[geocentrism] Re: Tides and the moon and M-M
- From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2008 08:40:04 -0700 (PDT)
it is the cause of error by as much as 90% on the very large scale and 1part in
300 on smaller scales.......that is close enouph for you?????.......great what
are we even doing here!?
----- Original Message ----
From: philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, April 6, 2008 6:16:27 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Tides and the moon and M-M
Allen Newtons laws work close enough fine for me.. no speculation needed .. no
theories either.. Its straight experimental evidence.. What you measure is
what you got..
Phil
----- Original Message -----
From: Allen Daves
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, April 07, 2008 10:04 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Tides and the moon and M-M
Phil, my "speculitive theroies" are not as speculitive as the ones MS keeps
appealing to....mine are consistnet with logic observations and experiance
.....not in spite of it......Therefore if you are not intersted in speculitive
theories then why use MS's to argue against GU or my grav theories which are
far less "speculitive" then the ones you are ; "I'm quite happy with the normal
kind " ...??
----- Original Message ----
From: philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, April 6, 2008 4:37:40 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Tides and the moon and M-M
I think you are missing in my comments is a fundimental differnce in not just
how it works but the source of Gravity itself. In AVGM The wave is resposible
for gravity but the wave doese not originate from mass allen
Thank you Allen.. but I was not interested in your speculative theories that
have as much if not less support for them as Einsrein has.. Even my aether
theory is only speculation.. Your source of gravity has no bearing on the
practical realities Paul was discussing..
However I am greatful for your statement ,
"Although it is posible to mathematicaly model a pushing gravity wave in the
same way that MS models Gravity. "
That is as far as I wanted it to go.. Experimental reality without any room for
speculation .. And I was not pushing a pushing gravity.. I'm quite happy with
the normal kind called molecular attraction, which works out just fine
experimentally for all our near earth near moon near sun experiments..
ta ta,
Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: Allen Daves
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, April 07, 2008 2:05 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Tides and the moon and M-M
Ok no kick, I understand what you are saying. Although it is posible to
mathematicaly model a pushing gravity wave in the same way that MS models
Gravity. However:
1.That would still be a inconsistent model with the observations since it would
just be MS with a differt "packaging".
2.But, most importainly what I think you are missing in my comments is a
fundimental differnce in not just how it works but the source of Gravity
itself. In AVGM The wave is resposible for gravity but the wave doese not
originate from mass or due to the mass in the universe as with the case of MS
with it's graviton.......In MS it is mass/ graviton that is the cause of
gravity where in mine (AVGM) mass is not the cause of gravity or the wave/
graviton, mass is just but one variable gravity. In avgm Mass is not the cause
it is only a player "on the feild" ( wave propragation in a medium that has
"imperfections"[mass] in it) there is a big fundimental difference between
thoes two.... Just as in the sound board where sand particles appear to coeless
into patterns and "gravitate toward each other even though the mass particles
themselfs are not emitting a graviton or any thing else the souce of the
"gravitation" or attraction on the sound board is a function
of the medium the frequency of the vibration and the particles on the board
but the particals on the board are not the source for the patterns......I hope
now you can see what I am trying to get at........
----- Original Message ----
From: philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, April 5, 2008 12:36:02 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Tides and the moon and M-M
Before I get kicked I realise my explanation was simplistic..WAVE propagation
is a complex subject . There are many misconception on the nature of the tides
particularly on the internet. I think the following gives a fairly good detail
if you can cope with this rule , ITS DYNAMICALLY THE SAME FOR GEOCENTRISM OR
HELIOCENTRISM even if different theoretical reasons need to be invoked. You can
use the links directly from here if you want more detail.
Tide
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Tides are the rising and falling of Earth's ocean surface caused by the tidal
forces of the Moon and the Sun acting on the oceans. Tidal phenomena can occur
in any object that is subjected to a gravitational field that varies in time
and space, such as the Earth's land masses. (see Other tides).
Tides noticeably affect the depth of marine and estuarine water bodies and
produce oscillating currents known as tidal streams, making prediction of tides
very important for coastal navigation (see Tides and navigation). The strip of
seashore that is submerged at high water and exposed at low water, the
intertidal zone or foreshore, is an important ecological product of ocean tides
(see Intertidal ecology).
The changing tide produced at a given location is the result of the changing
positions of the Moon and Sun relative to the Earth coupled with the effects of
Earth rotation and the local shape of the sea floor.[1] Sea level measured by
coastal tide gauges may also be strongly affected by wind.
Contents
[hide]
1 Introduction and tidal terminology
1.1 Tidal range variation: springs and neaps
1.2 Tidal phase and amplitude
2 Tidal physics
2.1 Tidal forces
2.2 Laplace tidal equation
2.3 Tidal amplitude and cycle time
2.4 Tidal dissipation
3 Tidal observation and prediction
3.1 Timing
3.2 Tidal analysis
3.3 Tidal Current
3.4 Tidal Power Generation
4 Tides and navigation
5 Biological aspects
5.1 Intertidal ecology
5.2 Biological rhythms and the tides
6 Other tides
7 Misapplications
8 See also
9 External links
9.1 Tide predictions
10 References and notes
----- Original Message -----
From: philip madsen
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2008 4:51 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Tides and the moon and M-M
Allen the fact it took you 1000 plus words to convince us my simple explanation
was wrong, shows how weak the ground is under your feet.
Logic states in your very first , your own answer. But you cannot see it.
Hence I am disenclined to read the rest. But I will as it is my happy hour.
1. If gravity in your model pushes then how on earth can the tides lag behind
the moon ..if gravity pushes the tides the moon would push the tides not lag
them behind!?
I said semantics does not matter.. Action is the same in either system theory.
First and foremost The moon does not pull the tides nor does it or anything
else push it.. Hmm perhaps my "squeesze" was a bad choice. Water seeks its own
level according to its head pressure at various parts, causing currents.. The
head pressure is relative to gravity.. Level is also a bad choice, coz on a
curved sphere of equal gravity the water level is a curve.
The lag of the water lift is for the same reason in mine or conventional
gravity. There may be timedelay due to aether , speed of light limits what
ever, but such is a negligible few seconds. The delay is purely fluid dynamics.
in the direction of rotation, whether its earth rotation shifting away from
under the water, or rotation across the sky.. The effect shifts rather
quickly, The water wave has to catch up. And don't be confused.. The wave,
action of the tide around the globe moves at a max of 1000 mph . The water
does not move around the globe at all.. Tidal curents are caused by
depressions in the globes topological construction, such as channels estuaries,
land masses rivers etc..
Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: Allen Daves
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2008 1:56 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Tides and the moon and M-M
Phil,
How can this be so hard?.. I’m not arguing what you state in
1. If gravity in your model pushes then how on earth can the tides lag behind
the moon ..if gravity pushes the tides the moon would push the tides not lag
them behind!?
2.However, If gravity pull everything at the same time ( your attempted GTR
explanation for why we can not detect the accelerations of grav in free fall)
then it pulls the earth at the same time to the same degree...If it does not
then you can't claim the acceleration is not detected..for crying out loud go
to the beach and watch it...but then if you say that is the observable
acceleration of earth in a free fall around the sun& moon then you cant claim
the reason we cannot detect the earths acceleration around the sun because
gravity is pulling everything all at the same time......!?
You don't see that it is the GTR 's acceleration explanations that lost this
whole argument before it began not me. You don't seem to fully understanding
the GTR dynamics in the first place. However, neither I nor my "gravity" theory
has any problems or inconsistencies with the tides and accelerations in a free
fall.. GTR does...so which one is closer to the truth...?!........If inertial
accelerations cannot be detected in free fall then how can the earths oceans
demonstrate a physical and observable acceleration of the earth/ moon/ sun/ in
free fall around one another’s gravitational field? There is no difference
between the earth/ oceans and your accelerometers........... Both are simply
mass suspended elastically( spring/hydrostatic force)!....Phill you missing the
obvious ...... There is a difference the text book answers found in GTR and
the practical applications in the real world.
Yes we see tides they are real "in carnate"....the MS explanations for what
causes them is not only just imagined but inconsistent with GTR's / your
explanations for accelerations in a free fall ....You don’t seem to grasp the
difference between reality (tides) and imagination (GTR accelerations)..?
Reality and GTR are not compatible ....!?
How gravity works does make a great deal of difference. Yes you still call it
gravity but a push gravity does not function the same way a pull gravity is
assumed.....It could, but observations such as the tides and the Allais effect
demonstrate that it most certainly does not work the way MS gravity in a grav
free fall claims or attempts to explain how things work. It is much more then
just a "semantic theory". It gets to the very core of how things could or
would work, which are not the same in the two theories! GTR cannot be the
explanation for how things work...at least if logic and observations "have
anything to do with the conclusions"....??? Tides demonstrate usfull
information about gravity it is just not consistent with GTR's assertions!
3. The Allais effect demonstrates that the position of the moon with the sun do
have a direct, (not just assumed delay… this is to say the tides and the moon/
sun do not correspond exactly and it is not even consistent) association with
the tides. Further, That direct relationship shows that gravity
pushes.......well how can gravity push but cause the tides to lag behind rather
then push ahead???????!!!!!
The Answer is simple:
A. Gravity does not work in any shape form or fashion as MS portrays it
certainly not within GTR.
B. The relationship between the moon/sun and tides is therefore related but
only indirectly not directly. If it were direct then the push gravity of the
moon would cause the tides to advance the moon/suns positions not lag....that
is not the case...
C. There is only one known possible "physical cause" and mechanical action that
is capable of creating such a phenomena based on the locations of other objects
within a given matrix.....and for other just as if not more powerful reasons
that (i will not get into here)
The solution: The physical cause of gravity is a vibration in a "Homogeneous",
"smooth" matrix (aether) with "non-indigenous" substances (ordinary matter)
scattered throughout it.... The speed of light is only a limit for EMR because
EMR are ultra high frequencies in a dense medium.....thus restricted just as in
the case of various frequencies of light moving at differnet speeds through
glass, air, water........Gravity is a very low frequency that traverses a very
dense medium, the whole universe in somthing like -10^44 sec that is why it
cannot be detected directly only its effects can be measured...
instrumentations and the affects of aether waves on matter directly are only
capable of demonstrating a effect at light speed at best but the force/wave
itself prorogates faster then is possible to measure... our ability to measure
it is limited to the speed of light...but there are other ways to ascertain
it's "properties".....they are just very
difficult....
Viva "AVGM" (Aetheral Vibrational Gravitational Model).. (:-D)
That is the very very short version.....
----- Original Message ----
From: philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, April 4, 2008 7:30:57 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Tides and the moon and M-M
Phil, There can be no "differeing gravity foces." to accelerate the water
upward if gravity pulls on everthing on the accelerometer ......Allen
Allen, when the moon is dead centre over head the net or resultant of the two
gravitational forces 180 degrees out of phase is less at that point than it is
at any other phase angle either side of top dead centre. That is what I meant
by differing gravity, or varying gravity.. Water seeks a common level due to
gravity.. It will flow from where there is no moon overhead to that area
beneath the moon.
This is proven no matter which semantic theory you want to apply to gravity.
I say the gravity is aetheric push not molecular pull. But I still call it
gravity. Its a very grave subject. a matter of grave concern. I gravitate to
my theory. Therefore if the aether over here squeezes all the water to over
there under the moon, because the moon interfered with and caused a lower
aether pressure or less gravity under the moon, then it is still all the same
thing.. The moon caused the tides by being where it is..
And don't try bringing this into it, "if gravity pulls on everthing on the
accelerometer "
You lost that argument well and truely before you started it..
Phil
----- Original Message -----
From: Allen Daves
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2008 9:22 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Tides and the moon and M-M
Phil, There can be no "differeing gravity foces." to accelerate the water
upward if gravity pulls on everthing on the accelerometer (earth) at the same
time in the same way such that it prevents a detectable acceleration in free
fall....... !?
----- Original Message ----
From: philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, April 4, 2008 4:08:42 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Tides and the moon and M-M
Thank you Peter.. You saved me from wondering how to explain the simple
phenomena to them.. Because the water is fluid tidal flows can move under the
differeing gravity foces.
When the moon is overhead we weigh less because we are subject to two forces
one up one down and the vector difference is positive down..
Of course there will be a point somewhere between the bodies closer to the moon
where the vector forces in each direction will be equal and a mass will have no
weight. Go closer to the moon and it will fall to the moon go closer to the
earth and it will fall back to earth.. I would imagine this neutral position
would be easier to maintain than the similar experience on a piece of iron
between two magnets.. But even there, we can have a neutral position of zero
force.. not zero magnetism.. to say zero gravity is a misnomer.. we mean
zero force of gravity due to balancing forces.
Its just a big hill actually.. If we had a real road to the moon, it would be
uphill three quarters of the way, and down hill the rest of the way.
Or again if you kick a ball straight up into the air there wil be a split
second when it will have no weight, this does not mean there was no gravity..
Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: PETER CHARLTON
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2008 6:06 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Tides and the moon and M-M
As you know, I have no scientific knowledge, but it seems logical to me that,
rather than there being a "zero gravity point", that instead there is a point
where the pull of gravity from the moon, is equal to the pull of gravity from
the Earth, that is, the two forces pulling equaliy at a given point.
If you go nearer the moon, you still have the pull of gravity from the Earth,
but it is less than the increasing pull from the moon, and visa versa.
Surely, if there was a point where gravity was zero, the moon would escape from
its orbit?
Pete Charlton
----- Original Message -----
From: Bernie Brauer
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 12:04 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Tides and the moon and M-M
Statement/Question:
"It is widely accepted, although not by me, that the moon causes the tides. It
is also widely accepted, although not by me, that there exists a zero-gravity
point situated somewhere between the World and moon.
My question is this: If the ocean were situated at the zero-gravity point, then
there would be no tide. Closer to the World the pull of the World is stronger.
Closer to the moon the pull of the moon is stronger. The net effect, this side
of the zero-gravity point, is always a positive pull by the World. Since this
is equivalent to a force of gravity that produces a stronger pull as we take
the oceans further this side of the zero-gravity point, then how does the moon
produce the tides?" Dr. Neville T. Jones
Response:
"IT DOES NOT DIRECTLY, ONLY INDIRECTLY. Hooray! I’m so glad finally someone
else sees this issue too. Further, the tides are one of the major reasons why I
model gravity as a vibration, for The Alias Effect shows that the position of
the sun and moon has a relationship to gravity on Earth but tides demonstrate
that they are not directly related due to the whole satellites issues as well
as atmosphere. However, in vibrational gravity the positions of CB's (
Celestial Bodies ) will affect the vibrational wave. In short, the tides are
caused by the squeezing effect of the gravity vibration, that is to say, that
there is no additional or absence of gravity force, only a uneven squeezing
effect that is a result in part due to sun/moon/background-stars positioning (
The Alias Effect proves this ). A vibration is the only known physical
explanation that can account for that effect while producing a non-detectable
gravity force in all of its anomalies, which
are not anomalies but rather clear indicators that gravity is a vibration of
aether waves. No other known physical construct could account for all those
things." Allen Daves
Jack Lewis <jack.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I haven't yet seen anyone come with an answer to something Neville, I think,
once said regarding the point, which must exist, between the Earth and the Moon
where the gravity is zero. This being the case how is it that the Moon controls
the tides? I'm sure, I think, that there must be a simple answer.
The M-M part of the subject is to ask Regner how he is getting on with the
answering the interferometer experiments wrt a non-moving Earth?
Jack
You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total
Access, No Cost.
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.5/1358 - Release Date: 3/04/2008 6:36
PM
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.5/1358 - Release Date: 3/04/2008 6:36
PM
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.5/1358 - Release Date: 3/04/2008 6:36
PM
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.5/1358 - Release Date: 3/04/2008 6:36
PM
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.7/1361 - Release Date: 5/04/2008 7:53
AM
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.7/1361 - Release Date: 5/04/2008 7:53
AM
Other related posts:
