[geocentrism] Re: Moving Earth Deception -- Answer to Philip
- From: "philip madsen" <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "geocentrism list" <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 09:33:14 +1000
Dear robert Sungenis, and others.
Well thankyou Robert for your explanation. Whilst it was obvious to me that
Miller was a heliocentrist, and all that follows from that, it seems that
having access to his readings, you were able to show how and why he gave us a
calculated figure, of what he thought it had to be. He must have been awfully
dissappointed, that his reading was so low, that it was necesary for him to
look to local reasons such as earth entrainment and material proximity, (same
thing) to excuse the low result.
Please note that this post is after my having also read your response to
Neville, hence I am sourcing both for my comments here. Please be assured I am
not looking to criticise.. My aim is always to self examine to preclude the
enemy finding any loophole in our deliberations.
At this stage we can conclude that Miller proved something moves through and
affects (moves) the light beam, in the direction from east to west, with a
measured speed equal to sidereal rotation at the latitude of measurement. I am
still unclear as to why the reading is still so far above the expected 0.43k/s
at 4k/s
Miller claims it is the movement of the rotating earth , and we claim it is the
movement of the aether, because the earth is still. This does not prove either
case to be true, excepting that it must favor the latter, there being no
evidence of a movement at or near the 30k/s orbital speed of the earth.
Yet our case only holds if it can be proven that it is an aether that exists
and is the cause of this rotating "field" effect. I see a couple of questions
others may raise, needing answer to allay doubt, as to another possible cause.
You are using Millers readings, which I hope are true readings and are not also
fudged by him to fit his preconceptions, such as running with the sun and
running against it etc. Thus the first thing that comes to mind, is why were
these readings variable over the 24 hour period? And with the seasons for that
matter.
eg " His experiments yielded systematic periodic effects which pointed to a
similar identifiable axis of cosmic ether-drift, though of a variable
magnitude, depending upon the season, time of day, density of materials
shielding or surrounding the apparatus, and altitude at which the experiment
was undertaken. " Those last are irrelevant as they can be neutralised.
An aetheric medium presupposes a constant property pervading all space, equally
in all directions. In the first instant we might expect to find a constant
effect in strength and direction over the full 24 hour period. But as it is not
constant, we are forced to the probability of variations being attributable to
the variations in the gravitational fields of the universe which change at the
measuring location every day. Or some other even unknown field. De Witte's
Co-ax experiment did claim detection of gravitational waves, though I don't
claim to understand what significance there is in this. Hope to give it a try
today. http://blog.hasslberger.com/docs/Cahill_Experiment.pdf
But once we are forced into that direction, an objection could be raised that
it is this varying field which is causing the "fringe" reading, and we are back
where it started. i.e. It could be either the earth rotating or the universe;
and general science would on logic prefer the former probability and say there
is no aether. This varying "gravitational" field effect would also show
seasonal changes, consistant with an orbiting earth.
Your views much appreciated..
Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: Sungenis@xxxxxxx
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2007 12:57 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Moving Earth Deception -- Answer to Philip
Philip,
Our treatment of Miller's 208 km/sec drift toward Draco is answered from a
geocentric perspective in GWW. We also deal with Stephen Marinov's claim to the
same, as well as Silvertooth and Smoot, et al
Here is the relevant portion. I believe it deals with your question.
Robert Sungenis
One of the interesting features of Miller’s results is that they were
calculated in relation to sidereal time, that is, against the displacement
between a star and the Earth, as opposed to the sun and the Earth. The former
time yields 23 hours, 56 minutes and 4.09 seconds; the latter 24 hours
exactly.[1] This shows that the ether is drifting in relation to the stars, and
thus gives a more definitive picture of absolute motion.
But we must pause at this juncture to critique Miller’s thinking process, for
he, being a Copernican, is basing his interpretation of data on his belief that
the Earth is moving at least 30 km/sec through space. Interestingly enough, it
is precisely because of this presupposition that Miller runs into some
unexplained difficulty, since his observations begin to conflict with his
mathematical calculations. The one anomaly in all past interferometer
experiments that Miller discovered was the experimenters assumed they knew the
precise velocity of the Earth through the ether in combination with the solar
system’s supposed motion toward the constellation of Hercules, but did they
really know? The geocentrist, of course, would answer that they did not know.
In any case, Miller’s 1925 experiment took into account this “anomaly” and he
made his calculations accordingly. Since he assumed the Earth was moving 30
km/sec, he combined this with the four positions (February, April, August,
September) that he examined of the Earth’s orbit around the sun and then used
Pythagorean geometry to determine the speed of the Earth toward the
constellation Draco, which came to 208 km/sec.[2] In other words, 208 km/sec is
what Miller believed to be the Earth’s absolute speed through the ether. Of
course, being a heliocentrist, Miller is assuming that the ether is motionless
and that the Earth is moving through it. In any case, Miller’s 1933 paper
reveals that his Pythagorean calculations do not match what he observed in the
fringe shifts. As we will recall, his experimental fringe shifts showed a
maximum of 10 km/sec, but this figure is less than his computed value by a
factor of twenty! Miller did not have an answer for this problem, and it is
left as an open-ended question in his 1933 paper. The answer, of course, is
that Miller’s Pythagorean calculations were based on a faulty premise (i.e.,
that the Earth was moving). If that factor were eliminated, his calculations
would be in accord with his observations. The same can be said of recent
experiments performed by Stefan Marinov, in the late 1970s, using
coupled-mirror interferometry.[3]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] In the same way, in sidereal time (i.e., star time), the moon travels
around the Earth in 27.33 days, as opposed to 28-29 days as measured only from
Earth.
[2] Miller configured the four interferometer readings in the form of a
parallelogram (February, April, August, September), which assumes the Earth is
in orbit around the sun. The diagonal of each of the four parallelogram points
represents the apex of that period, while the long side represents the motion,
which is coincident with the center of orbit; the short side of the
parallelogram represents Earth velocity of 30 km/sec. Hence, knowing the
direction of the three sides of the triangle, and the magnitude of one side,
allows one to calculate the magnitude of the other sides, which for Miller was
208 km/sec toward Dorado. (See also Laurence Hetch in 21st Century – Science
and Technology, Spring 1988, pp. 47-48.)
[3] Stephan Marinov, whose experiments show an ether-drift of 279-327 km/sec,
declares that the Earth is moving through it toward the midpoint of the
constellations Virgo, Hydra and Libra (J. P. Wesley, Galilean Electrodynamics,
“In Memorium: Stefan Marinov, Spring 1999, pp. 11-12; S. Marinov, General
Relativity and Gravity 12, 57, 1980b). Also Czechoslovakia Journal of Physics
B24:965, 1974, and Eppur Si Muove (Brussels: CBDS-Pierre Libert, 1977, pp.
101-111, the latter cited in Bouw, Geocentricity, p. 257). Obviously, Marinov’s
calculations are close to those of Dayton Miller’s 1925 interferometer
experiments, but, as Miller had, he used heliocentric geometry in arriving at
his 300+ km/sec. E. W. Silvertooth, after having had “null” results in 1972
with frequency-doubling crystals (Journal of the Optical Society of America,
62:1330), had similar results to Marinov in a 1983 experiment. He claims that
laser-interferometer experiments analogous to the Michelson-Morley apparatus
give a null result because frequencies of the interfering beams are dependent
upon velocity relative to a stationary frame. Hence, the frequency adjusts
precisely enough to cancel any effects due to the motion through the light’s
reference frame, and a null result is the inevitable consequence. This, claim,
of course, assumes that the “velocity” is caused by an Earth moving at 30
km/sec and that light has its own “reference frame.” Another study performed by
Smoot, Gorenstein and Muller also sought to find motion of the Earth (Physical
Review Letters, 39, 898, 1977). As reported by Michael Rowan-Robinson, the
quest was to find a “dipole anisotropy of order 10-4 to 10-3…due to the random
motions that galaxies have with respect to each other and to the cosmological
frame of reference. The radiation should look slightly hotter in the direction
we are traveling towards, and slightly colder in the direction we are traveling
from, by an amount ΔT/T ≈ v/c, due to the Doppler shift.” This study was
important to them because “Failure to detect this effect would put us in the
uncomfortable position of happening to be exactly at rest with respect to the
cosmological frame.” In other words, it would show the Earth at the center and
immobile in space. Although the Smoot team, similar to the Rubin team, found an
anisotropy, it made little sense and did not get them out of the “uncomfortable
position.” As Rowan-Robinson reveals, “the magnitude of the velocity deduced
for the Milky Way, 600 km/sec, is so large as to throw existing ideas about or
cosmic environment into disarray.” In addition, “The authors note that the
velocity they have found conflicts with various attempts to measure our
velocity with respect to nearby galaxies, but offer no explanation of this.
With respect to the Local Group of galaxies, the motion of the Solar System
hardly differs from that expected due to our circular motion round the Galaxy.
This suggests that the whole Local Group has to be moving along together at
this velocity of 600 km/sec with respect to the microwave background” (Michael
Rowan-Robinson, “Ether drift detected at last,” Nature, Vol. 270, November 3,
1977, p. 9). We note here that the Smoot team did not find a velocity of the
Earth, but only a velocity of the solar system and the Local group. Reginald T.
Cahill reports that at least seven experiments have detected a translational
velocity; some with gas-mode interferometers and others with coaxial cable
(DeWitte 1991), with a result of around 430 km/sec (R. T. Cahill, “Quantum
Foam, Gravity and Gravitational Waves,” Relativity, Gravitation, Cosmology,
eds. V. V. Dvoeglazov and A. A. Espinoza, New York: Nova Science Publication,
2004, pp. 168-226; R. T. Cahill, “Absolute Motion and Gravitational Effects,”
Apeiron, 11, No. 1, 2004, pp. 53-111). In another paper Cahill writes: “Physics
has been in an era of extreme censorship for a considerable time; Miller was
attacked for his major discovery of absolute linear motion in the 1920’s, while
DeWitte was never permitted to report the data from his beautiful 1991 coaxial
cable experiments. Amazingly these experimenters were unknown to each other,
yet their data is in perfect agreement….All discussions of the experimental
detections of absolute motion over the last 100 years are now banned from the
mainstream physics publications” (Reginald T. Cahill, The Einstein Postulates:
1905-2005: A Critical Review of the Evidence, Flinders University, Adelaide,
Australia, December 7, 2004.)
In a message dated 8/4/2007 10:04:33 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
You said that, "Failure to detect aether drift, to me is no evidence
against its existence,"
but aether drift has been detected. There are pages and pages on this in
GWW. (And very well researched and written, in my opinion.)
Neville.
Dear Neville.
I guess you have missed my point, .I do not deny the evidence of readings
by Miller and others of interference waves in light . I have trouble accepting
the reasons given. Maurice Allaise was closer to this truth.
In any case None including Robert B have answered my question re Millers
figures, which if true establish the earth is definitely moving in a direction
not related to either the speed/direction of rotation, nor the speed/direction
of orbit.. I repeat it here. But please notice the most important presumptions
I highlight in red for danger .
"Miller's work, which ran from 1906 through the mid-1930s, most strongly
supports the idea of an ether-drift, of the Earth moving through a cosmological
medium, with calculations made of the actual direction and magnitude of drift.
By 1933, Miller concluded that the Earth was drifting at a speed of 208 km/sec.
towards an apex in the Southern Celestial Hemisphere, towards Dorado, the
swordfish, right ascension 4 hrs 54 min., declination of -70° 33', in the
middle of the Great Magellanic Cloud and 7° from the southern pole of the
ecliptic. (Miller 1933, p.234) This is based upon a measured displacement of
around 10 km/sec. at the interferometer, and assuming the Earth was pushing
through a stationary, but Earth-entrained ether in that particular direction,
which lowered the velocity of the ether from around 200 to 10 km/sec. at the
Earth's surface."
Back to work: My point;
I said
"Failure to detect aether drift, to me is no evidence against its
existence,"
In the same context I could have said with equal inference,
" detection of an aether drift using light (interferometer) is no evidence
for its existence. "
If in a given plane as compared to a plane at right angles to it, light
(EMR) was bent or shifted , causing interference patterns, ( and I have not
found a singly solitary explanation of the mechanics behind what these are, and
I am left to guess that they bear some resemblance to standing waves in a
medium when two waves meet out of phase) any number of cosmic or earth bound
reasons may be possible to account for it.
Note that Millar had to go top of that mountain to get a readable result.
Whilst we may decide to explain this by claiming that the aether is slowed down
by proximity of matter which Miller presumed, I likewise could just as easily
say that light propagation is affected by proximity of matter, the strength and
direction of the magnetic field of the earth, Cosmic rays , ionisation in the
earth, or any number of factors. All of these factors, particularly the earth,
influence in different ways radio propagation, depending on the frequency.
Consider the refraction in the ionisphere for example on medium wave RF.
Too many considerations can be involved for us to make preferred
presumptions. ..
I repeat,
I have said so often.. The proof of the aethers existence is in the fact
that force has acted over a distance in a vacuum.. there is no need of any
further proof.. What we are keen to know is the mechanism of what it is and how
it works..
I hope to soon post my reasons for opposing the corpuscular theory of EMR.
I have called the subject "Half a photon"
Philip.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.4/936 - Release Date: 4/08/2007
2:42 PM
Other related posts:
