Paradox
©
Fisana

Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Gravity Generation - Can We Get Threre From Here?


  • Please log in to reply
83 replies to this topic

#21 Alder Logs

Alder Logs

    Shiitake Novice 206 Logs

  • OG VIP
  • 8,889 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 17 August 2012 - 12:15 AM

Gotta love Tom van Flandern.

Thank you for posting this, Ilia.

The shitcanning of the ethers has always seemed ill advised. Now, if we can just get past the idea that gravity is generated by mass...

My image is that gravity, i.e., electrogravitation, while it's what we would call, "static electricity," is not likely something in stasis. It is probably a motion of something that is not material, and not necessarily a wave, but more of a flow, the propagation of the stuff of creation, flowing from a source. We see only the smallest part of this stream, and therefore, by physical observance, are not equipped to make the grandiose pronouncements of all-knowing certitude we are used to getting from the expert, du jour.

#22 eatyualive

eatyualive

    ExoCannibalist

  • Honorary Former Staff
  • 6,153 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 26 August 2012 - 08:17 PM

ever seen the hutchinson effect


[Direct Link]



[Direct Link]



dude claims hes using high frequencies to levitate things and melt iron bars and metal, forks ect...

#23 LilBear

LilBear

    Producer

  • Expired Member
  • 1,087 posts

Posted 26 August 2012 - 10:37 PM

Mind - :laser: - blown

haha, gotta get back into the physics world, got a baasssiicc grasp of quantum, but most of thats :rasta: hazy haha


even the german flying saucer they built was anti-gravity as you define the word,

I don't know enough yet to comment Ill say haha


but I will say that the hutchinson effect website looks like total bogus to me haha

#24 Alder Logs

Alder Logs

    Shiitake Novice 206 Logs

  • OG VIP
  • 8,889 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 26 August 2012 - 11:27 PM

Hey. a little bear woke up my mad scientist thread!

=================

The Hutchinson effect should not be ignored. See http://www.drjudywood.com/. That's where I first encountered the idea.

=================

Isn't it bizarre what a self-taught high school dropout might come up with? I am astounded that the assumption, the ungrounded assumption, in Newton's formula for gravitational force are not questioned by anyone but this old flunky (so far as I can see).

=================

Don't expect much from the physics world. Just start thinking about why they can't come to terms with gravity when they want to unify the forces. Personally, I think the strong and weak forces were invented because F=GXm1Xm2/r squared shapes the academically schooled world view. It is so basic in cosmology, cosmogony, and physics. But because we can put cannonball-like objects into orbit, just as Newton's empirical studies indicated, we accept the assumptions of that equation. We are wowed by Stupid Human Tricks.

Give Newton his due. He predicted we could put cannonballs into orbit. His next step took us all down the wrong path. Cannonballs do not generate gravity, and planets do not have a mass relative to that of a cannonball.

Gravity is a dynamic based in ether motion and is electrical in nature. Since the motion of static electric fields act in the non-material ethers, they are not recognized. Gravity is not a wave, as much as it is a flow.

================

Welcome to a new chance to think. Let us put aside an assumption that no longer serves us.

#25 Ilia

Ilia

    mycophILIAc

  • Expired Member
  • 1,424 posts

Posted 27 August 2012 - 05:28 AM

Electricity seems to be floating around a lot of mysterious forces (like gravity). Einstein flunked highschool as well. Think he said something along the lines of education being the largest obstacle to learning.

Well I got myself a bunch of graph paper which I find essential for doing maths. I haven't done any serious math studying since last year and I find doing things on proper paper beats trying to write on a pc or scratch paper. I figure some one has to get deep into it to figure it out. Other people's work won't give me understanding beyond concepts. I want to start working with the actual formulas for orbit calculation etc. Should be fun :). As I understand things better I'll chime in here with any alternative explanations i think of along the way. Ether and the like are interesting ideas - gotta find a way to integrate them into the maths if is possible/useful.

#26 LilBear

LilBear

    Producer

  • Expired Member
  • 1,087 posts

Posted 27 August 2012 - 07:42 AM

just to clarify, what do you mean by ether?
I'm unfamiliar with the term except as a gas,
and I don't think you mean it that way haha

I'll get my read on!

#27 Alder Logs

Alder Logs

    Shiitake Novice 206 Logs

  • OG VIP
  • 8,889 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 27 August 2012 - 09:49 AM

Electricity seems to be floating around a lot of mysterious forces (like gravity). Einstein flunked highschool as well. Think he said something along the lines of education being the largest obstacle to learning.

Well I got myself a bunch of graph paper which I find essential for doing maths. I haven't done any serious math studying since last year and I find doing things on proper paper beats trying to write on a pc or scratch paper. I figure some one has to get deep into it to figure it out. Other people's work won't give me understanding beyond concepts. I want to start working with the actual formulas for orbit calculation etc. Should be fun :). As I understand things better I'll chime in here with any alternative explanations i think of along the way. Ether and the like are interesting ideas - gotta find a way to integrate them into the maths if is possible/useful.


Well, though I am all up in Newton's face over that problematic equation, I am no mathematician at all. I'm a wrencher and wirer, a nailer/screwer and a brick layer/pipe fitter. I employ a calculator to assist me in cobbling together gizmos and shelters. I would love for a math man/woman to sort out the numbers after we reassess "F" & "G" and "E."

just to clarify, what do you mean by ether?
I'm unfamiliar with the term except as a gas,
and I don't think you mean it that way haha

I'll get my read on!


Look up Michelson Morley. They are credited with the demise of the ether. I say they only killed one view of it, and it was one that needed to go anyway. Einstein created a view that needed space to be void, and it's not. In my view, material stuff is made up of motion in non-material stuff. That stuff I call, "ether." That's what it was called before Michelson/Morley. All M&M proved that the either was not stationary in space while everything material simply passed through it. It is my view that the ethers are in motion and have varying affects upon material at varied scales of physical size.

Gravity is a dynamic based in ether motion and is electrical in nature. Since the motion of static electric fields act in the non-material ethers, they are not recognized. Gravity is not a wave, as much as it is a flow.


I would like to apologize for stating my ideas as fact, when I cannot back it up. Please allow me to correct this by saying the quoted paragraph is hypothetical. I will require some assistance from my educated friends in order to bring it along to the level of theory. Thank you in advance.

Edited by Alder Logs, 27 August 2012 - 10:07 AM.


#28 LilBear

LilBear

    Producer

  • Expired Member
  • 1,087 posts

Posted 27 August 2012 - 10:02 AM

ah I gotcha,

ever heard of quantum foam? there is no such thing as "space" merely shit we can't see haha

even between the vast spaces in an atom, quantum foam is there to fill the gap!
http://www.astronomy...ask/a11792.html

http://en.wikipedia....ki/Quantum_foam

http://www.technolog...ntum-foam-in-a/

http://quantumfoam.t...com/q-foam.html

http://curiosity.dis...-to-time-travel

buncho random links on the stuff, interesting correlations between foam and ether

is Quantum Foam the "New Aether" that Einstien and Lorentz were talking about?



this is the stuff I get, the theory behind it all, not a math whiz, I imagine big picture stuff and connect the dots, like the difference between an architect and an engineer, I easily envision the entire building, just stumble over how you attach all the cabinets to the walls haha


and remember folks, its all just theories! ;)

Edited by LilBear, 27 August 2012 - 10:17 AM.


#29 LilBear

LilBear

    Producer

  • Expired Member
  • 1,087 posts

Posted 27 August 2012 - 10:13 AM

i dunno 'bout that 9/11 theory there.

just by how it was structured the building was gonna collapse as if it was a planned demo, the only problem I see is the heat, but then the insulation they used (once ignited) burned at the right temps apparently.



but this isn't about gravity haha

#30 eatyualive

eatyualive

    ExoCannibalist

  • Honorary Former Staff
  • 6,153 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 28 August 2012 - 10:05 PM

This guy boyd bushman was head of skunk works at lockheed martin in the hayday of black engineering ops. hes an avid supporter that we have back engineered ufos, but watch this demonstration prove anti gravity right here. watch the part with the copper pipe.

watch him demonstrate newtons law but he cancels out gravity by using a non reactive metal such as copper. pretty cool
skip to 4:17 to see the newton's law experiment. some how the movement of electrons or something reacts with the copper and slows down the item he drops. pretty amazing.

[Direct Link]




and get back on topic, this isn't a 9/11 thread its about anti gravity.

Edited by eatyualive, 28 August 2012 - 10:13 PM.


#31 Alder Logs

Alder Logs

    Shiitake Novice 206 Logs

  • OG VIP
  • 8,889 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 29 August 2012 - 12:00 AM

Until they understand that gravity has polarity, they will continue to speak of anti-gravity. Gravity fields present one pole outwardly and one pole inwardly. What we are dealing with is gravity generation. I wrote nearly twenty years ago that "the F117 Stealth Fighter is a flying saucer in airplane's clothing." An airplane or a rocket is anti-gravity. A flying saucer is a gravity generator, not anti-gravity. Gravity fields all present the same pole outwardly, and so, repel each other. Collisions between gravity generators will be nearly impossible, as they will repel and veer as the fields come close.

#32 LilBear

LilBear

    Producer

  • Expired Member
  • 1,087 posts

Posted 29 August 2012 - 09:11 AM

someone should use all their money from mush cultivation to expand on this haha

this is wild haha

I'm gonna have to do a lot more than read some articles hahaha

Edited by LilBear, 29 August 2012 - 09:17 AM.


#33 MungoFungo

MungoFungo

    THE Un-Governable FORCE

  • OG VIP
  • 1,796 posts

Posted 29 August 2012 - 09:23 AM

What the HELL is Y'ALL be SMOKIN?
must be pretty good stuff..

#34 Myc

Myc

    Myc - o 'Topia

  • App Administrator
  • 5,087 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 29 August 2012 - 09:29 AM

This guy boyd bushman was head of skunk works at lockheed martin in the hayday of black engineering ops. hes an avid supporter that we have back engineered ufos, but watch this demonstration prove anti gravity right here. watch the part with the copper pipe.

watch him demonstrate newtons law but he cancels out gravity by using a non reactive metal such as copper. pretty cool
skip to 4:17 to see the newton's law experiment. some how the movement of electrons or something reacts with the copper and slows down the item he drops. pretty amazing.


Laughing my ass off!
I have a copper tube I've been using for this research!!! Another really neato thing you can do:
Wrap the exterior of the pipe with magnetic film. The film helps one to see what is happening to the polarity of the forces within the interior of the pipe. As far as I know, I'm the only one who has done this yet - have not seen any videos to the effect.
Should anyone try this, please post your observations for comparison in this thread. Thank you.

#35 Alder Logs

Alder Logs

    Shiitake Novice 206 Logs

  • OG VIP
  • 8,889 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 29 August 2012 - 10:18 AM

What the HELL is Y'ALL be SMOKIN?
must be pretty good stuff..


I'm allergic to smoking, and even eating, cannabis. But I believe I was still partaking back when I first started thinking about this stuff in the early to mid '80s.

I'm trying to remember what it was that got that train of thought started. I think it was when I started considering the possibility of a hollow earth/planets. That was it. It was in a book I read that gravity was generated at the frictional interface of the molten strata with the crust. I can't even remember what book it was, but the idea that gravity was due to a dynamic action, as opposed to simply the presence of an inert but big and dense lump of matter. It was then that equation of Newton's came into question. I started seeing so much doublethink in the accepted model of the earth's structure.

By taking the inverse square idea below the surface, they virtually pressured the core into a solid nickel and iron mass, sufficient to bring the average density of the earth up to their projected cannonball mass equivalency. In this model, it is mass attracting mass keeping the planet together.

The average density of basaltic rock and lavas aren't enough to do the job. If one were to actually think about this model, one would realize that at the center of a solid sphere, all the mass is outward from the center point, and should be pulling away from the center. So, even with the mass=gravity scenario, there is reason to suspect a hollow, not infinite pressure and density.

The core has been assigned a composition of nickel and iron to account for its magnetic field. If gravity is, as I postulate, electric, a magnetic field would follow.

Seismic waves propagation is seen as a proof of the solid core, but an inner crust around a hollow would do precisely the same.

Once the massive and dynamic equivalencies of planets and cannonballs are abandoned, nearly every aspect of our images of the macro world must change. There will be huge implications for our image of the micro universe as well. The error of the Newtonian Assumption weighs heavily upon us (pun intended).

My life as a hollow earther has been, and must be, a lonely one. How much more of a crackpot idea could one entertain? The price of such thinking is banishment from all academic company. They might ask me what I've been smoking. :smokin:

Edited by Alder Logs, 29 August 2012 - 10:29 AM.


#36 LilBear

LilBear

    Producer

  • Expired Member
  • 1,087 posts

Posted 29 August 2012 - 10:47 AM

hollow?

its certainly not solid for sure, most probably molten (liquid) metallics (fluid magnet? with a current? causing rotation?)

compare earth to mars, I've always thought that the reason mars is "dead" is because it didnt have the energy-balance to maintain a liquid core. like an egg when unequal force is applied to it.

if this post makes any sense, hard to describe in a sentence or two with a lack of the requisite vocabulary'

maybe im not understanding clearly,

I get the whole nonsense of why it wouldnt be solid, thats obvious. earth wouldnt hold itself together unless each consecutive mass-underlayer(?) was dense enough to hold its "covering" (overlayer?) which is the inverse of how mass is distributed in a solid sphere, meaning the earth, as you went down into it, would have to be exponentially denser the farther you went.

unless gravity was magnetic and the very core of the earth was a giant fluidic magnetic dynamo of sorts


but I must be missing something

Since I'm fairly certain most geologists would say there is a liquid layer within the earth of molten metals and other hefty elements.

http://en.wikipedia....ophile_elements


but of course, none of this is in disagreement with whether or not gravity is magnetic/electric in nature. mostly whether or not that has much say about the makeup of the inner core.

wait, just clicked haha

if the outer core was the liquimagnetic fluid generating gravity, and gravity fields would be polar , nah, lost it, cause that would mean the interior of the field (inner core) would be incredibly dense (forced into itself by its exterior flow of magnetic elecric gravity generating fluids) and gravity on the opposite side of the fluid core would be pushing outward.



I've confused myself haha

Edited by LilBear, 29 August 2012 - 11:01 AM.


#37 Alder Logs

Alder Logs

    Shiitake Novice 206 Logs

  • OG VIP
  • 8,889 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 29 August 2012 - 10:56 AM

hollow?

its certainly not solid for sure, most probably molten (liquid) metallics (fluid magnet? with a current? causing rotation?)

compare earth to mars, I've always thought that the reason mars is "dead" is because it didnt have the energy-balance to maintain a liquid core. like an egg when unequal force is applied to it.

if this post makes any sense, hard to describe in a sentence or two with a lack of the requisite vocabulary


Nickel and iron cannot support a magnetic field after they reach a temperature still somewhat below melting. So, in the finest tradition of doublethink, the solid core is made by way of the massive pressures. The trouble with this idea is, you cannot pressure molten nickel and iron into a solid. Pressure just adds to the heat. Granted, pressure will raise the boiling point of a liquid, but then we could explode a large solid nickel-iron ball by simply boiling one drop of water at its center.

Being a hollow earther can lose you friends in a hurry.

((((((UNCLEEEEEAAANNNNNN!!!!!))))))


It's a lonely path.

When I see planet earth, I see a crusty bubble.

#38 Alder Logs

Alder Logs

    Shiitake Novice 206 Logs

  • OG VIP
  • 8,889 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 29 August 2012 - 11:39 AM

The earth, planets, stars, (not to mention quarks and electrons) are vortical in structure. They are mostly fluid and structured by motion. In highly electro/gravitationally biased environments, such as where we are standing or sitting, vortical motion domains are inwardly conical (centripetal portion) and outwardly egg-shaped (centrifugal portion). In outer space, a bit away from close proximity of a locally dominant electro/gravitational field, the vortical form is that of a sphere.

This fact is important: fluid vortices are electrically negatively charged in their centripetal portions. This has been noted and measured.

Our physical planet is the centripetal portion of a greater ether vortex in free space. A vortex with an equatorial relative velocity of about 1,000 MPH. All material in motion involves motions in the ethers, whether primarily or secondarily. In other words, if you throw a baseball, you impart a motion to it, and it drags the ethers with it. You imparted its motion field. In action at distance, it is the ether that drags the matter into motion via a prime moving ether motion field.

Magnets and gravity (static charge) both work through the ethers, but with different field and polar configurations. Magnets only affect certain atomic structures, while electro/gravitation affects any and all material atoms. A magnetic field is lineal, with its poles at opposite end of a line. A gravity filed is spherical with one pole at the center of an ether vacuum, the true positive pole of electricity, and a No-Man's-Land, and its highest negative electrostatic charge in the centripetal whorls.

============

Once again, I'm sorry for stating these hypothetical notions as fact, but it's just an easier way to say it, rather than couching every sentence in those terms.

Edited by Alder Logs, 29 August 2012 - 11:44 AM.


#39 LilBear

LilBear

    Producer

  • Expired Member
  • 1,087 posts

Posted 29 August 2012 - 11:49 AM

http://www.google.co...hpsVQFpcq37I1Fg


interesting article

I think what they found was that Iron is crystalline in the outer core/lower mantle or whatever the layer is called just outside the outer core, so the pressures only going to go up from there.

moreover, it has a superdense structure.

also, seismic waves travel faster through the inner core going along earths polar axis (magnetic pole)

#40 Alder Logs

Alder Logs

    Shiitake Novice 206 Logs

  • OG VIP
  • 8,889 posts

Donator


Awards Bar:

Posted 29 August 2012 - 12:10 PM

http://www.google.co...hpsVQFpcq37I1Fg


interesting article

I think what they found was that Iron is crystalline in the outer core/lower mantle or whatever the layer is called just outside the outer core, so the pressures only going to go up from there.

moreover, it has a superdense structure.

also, seismic waves travel faster through the inner core going along earths polar axis (magnetic pole)



Once again, it seems all this theorizing stems from an assumed overall mass derived from Newton's cannonball trajectories, and the equivalency of m1 and m2. They build their models to conform to that groundless assumption. If it does not assume that level of mass, it cannot be considered. Hence, mass equals gravity and here we are stuck.

I understand that no one wants their educated mind blown. They worked so hard for it.




Like Mycotopia? Become a member today!