this
effect defies standard theories.
Gyro Drop: A fully enclosed, electrically driven gyroscope is
released to fall freely under the influence of gravity. The elapsed time
taken to fall a measured distance was photo-timed, with the rotor stopped
and then spinning. The gyroscope fellalong its axis. Power leads for the
rotor were disconnected just prior to release.
  B. Aspden effect Page 869
  An Adams motor with a magnetizedrotor and no electrical power
input is started on no load by a drive motor and brought up to operating
speed of 3250 rpm, then runs steadilyat that speed for two minutes. With
a machine rotor of 800 gms, its kineticenergy and that ofthe drive motor
is less than 15 joules, contrasting withthe 300 joules needed to spin up
from rest.
After five minutes or more, the machine is stopped, but can be
restarted up to speed in the same or opposite direction with only 30
joules, only 10% of the original effort, provided that the machine is not
stopped more than about a minute. This totally violates all known laws
of physics. It is ten times easier tospin the magnet once it has already
been spinning. (The term for this is hysteresis, a memory of prior
physical states).
Energy within the magnet seems to continue ?spinning? inside
even when the magnet is not moving (similar to stirring up a glass of
water and then removing the stirring rod, while the glass itself remains
still). It will take less energy to stirup the water in the glass again if you
wait less than a minute before trying. So it certainly appears that 
this..........
   
   
  2. If objects were launched strait up from the earth then they are always 
biased toward a e-w trajectory.....that is the whole point of all objects 
including light demonstrating a e-w preferred direction.  
   
    Summary: There is no other explanation that can be arrived at via logic & 
observations all other "Explanations" are just imaginations....... that ya 
could be true they might not be true....the point is LOE only leads you or 
supports one conclusion there is a viscosity to/in as a property of "free" 
space.....If we use what we actually have and not worry about what MS imagines 
we might be able to more clearly define the nature of gravity and the cosmos 
itself. Start with what you have (actual experiments) not what you do not have 
( validity for MS assertions/imagination)

   
   
  
philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
          Correct Neville, and its just another support for my contention that 
you cannot call it a fluid, or substance or attribute to it any physical 
properties, such as wind, etc, which sent michelson, morley, einstein et al, 
down the wrong corridor. 
   
  But perhaps Allen was speaking of synominousness, not being quite couragious 
enough to coin a new word...for the analogy of fluid viscoscity in the aether.. 
 arrr. errr  how about aetherage, or aethoricity...  As I said, who knows how 
far science would have advanced had it chosen the aether for serious 
consideration ..  rather than a hypothetical Newtonianism.. 
   
  Philip. 
    ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Dr. Neville Jones 
  To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 7:31 AM
  Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Aether effects
  

  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.     
---------------------------------
    
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.463 / Virus Database: 269.5.7/771 - Release Date: 21/04/2007 11:56 
AM



Other related posts: