[geocentrism] Gravity 1
- From: "philip madsen" <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "geocentrism list" <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 13:22:45 +1000
Neville I think, once asked for a concerted attempt at working on and defining
the aether.. So I have been trying to compose a start for some time as a
sideline.. Philip
Universal Gravity as a function of the Aether.
A developing alternative analytical exploration, as it affects the Universe.
All are encouraged to participate in this development, adding to or taking
away, within the prescribed guidelines.
For the purpose of this analysis, without precluding a revisit to any of them,
we will presume the following.
1.. That though the universe may have any shape, we assume it to be spherical
2.. That it has finite size. It is not infinite.
3.. That there is no external influence .
4.. That there is an aether which can be considered analogous to a liquid
(not a fluid) excepting that,
a. It is non-material. i.e. has no physical properties normally expected
of matter.
b. It is incompresible in the sense that matter is compressed.
c. It is confined within the limits of the physical dimensions of the
universe of 2. above.
d. It has density which is variable and influenced by (i) the position a
point lies within the universe, and (ii) proximity of matter, and (iii)
permeation within matter
It is important to clear up certain seemingly apparent contradictions caused by
the terminology used in section 4 above. Such confusion is often associated
with the use of anology. We have to use certain expressions that in normal
physics would have follow on expectations, but which do not in our case.
Take our use of "density" in 4.d. Density is usually expected to be a
factor of compressibility, but I negate that here by condition 4.b. I am not
implying that the aether has more or less of "it" in different specific
locations. We do not know what "it" is. I mean that the effect it exerts is
more or less dense under given circumstances. i.e. The intensity of its
"effects" is variable, or it is influenced in its effects by environmental
factors.
5. As far as is possible, the accepted or proposed theories should
conform to Scripture, and certainly not be in contradiction with it. I insist
that Scripture, and all that flows from Scripture should be allowed within the
context of this exploration. It cannot be separated from it. For Example. At
the time the Aether was rejected, science historically was riding on a wave of
anti-religion, which meant ant-spirit. So strong was the argument for an
aether, that there arose at that time a parallel science of spiritism that
also opposed mainstream religion, especially Christianity. You see, the aether
smelled too much like a spirit, that pointed to a God. Some other way HAD to be
found. That is still the mainstream philosophy.
The Aether:
Before one can investigate universal gravity, as a function of the aether, it
is vitally important to first of all establish proof that there is indeed an
effect that can be ascribed as being the aether.
# Universal gravity,is not meant in the MS frame. We propose it may have any
number of possible limitations.
Better brains than mine have baulked at this. But I have no trouble seeing why
they always fail. And fail they do. There is no aetheric wind in my philosophy.
Physical laws as applied to matter do not apply to this phenomenon. We cannot
presume that because wave motion is affected by flow in a liquid, that similar
expectations must apply to a flowing or moving aether. This is the weaknes of
the expectations of Michelson, Morley and others. No one can reasonably state
that their experiments proved the aether either way. Yet all of physics may
well be subject to its effect, including gravity, such that nothing even matter
itself could exist without it.
The proof.
Natural physics expects that it is IMPOSSIBLE to have any effect at a distance
without some sort of medium. Yet we do experience such effects. Leaving aside
the major effect of gravity in the cosmos, we have simple magnetism, which
operates in a vacuum, (the absence of all matter)
Before anyone says Lines of force emanating, forget it. Lines of force are a
fictional non material entity used to graphically represent the existence of a
force, whether it be electrical, magnetic, or even gravitational. To detect any
such lines of force as a "wind" by physically moving through them would be as
impossible as the original MM experiment. We say that by spinning the magnet so
that its "lines of force" cut a conductor and thereby generate an EMF that we
prove their existence. Such is no more than a theoretical assumption used to
justify the result. Move the conductor through this field parallel to the
alleged field and no voltage is generated. The line of force is as illusive as
the aether, and I say that the existence of this "force at a distance" is
direct proof of the aether.
That one particle of matter gravitates to another in a vacuum is proof of an
aether. No one has ever demonstrated by practical experiment the existence of
lines of gravitational force. Someone has posed the assumption that such exists
simply because matter does gravitate, and it looks like attraction.
I propose that we examine gravity between material objects as being a force
caused by the "pressure" or similar influence, of the aether. We may include
that this influence or pressure is not constant throughout space, and that it
is modified by the proxmity of matter, on the one hand, and maybe even by its
position within this universe on the other.. .
What say you.. Lets begin.
Other related posts:
