[geocentrism] Re: Tides
- From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 08:43:04 -0700 (PDT)
If the period is say 1 sec before the eclipse & 1.2 during then back to 1 then
what would the explination be?...some "lorenezian transformation" where the arm
extended during the eclipse?!!! ...oh yea that is demonstratable!?...If not
then the only other varible left relates to the mass via weight/ grav
attactions..
----- Original Message ----
From: philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 11:35:37 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Tides
Allen you said,
it does just the opisite...it makes them get heavier...thus we can see the only
experiment to date that has ever been able to distinquish the effect of grav as
pull or push, demonstrates a push effect not a pull effect.
Forgetting the push or pull idea, for our purpose, gravity works in a normal
way regardless of the reason for it, locally, Let us discuss the action of a
pendulum.
We have a time function, "period", which I thought was governed only by the
length of the arm from the fulcrum to the centre of gravity of the bob... The
weight of the bob made no difference. Are you saying that at every high tide,
our grand father clocks go astray?
There I've given you an easy way to put me right. Coz I'm not sure. And Neville
told me wiki was wikid. So I cant look there.
Phil.
----- Original Message -----
From: Allen Daves
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 2:10 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Tides
There is much to agree on and look at here.....
----- Original Message ----
From: philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 6:30:28 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Tides
Though I have never ventured into the discussion on the tides, it being a
mystery, outside my comprehension, I've decided to look at it. Some have
claimed the moon does not cause the tides. Well this raises more questions.. If
the moons gravity is not the cause, then certainly something related to the
moon and its position above, is the cause. I'm going to think on that. I
would agree with you that it is related....just not as directly as many
suppose..i explain my thoughts in greater detail further down
Also we have the anomaly of the pendulum under the lunar eclipse which NASA
though claiming attention to it seem to be avoiding it, or have no answer.
What is importaint to note about this observation is that it is the best
posible configuration for the sun an moon to exert a combined gravitaional
influence on the tides....and yet rather then making the pendulums get lighter
due to grav acceleration toward the sun and moon ...it does just the
opisite...it makes them get heavier...thus we can see the only experiment to
date that has ever been able to distinquish the effect of grav as pull or push,
demonstrates a push effect not a pull effect.
Secondly: Note, that the tides themselfs do not corespond exactly with the
suns/ moons timing although it is within 4 min but always lagging behind....If
the tides were being pushed rather then pulled then we should expect to see the
tides advance the sun/ moon not lag behind.... also even if gravity were acting
at the speed of light ( i do not aggree) but even if it did....there is still a
inconsistency in positions and the lag times..any solution would involve
harmonic anylisis...ummm..well, why not start with that in the first place?
Thirdly: The effect or the strength of the gravitational effect is certainly
not strong enouph to push or pull the tides either way.....simply the detected
gravitaional effect is too week to have any significant direct affect on the
oceans to create the tides we observe...
Further, in my own writings re gravity/inertia, to Allen, I find seeming
contradictions about this whole business. Is it just a matter of scale and
distribution.. I read others mathmatical analysis, and I acknowledge that I am
not gifted in maths, and cannot comment specifically, but I have experienced
enough to know that a mathmatical analysis is only as true as the data
inputted.. Leave something out and it is in error. And that is always on the
cards. A physicist who understands nature, should be able to explain movements
without resort to complex formulae.
Absolutly correct! In fact it was Herbert Dingle that stated:"...in the
language of mathematics we can tell lies as well as truths, and withing the
scope of mathematics itself there is no possible way of telling one from the
other. we can distinquish them only by experience or by reasoing outside the
mathematics, applied to the posible relation between the mathematical solution
and its supposed physical correlate" Science at the crossroads pg 33 also
found in volume 1 GWW pg 50
At this moment I am having doubts. If I was correct about gravity in the
effects on free fall, affecting every particle equally in the space vehicle,
then how can the water be pulled up separately and further than the rest of the
Mass earth? Shouldn't the whole thing stay together and dance a wobble with the
moon? Just a bigger spacedhip. YES
Was it Regner, who said that the solid world is spinning under the tides?
Someone did. I thought it at one time. This cannot be true, and I mean true in
the conventional system
The tide is like a wave form. Water flows to both sides of the crest of this
wave. The ocean as a whole like the atmosphere must rotate with a general speed
similar to the solid earth. Imagine the turbulence if this was not so. Agreed
In geocentricism:
Just a small final word , as regards geocentrism, and how far we can take the
Biblical claim to the earth shall not move. If the earth is absolutely still,
then the moons variations of the elliptic, must not cause any secondary
orbital/translationary movement to the earth. What that does to the
barycentre, the math man can tell us.
But I feel, intuitively that if the earth was FIXED the moon would have to
eventually form a true circular orbit. Wouldn't it. I think this gets to the
aether as it rotates as a whole ...but with moving currents like currents in a
streams..with individual edies and such even though the stream still has a
overall direction of flow..?
This is where the aether , the universe , and independent motions, (of the
moon.) make a complex problem as regards dynamics. (from our viewpoint)
One motion of the moon around the world almost daily, is not an individual
movement, but rather a locked in with the "aether sphere" rotation, and
therefore, not like a normal real independent movement as with similar orbiting
moons around other solar system planets. In addition the moon has its own
independent motion against this universal movement. What we see is the
resultant. But what we feel inertially is the standard 28 day orbit. Just as
what we feel inertially with respect to the earth, is a 24 hour rotation. The
two systems are dynamically equivalent as regards inerial properties.
But the tide follows the moon, which means that the universal rotation of the
stars, aether, and slipping moon, all contribute in some way to the tides.
I agree ..but since I think gravity is best explained by a vibration within the
aether as sand particles vibrating on a vibrating membrane......I would tend to
think of the relationships ( positions of sun/moon) in terms of how changing
the postions of the furniture in a room will change the harmoics of that a
room.... vibrations will squez as well as shatter and do all the things we
observe but where the furniture in the room is will determine where and to what
degree the effects are most and least noticable..... the gravitaionl vibration
resonates in the aether but the aether is rotating around a fixed earth..
I have much to retreat into my shell to think about..
comments welcome.. Guiding lights.
Philip
________________________________
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.16/1430 - Release Date: 13/05/2008
7:31 AM
Other related posts:
