On 21 Nov (Double-A) wrote:

(cinquirer) wrote:
airplane. It's not we who falls to the ground. But the earth reaching
up to us and we are feeling the falling because the earth atmosphere
is hitting our body.
[snip]

If that were true, the Earth would overtake the Moon pretty fast, and
then the Sun the Earth!
Double-A

Wrong dummy, you need to study the Divergent Matter model
and see that orbits are not closed, in this model all orbits are outward
spirals.
If you can think of something else besides Euclidean apace
and Newtonian concepts it should be easy enough.

Joe Fischer

On 21 Nov (AaronB) wrote:

(cinquirer) wrote:
reaching up to us. So it's all about expansions. When we jump from
airplane. It's not we who falls to the ground. But the earth reaching
up to us and we are feeling the falling because the earth atmosphere
is hitting our body.

This fails completely. The sun is bigger than the Earth. By the same
logic, the sun is expanding faster than the Earth, and thus the Earth
is being pulled into the sun. Therefore, if this is true, we should
see the sun approaching us at a rate relative to the expansion of the
sun. In other words, relative to the Earth, the sun should be getting
bigger; which it isn't.

In the Divergent Matter model larger objects would have
to expand faster than smaller objects, the critical restriction is
that each element must expand at a rate that results in all
objects retaining the same size relative to each other at the
same temperature, pressure and compression.
If the Earth is getting bigger, the sun is too. :-)

Also, the force of gravity is not constant, it changes with distance.
Thus if a sky diver is falling from say, 20000 ft above the surface,
he might experience an acceleration of 8.7 m/s^2 (this is a guess, not
going to bother to do the full calculation), but as he approaches the
surface, his acceleration will increase. By your theory, this would
imply that the rate of expansion of the Earth changes relative to the
position of the person, which makes ABSOLUTELY no sense.

Of course the rate of expansion changes in Newtonian terms,
each instant the Earth fills an ever increasing volume, but it always
measures the same diameter with a meter stick made of matter that
is also expanding.
But the time interval (the second) has to be increasing in
length at the same rate matter increases in length (all double
in the same time interval).

The above should start as a suitable beginning. If the theory intends
to replace standard model, it must be consistent with the data. That's
aside from other things dealt with in various other posts (the whole
work fiasco, for instance)

An expanding matter model will establish it's own parameters
and this is where most people have a problem, they are not able
to think in terms other than Newtonian.

Even the professional expert relativists who use the Einstein
terms of proper acceleration and inertial motion are not able to
accept matter expanding, even though they consider the ground
to have a proper upward acceleration, and they switch from the
Einstein Principle of Equivalence concepts to a bizarre combination
of the ground exerting electromagnetic forces upward that prevents
freefalling objects from falling past the surface.

It would be easier and more compatible to just accept that
matter is expanding.

Their comments aren't relavent to the discussion. Also, I note that
you didn't post the two or three other reviews (which are at
amazon.com by the way) which scathed the book for being a logical
disaster with no physical sense.
A.

The little bit that I read seems to be a jumbled up rambling
presentation of many different and unrelated ideas, not very well
thought out, and not a single consistent model.
And the messenger that started this thread seems to add to
the rambling in his enthusiasm.

I became interested in understanding the physical
mechanism of gravitation in 1944, and the study of the expanding
matter model has been my favorite hobby ever since.

I published the first clumsy paper in 1964, and again
in 1970, and James Carter also published a booklet in 1970,
but went off on a tangent instead of being consistent.

All models have problems, but sometimes the problem
is in the minds of those who have not studied the problem
enough or studied it from the wrong perspective.

I am very satisfied and comfortable with the knowledge
of how the Divergent (expanding) Matter works, even though
it is contrary to the belief that gravity is attractive.

But "space" cannot play a part in the model, matter is
all that needs to be considered and how many matter sticks
will fit between objects.

Joe Fischer

(cinquirer) wrote in message . com...
(Double-A) wrote in message . com...

Anyway. What the book basically says is that entire planet earth is
expanding as well as the rest of matter in the universe.
Since human is smaller and the earth bigger. The earth expands
faster compared to humans. So what we feel as gravity is
not us being attracted to the ground. But simply the ground
reaching up to us. So it's all about expansions. When we jump from
airplane. It's not we who falls to the ground. But the earth reaching
up to us and we are feeling the falling because the earth atmosphere
is hitting our body.
[snip]


If that were true, the Earth would overtake the Moon pretty fast, and
then the Sun the Earth!

Double-A


He has devote an entire chapter of his 400 page book about mechanics
of orbital observations, etc. I'll just quote a couple of page of it.

See http://www.angelfire.com/ultra/visio...ion_orbits.JPG

(text about it further below after the table of contents so you
would know what topics he has covered... which is most of physics)
(don't worry Mccucheon, i won't post those other figures, just
this sample)

Table of Contents of The Final Theory by Mark Mccutcheon

Introduction 1
Investigating Gravity 10
The Theory of Gravity 11
The Trouble with Gravity 14
The Origin of Newton’s Gravitational Force 27
Does the Evidence Support a Gravitational Force? 49
Encountering the New Principle 53
A New Property of the Atom 58
Can it Be? 60
Mysteries and Violations Resolved 65
New Revelations and Possibilities 93
Rethinking Our Heavenly Observations 108
Orbits 109
The Gravitational Lens Effect 138
The Nature and Origin of Tidal Forces 156
The Slingshot Effect 166
Galactic Implications 183
The Origin of a Natural Constant Revealed 190
Rethinking the Atom and its Forces 196
Flaws in Current Atomic Theory 198
A New Atomic Model 201
Chemical Bonding 216
Electricity 223
Radio Waves 242
Magnetism 249
Rethinking Energy 263
Light and Electromagnetic Radiation 264
Quantum Mechanics - is it all just a Misunderstanding? 290
Special Relativity - is it all just a Mistake? 314
The Big Questions 337
What are Subatomic Particles? 339
What is Antimatter? 346
What is an Atom Bomb? 352
E=mc2 : What is Energy-Matter Conversion? 355
What causes Inertia? 369
What are Black Holes? 379
Did It Really Begin with a Big Bang? 385
Is Our Universe Truly Expanding? 387
What is Time? 399
Is Time Travel Possible? 404
The Theory Of Everything - Has it Finally Arrived? 411

See http://www.angelfire.com/ultra/visio...ion_orbits.JPG

"Figure 3-9 shows a faster-moving object, whose movement past the
planet perfectly counteracts the planet's expansion toward the object
in any given time period. This results in a constant distance between
the object and the planet as the object continues coasting along - the
very definition of a circular orbit. Note that the rapidly increasing
acceleration of the planet's growth, shown earlier in Figure 3-8, is
not seen in Figure 3-9. Instead, it appears as if the planet grows by
the same amount each time p eriod - not the compounding amount
mentioned earlier. The reason for this is the fact that the object
moves fast enough to counteract the planet's expansion
moment-by-moment, as just mentioned. Therefore, after each second of
time passes, the geometry is indistinguishable from that of the
previous second; the object effectively continues coasting past at the
same altitude all the time.

This is somewhat like continually withdrawing the interest from a bank
account as soon as it is deposited. In that case, the bank account
would not grow at an ever-increasing rate since the compounding effect
is continually removed before it has a chance to accumulate. Likewise,
an orbiting object effectively resets the geometry of the situation
moment-by-moment, removing the compounding growth effect of the
expanding planet (for orbiting objects only - not for those that are
falling or sitting on the groun d) and producing an effective circular
path as shown in the right-hand frame. The object then behaves as if
it has a continual circular momentum about the planet, though this is
a purely geometric effect - not a true circular momentum possessed by
the object and forcefully maintained, as Newton claimed. Both the
parabolic and circular paths merely result from the pure geometry of
expansion, and are free to change to whatever is dictated by the
geometry of the Moment. An objec t traveling more slowly past an
expanding planet naturally exhibits an effective parabolic path toward
the ground, and a faster speed exhibits a circular orbit about the
planet.

Such a view of object trajectories would not be possible in Newtonian
physics, since horizontally fired objects are said to fall due to a
gravitational force, and thus possess a parabolic momentum. However,
Eypansion Theory shows that no such "gravitational force" and no such
absolute parabolic momentum exists. Just as objects that fall straight
down do not actually possess a failing momentum, as shown earlier, but
merely follow an effective falling geometry while it is the planet
that actually expands towa rd them, so horizontally fired objects do
not possess a plummeting parabolic momentum either. Everything is
merely relative geometry and can take whatever form may be dictated by
the dynamics of the moment. Thus, stable circular orbital trajectories
are impossible in Newtonian physics, where objects possess an absolute
momentum, as stated in Newton's First Law; but such orbits are quite
natural in Expansion Theory.

Finally, note that a small surface feature was provided on the ground
in Figure 3-9, which moves along with the orbiting object and
indicates that the planet is rotating in step with the object. In
other words, Figure 3-9 shows a geo-synchronous orbit, where the
object always remains over the same location as it orbits. There are
several important points to draw from this situation. First, it is
completely irrelevant whether the surface feature moves or not. It
could just as well have been drawn in the same unchanging location
throughout indicating a non-rotating planet - without changing the
geometry and dynamic of the orbit overhead in any way.

Therefore, while Newton's gravitational explanation of orbits required
that the object passes the curved surface of a spherical planet,
Expansion Theory shows that this is an unnecessary restriction or
special case. Orbiting objects do not necessarily need to be passing
surface features, but can also effectively hover over the same
location if the Planet happens to he rotating, since an orbit is not
based on escaping a gravitational pull" from below but on
counteracting the geometry of an expanding planet. Secondly, although
the classic spherical planet is shown in Figure 3-9, it could have
been an expanding planet of any arbitrary shape - as long as the
planet's rotation and expansion balance with the object's altitude and
speed to produce a stable geo-synchronous orbit. This follows from the
fact that if the object remains over the same surface feature as it
orbits a rotating planet the remaining overall shape of the planet
cannot matter. The object never p asses over the remaining terrain of
the planet, and never encounters the planet's overall shape; it simply
orbits because the planet has a circular rotation that rotates away
from the passing object at a rate that balances the planet's expansion
toward the object (as shown earlier in Figure 3-2).

To reiterate and clarify these concepts, an orbit results once the
object is traveling by fast enough to counteract the planet's
expansion, which does not necessarily involve the special case of
passing the planet's curvature, as in Newton's explanation. The
Natural Orbit Effect of passing expanding objects dictates that an
object speeding past a planet will naturally curve about the planet.
It does not matter what shape the planet is, as long as the object
continuously overcomes the planet's expansion. One way to achieve this
is by speeding past the surface of a spherical planet, whose shape
curves away from the passing object to counteract the planet's
expansion. Another way is by passing a planet of any shape that
rotates away from the object at the proper speed (a geo-synchronous
orbit). That is, the typically spherical shape of planets, though very
common in nature, is a special-case geometry whose roundness
essentially simulates the circular rotation of ail arbitrarily shaped
planet. In this case, the p lanet does not need a circular rotation
away from an orbiting object overhead if the planet's very shape
already curves away from the object in a uniformly circular manner.

This geometry allows objects to orbit spherical planets at a wide
variety of speeds and altitudes - not just specific geo-synchronous
orbital speeds and altitudes that match the planet's rotation and
expansion. This spherical special case, where a planet's rotation call
he ignored, is the example used by Newton to explain orbits in
general, with a "gravitational force" causing circular orbital
trajectories past the curved surface while simultaneously causing
parabolic plummets for other objects. Not only do es this show an
inherent contradiction in the gravitational explanation, but it also
shows that this explanation does not cover more generic orbital
scenarios such as geo-synchronous orbits, in which the object does not
pass any surface at all."

-------------------------------------
back to cinquirer

Joe, Aaron, etc.

His thick 400 page book address all sorts of things from magnetism to
atomic bomb. Try to get the book so we can find any possible fatal
flaw and debunk the whole thing and make him submit. Remember if
one can find a fatal flaw. All his theories fall down like a domino.
Also I'd rather that it is not true. It's all so mechanical. No Qi
there. I'm presently reading a book called "Aethro-Kinematics" and
it has an Aether explanation of gravity and it's 500 page and much
more complicated than Mccutcheon's book. Try to read this too. It
would be double the fun debunking both (if that's what they are).


c

I'll have to look into the geometry of that a bit more, but here's
something that is a bit more problematic. Suppose I want to travel
around the circumference of the Earth, at constant speed of 1 m/s,
which I can do regardless of the expansion of the Earth (just get one
of those walking speed measurer things). The Earth, on the other hand,
is expanding at a rate of 9.8 m/s^2, and, let's suppose, has an
initial velocity of 0 m/s, and an initial radius of 6.38x10^6 m.
Before starting, I predict that my journey should be 6.38x10^6m x 2pi
= approximately 4x10^7 m, because I believe the Earth isn't expanding.
Now here's where things get problematic: In my first second, the
radius of the Earth increases according to d=Vit + 1/2at^2. The
initial speed is zero, so d=1/2at^2. For t = 1, and a = 9.8 m/s^2, the
radius of the Earth expands a distance of 4.9 m, meaning that the
distance I travel is now 4.9 m x 2pi, greater than it was initially:
31.8 m. In 2s, it would be 123 m. I would never get there; I wouldn't
even get close, because the Earth is expanding at an exponenetial
rate, which is MUCH faster than I could ever travel. There is no way
around it; my speed isn't increasing, because I'm pacing myself
relative to a standard interval (even if I were using a metre stick,
the stick would be expanding at a rate much smaller than the Earth, as
you've said earlier, so that would not compensate for it).

To simplify, in case the math is a bit confusing:
1. The Earth must be expanding at a rate equal to 9.8m/s^2, otherwise
gravitational effects would not make sense.
2. For all seconds of the journey, I travel exactly 1 m relative to a
standard which is (virtually) unchanging.
3. The Earth's radius increases is greater than the distance I travel
for any second.
4. I never get there.

For that matter, if objects are all expanding at different rates,
suppose I have a ball that much smaller than I am. I am expanding at a
rate greater than the ball, because I am larger, so relative to me,
the ball should be shrinking.

You could come up with literally hundreds of different examples for
why this can't work.

A.

"cinquirer" are you Mark Mccutcheon ??

"cinquirer" wrote in message
om...
Joe Fischer wrote in message
. ..
On 21 Nov 2003 14:07:23 -0800, (cinquirer) wrote:

Now that I have mentioned Mark Mccutcheon's The
Final Theory: Rethinking the Scientific Legacy. See

http://www.thefinaltheory.com/pages/1/index.htm

http://www.brownwalker.com/upb/pdf-b/1126018b.pdf
(the first chapter of the book... read it... it's fun)

Let me give brief description of what the new theory is all about.
[snip
Anyway. What the book basically says is that entire planet earth is
expanding as well as the rest of matter in the universe.

Does the author give any credit or references to others
who have proposed this?

No. It's like he discovers it all by himself like Einstein discovers
Relativity. All those who have read it couldn't debunk it by finding
the fatal flaw in his Expansion Theory that can dealt him a death
blow.
His stuff covers all topics and how it relates to them (see my reply
to Double-A for the table of contents and a text quote to his inquiry
about orbits). Let's find that fatal flaw (so he can be silenced for
good... if it's not a good model).


Since human is smaller and the earth bigger. The earth expands
faster compared to humans. So what we feel as gravity is
not us being attracted to the ground. But simply the ground
reaching up to us. So it's all about expansions.

Are you sure that is what the book says?

Actually. In the thread "Flaws in Current Atomic Model". Someone
has summarized many points although he didn't say it's about that
book.
Rich Sobie wrote:

"If you consider the nucleus. And at the center of the nucleus
exists a bubble.

Inside this bubble is hyperspace.

Now as the universe expands, these tiny bubbles expand as well.

Picture a baloon, picture a ruler drawn on the balloon.
An inch is still an inch.
What makes the universe expand is a matter of debate, most
preferring to believe in the big bang. But the gas-like univere
would expand into hyperspace just as any gas expands.

Now because there is no space past the edge of the universe,
it just expands and the atoms expand and everything appears
to remain the same 'relative' size.

The ruler on the balloon, still reads an inch.

But then now you can see, if you follow the arrow of expansion,
that the result is gravity.

As, the bubble expands, it sends out waves. Electron shells,
are these spherical wave crests. In accordance with the
inverse square law.

Yet beyond the shells these waves carry on, to form a basic
background to existence. The fluid almost of our reality.

Within this, we also have transverse waves. Light, with a photon
being a wave crest of a transverse wave.

Now these waves react upon each other in such a way as to appear
to be particles under various conditions. Cancelling out or
adding to each other, to form other particles.

(a particle being a point in space-time)

Now then each atom, each bubble is expanding, but meets resistance,
as it sends out these EM waves. (and see black body radiation
to see that all matter emits EM radiation)

Now depending on the frequency of the nucleus, what fixed harmonic
vibrational pattern it is locked into, by the tremendous
pressure of the expanding universe, that determines which element
it is.

Try to stop the bubble from expanding, and you get the equivalent
of a sonic boom on the quantum level.

Superconductivity, is merely the arangement in a medium, whereby
the resistance to the EM waves being emitted, meet no resistance.

That is to say, that they are not fighting against each other but
flowing freely.

The same is true for permanent magnets.

The flow of EM waves due to the organized structure of the substance.

The geodesics of course are caused by the expansion of matter,
and the expansion of the universe as a whole.

A black hole is caused, when a star collapses, and is no longer
able to continue to expand along with other matter.

Like the sonic boom mentioned above only to a much greater degree.

So it creates a well. A gravity well.

It is not a singularity in my mind that resides there, but the
pressures would be enormous. But to have a singularity you need
solid matter and there is no such thing on our plane of existence
as solid matter. So you would have a hole to hyperspace.
A drain of sorts.

Planets are round, because matter expands.

Planets rotate, because the universe expands and they are round
and as such the pressure on the planet is not uniform,
so it will spin one way or the other.

Now you might ask, well what of this particle zoo?

If you freeze time, and examine a wave interaction, you can
call the interaction a particle.

Because all the elements are in a certain range of frequencies.

That is to say, that cesium here on earth, is cesium
a billion light years away and the frequency of the cesium atom
determines that it is cesium.

So these frequencies are precise, and these elements are
unique.

The universe is not a homogeneous mush, but rather made up of
elements that have individual and fixed characteristics.

If you bump an element with a very strong high energy wave,
you can bump it into another frequency.

As in a super collider.

The inverse is true.

Hypothetically you could neutralize radiation by dampening the
vibration, if you treated it with just enough energy to cancel
the wave to the degree that it would settle into a proper
bubble vibration, chugging along with the expansion of the
universe, rather than a feedback type of vibration in and out, which
sends odd waves out. Harmful waves of frequencies that tend to
not be in the norm of the background. These waves interupt things,
and cause other atoms to vibrate irrationally, and we know this as
harmful radiation.

So we use water to try to stabilize the element. To cool it.

We use lead to sheild us from it. Seeing as how lead has a certain
kind of frequency that chugs right along with the expanson of
the universe and can absorb, a lot of shock, without its vibration
being affected.


I could go on and on, but you should just by this, be able to
see how existence works.

We are not made of solid substance.

We are energy. E=Mc2

We detect things that are energy, with energy. That is to say,
we detect waves. Interactions of these waves. We call these
interactions particles, when we freeze the reference frame.
xyzt

The arrow of time, is the direction of expansion into hyperspace.

Hyperspace exists at the center of the nucleus, past the edge
of the universe of matter, and may even exist all around us.

We have no reason to doubt, that just a fraction of a Planck moment
before us, and behind us, are other universes.

We also have no reason to doubt that there are other elements in
those universes, very similar to ours, but their scale is slightly
different than ours.

If you examine this closely, you will see that what we have in fact,
is a multiverse. Each universe may be so similar, that to go from one
to the next, may not even be noticeable, as the entire universe
would change, but the obejects in it, the frequencies of the
elements would be relational to each other.
"


When we jump from
airplane. It's not we who falls to the ground. But the earth reaching
up to us and we are feeling the falling because the earth atmosphere
is hitting our body. Also the protons don't fly apart in the nucleus
because the particles are expanding too so it's maintening the core
and the space in the nucleus is not linear or something like that.

Surely to be worth publishing, the book has to say more than
that.

Of course, see the table of contents in Double reply or read this
first chapter which he offers for free.

http://www.thefinaltheory.com/pages/1/index.htm

http://www.brownwalker.com/upb/pdf-b/1126018b.pdf


The Divergent Matter model has been discussed here and
in other newsgroups and on other networks for at least 15 years,
and has been in print in copyrighted publications in 1964 and
1970.

What's the Divergent Matter model?? Can you pls summarize it?


Also, I seem to remember another book with something
like Dreams of a Final Theory in the title.

Yeah I read it too.


JoKE Fischer

(G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote in message ...
Cinquirer This expanding inside out theory has been kicked around for
over 2 hundred years.It keeps coming back from time to time(like now) It
creates more unanswered questions than answered. Bert

What unanswered questions for example? Let's see how Mccutcheon treat
it as he apply the Expansion Theory to almost all topics in modern
physics as well as offering possible solutions such as the pioneer
slowing down, etc (text shared below just as an example). What made
his book thick is because he address particle physics in half of it
and give many illustrations why the strong force and even
electromagnetic force is unnecessary (clue, instead of orbital clouds
swirling around the nucleus. The electrons are simply bouncing off the
nucleus like balls!). The particle physics portion has 200 page and
dozens of figures to accompany all situations. This stuff may be his
original idea that's why he has the guts to title his book as "The
Final Theory" and expecting a Nobel Prize if he is right and
challenging us to prove him wrong. For those interested. Just buy the
book from amazon.com. It would be long to share them here so just try
to get a copy and after we find the fatal flaw. Then we can challenge
him to submit and refund the book (he can agree to this if we find a
fatal flaw as he stated inside the book) as well as put to rest the
basis for the entire theory that as you said have started since 200
years ago..

"The Pioneer Anomaly

Mystery? An Unexplained "Gravitational Anomaly"

The discussions throughout this chapter have shown that the current
gravitational explanations of celestial events in our science today
may serve as useful models, but cannot be the literal description of
our observations. Therefore, since these models do not truly describe
the underlying physics, it might be expected that difficulties and
inconsistencies would arise that do not fit within such models. The
inability of science to provide a viable explanation for the slingshot
effect is one such example, tho ugh this has largely been hidden by
flawed logical justifications; however, one example that does remain a
clear mystery is the unexplained anomalies in the behavior of
spacecraft that cross our solar system.

The complexities of traveling among moons and planets have tended to
mask subtle deviations or anomalies that may exist in the behavior of
our spacecraft as compared to standard Newtonian gravitational
predictions; however, we have had a unique opportunity to see such
effects much more clearly in recent years. This is because it has been
over a decade since the Pioneer 10 and 11 spacecraft have sped past
Pluto and continued out of the solar system. As such, there are no
longer any moons or planets to encoun ter as they progress, so any
anomalies that may exist in the motions of these spacecraft since
leaving the solar system would stand out very clearly and consistently
over time. Indeed, NASA scientists have noted and published
observations of an apparent unexplained gravitational pull on both
spacecraft back toward the sun, which exceeds the expected pull of
gravity at that distance. This additional effective pull has been
consistently recorded ever since the spacecraft left the solar system
over a decade ag o, having a constant unexplained decelerating effect
on the spacecraft as they coast off into deep space. Attempts to
explain this effect using all known or even proposed gravitational or
physical theories have so far been unsuccessful.

However, when we look at this mystery from the perspective of
Expansion Theory, the journeys of these spacecraft take on a very
different quality. The situation now changes from that of two
spacecraft being pulled back by an unexplained additional
"gravitational force," to that of an expanding solar system and the
effect it has on the signals sent back to us from the distant
spacecraft. That is, the Pioneer spacecraft are not actually feeling
the tug of the sun's "gravity" a all - and they never did all thr
oughout their journeys across the solar system since such 4,
gravitational forces" do not exist in Expansion Theory. Instead, the
solar system was expanding outward all around them while they coasted
through it, aided by the occasional slingshot effect as just
discussed. And now the entire solar system is expanding outward toward
them as they coast along billions of miles beyond its edge. Pioneers
10 and 11 are now somewhat like two stones th at have been tossed up
in the air on Earth and are still coasting upward as the Earth's
expansion slowly gains on them, eventually bringing them falling back
to the ground. Only, the "plane" is our enormous expanding solar
system, and the "toss" that sent them flying away from it into deep
space is the series of planetary slingshot effects they encountered
throughout the solar system (since their initial rocket fuel alone
would not have taken them much beyond Jupiter).

From this perspective we can begin to understand why the received
signals here on Earth may hold some surprises. First, we must keep in
mind how the speed and distance of the spacecraft are determined from
the received signal. In essence. this is done by noting how long it
takes for each signal blip to travel from the spacecraft to Earth. If
we have just received a blip from the spacecraft and we know when it
was transmitted, then we can easily calculate the distance to the
spacecraft. Since we know the signal travels at the speed of light,
simply calculating the time taken, multiplied by the speed of light,
gives us the distance traveled by the signal, and thus the distance of
the spacecraft when the blip was transmitted. Then, if we monitor a
succession of such regular blips sent by the spacecraft, we can
determine the spacecraft's speed as well. If the spacecraft is
stationary, then the amount of time between received blips will be the
same as the known time between the original transmitted blips at the
spacecraft since nothing would have altered this timing as the signal
traveled. But if the spacecraft is moving away, then each blip will be
sent from a slightly further distance and will take slightly longer to
reach us than the previous blip did. This means the time between
received blips will be slightly greater than the known timing in the
original transmission, telling us that the spacecraft is moving away
at a certain speed. This simple analysis allows us to continually
track the distance and speed of spacecraft in their travels.

Now, let's see what effect an expanding solar system might have on
these timing measurements between signal blips. First, imagine a
transmitter sitting on Pluto - the most distant planet in the solar
system. Even though Expansion Theory states that both Pluto and Earth
are moving rapidly outward on their expanding orbital rings, this
underlying xpansion does not alter the received signal blips on Earth.
The blips would indicate that the transmitter is located at the
expected fixed distance to Pluto. That is, the signal blips would take
the expected amount of time to travel to Earth, and they would have
the same tinling between them as known to exist at the transmitter on
Pluto. This IS because our system of measurements alread y takes into
account our universe of expanding matter - whether we realize it or
not.

When we measure the fixed distance between two points on Earth, we do
not consider the fact that the ground between these two points is
expanding and pushing them apart as the entire planet expands. it was
explained in Chapter 2 that this underlying expansion is hidden as
everything in the universe expands equally, and so we simply call our
measurement a constant distance. Also, when we measure the speed of
light - for example, by timing its travel between two points on Earth
the value we arrive at is actua lly based on its travel between two
points that are moving apart due to the planet's expansion. Therefore,
the distance between Pluto and Earth is effectively every bit as
"fixed" as it is between two points on Earth, and the travel time for
the signal also follows from the same dynamics as for a light beam
traveling between two points on Earth. As long as the dynamics of
expansion create a scenario where two points are effectively fixed in
space, they behave as fixed points regardless of the underlying exp
ansion dynamics. Therefore, the natural orbit effect throughout our
expanding solar system results in an arrangement of planets that are
effectively fixed orbital distances apart in space, just as objects on
our expanding planet are effectively fixed distances apart on the
ground.

However, if the transmitter is on a spaceship heading through the
solar system and off into deep space, the situation changes. This is
no longer a scenario where the spaceship is naturally maintained at an
effectively fixed distance from Earth by the underlying expansion
dynamics between planetary orbital rings. Instead, the spaceship has
broken this geometric balance, just as an object in a stable orbit
about the Earth is in a very different situation than one tossed at
the same speed straight up into the air. Both objects have the same
initial speed, but one will coast indefinitely around the planet,
while the other will soon crash into the ground. Similarly, the
difference in the resulting geometry between a transmitter sitting on
Pluto along its effectively fixed orbital ring and one in a moving
spaceship heading out of the solar system means the transmitted signal
experiences very different dynamics in each case. The signal from the
spaceship must now contend with the underlying expansion of the solar
sy stem, just as an object that is tossed upward on Earth must contend
with the expanding planet beneath it.

As the spaceship coasts away from the solar system each blip is no
longer transmitting from an effectively fixed distance; the effective
distance is now entirely dependent on how the underlying expansionary
dynamics play out as it travels. So, when a blip is transmitted from
beyond the solar system, Pluto's orbital ring expands outward toward
the blip as the blip speeds toward Pluto. Therefore, the signal
reaches Pluto sooner than would be expected due to the reduced
distance (Fig. 3-25).

Although the rest of the signal's journey continues normally between
the effectively fixed orbital rings of the intervening planets on its
way to Earth, the initial reduction in the expected travel time from
the spaceship to Pluto means the overall travel time to Earth is
slightly less that' expected. Since we currently do not recognize the
expanding orbital rings of our solar system, this reduced travel time
from the spacecraft to Pluto would be interpreted as a transmission
from closer than expected. Also , as successive blips continually
arrive sooner than expected, the implication would be that the
spaceship is traveling at a continually slower speed than expected -
apparently due to an unexplained additional force pulling back on the
spaceship. This underlying expansion-based effect is the likely answer
to the currently unexplained "Pioneer Anornaly" noted by NASA
scientists.

o there is cosmic expansion
o there is not local (atom, earth or solar system) expansion
o the is no local (atom, earth or solar system) gravitation anomaly
o the anomalous acceleration of the Pioneer spacecraft is most likely
thermal radiation from the craft obeying Newton's Mechanics

to continue with the above comment...

(AaronB) wrote in message . com...


Also, the force of gravity is not constant, it changes with distance.
Thus if a sky diver is falling from say, 20000 ft above the surface,
he might experience an acceleration of 8.7 m/s^2 (this is a guess, not
going to bother to do the full calculation), but as he approaches the
surface, his acceleration will increase. By your theory, this would
imply that the rate of expansion of the Earth changes relative to the
position of the person, which makes ABSOLUTELY no sense.

here's a brief text in Mccutcheon book that deals with answer
to your question (Joe may explain further since he is also an
expert in this):

"The description of falling objects provided by Expansion Theory also
solves a great mystery mentioned in the previous chapter - the fact
that all objects, from a tiny golf ball to a massive ocean liner, are
somehow accelerated by gravity at the same rate and fall at the same
speed. Such immense differences in mass and inertia are apparently
inconsequential to gravity, as it accelerates all objects with equal
ease while also causing no apparent stresses upon the accelerated
objects ~ feats that are otherwise unparalleled in physics. The
mystery vanishes, however, if we consider that objects don't actually
fall at all, but remain floating in space while the ground expands
upward to meet them. In that case the ground would approach all
floating objects equally of course, regardless of their mass (Fig.
2-2).

This shows why, in the previous chapter, falling objects were said to
undergo an acceleration effect instead of an actual acceleration due
to a gravitational force. The masses of the objects in the right-hand
frame of Figure 2-2 have nothing to do with how fast they "fall" in a
universe of expanding atoms, since objects only appear to fall in such
a universe they actually float in space while the ground approaches
them a equally. This provides a clear resolution for this mystery,
with no unexplained forces pulling across space, while Newtonian
gravitational theory states that even the most massive objects are
somehow immediately and rapidly accelerated from standstill by an
attracting force when they are dropped.

The weight effect can also now be seen simply as the inertia o
resistance of an object to being moved as it is pushed from below by
the expanding planet - an effect that increases with mass just as a
more massive person is harder to push on a swing. The difficulty in
pushing a more massive person on a swing is the same phenomenon behind
the effect we call weight in the parallel situation of the expanding
planet pushing massive objects upward. No appeal to a gravitational
force is required to explain the mas s-dependent weight effect felt
here on Earth.

Also, since objects are not actually accelerated toward the ground by
a force when they are dropped, there is no power source requirement to
explain this effect. Indeed, our observation that objects "fall"
downward is merely a geometric effect caused by the planet expanding
up toward them, and not an actual force-driven motion of the objects
at all. This does not mean failing objects are merely an illusion - of
course - dropped objects obviously do hit the ground experience a
contact force with the Earth - but their apparent accelerating
approach downward toward the ground is actually due to the pure
geometry of our Planet expanding up toward them. Although this
acceleration effect is as if the objects themselves were accelerated
downward by a gravitational force, the objects actually float in space
while the ground accelerates up toward them."

On 22 Nov (cinquirer) wrote:

[snip] Although this
acceleration effect is as if the objects themselves were accelerated
downward by a gravitational force, the objects actually float in space
while the ground accelerates up toward them."

"Float in space" is not correct, to be moving as if "dropped",
an object must have been accelerated upward, and allowed to
assume an upward constant velocity.

This means that all objects that are apparently in freefall
are moving at constant velocity upward, not falling or "floating
in space".

And because of the space-time effect of lengthening units
of measure, the highest (fastest moving) object appears (and is
measured to be) accelerating away from lower (slower moving)
objects.

In General Relativity, this is known as geodesic deviation,
while in Newtonian gravitation it is a result of the gravitational
field gradient.

Joe Fischer

(cinquirer) wrote in message . com...
(Double-A) wrote in message . com...

Anyway. What the book basically says is that entire planet earth is
expanding as well as the rest of matter in the universe.
Since human is smaller and the earth bigger. The earth expands
faster compared to humans. So what we feel as gravity is
not us being attracted to the ground. But simply the ground
reaching up to us. So it's all about expansions. When we jump from
airplane. It's not we who falls to the ground. But the earth reaching
up to us and we are feeling the falling because the earth atmosphere
is hitting our body.
[snip]


If that were true, the Earth would overtake the Moon pretty fast, and
then the Sun the Earth!

Double-A


He has devote an entire chapter of his 400 page book about mechanics
of orbital observations, etc. I'll just quote a couple of page of it.

See http://www.angelfire.com/ultra/visio...ion_orbits.JPG
[snip]


I'm sorry, but there's no way this illustration can show how the small
object passing by the larger expanding object can ever completely go
around the large object. It might look good when drawn for just three
iterations, but redraw the illustration as many times as you like with
an ever expanding large object, there is no reason the center of the
small object would ever drop below the center of the large object so
it could complete its orbit.

This would be true even if both objects are expanding, and even if the
space between them is expanding too.

Of course this illustration is drawn using Euclidean Geometry. If
someone thinks they can draw an illustration using non-Eucludean
Geometry to explain how the small object ends ups circumnavigating the
larger, please enlighten us.

Double-A

Since you have already have mentioned the basics of Expansion Theory
to a public posting I will note a few points as well.

Expansion Theory basicly implies that all matter and energy are
composed of one subatomic particle. The electron. The electron by it's
nature is rapidly expanding in size. Taking up more volume of space as
it does. Space itself has no limit or any properties as all space
really is just the distance between atomic objects. All other
particles are made of groups of electrons. The mutual expansion of the
electrons in a group binds them together. Unstable particles or
decaying particles eject electrons from the group because electrons
rapidly expand. Stable particles and atomic objects are stable due to
the arrangement of electrons clusters, the rapid expansion is balanced
when electron clusters are in certain configurations. In a atom
electrons not found in the nucleous will bounce off the atom itself.
The height of the bounce determines a atoms atomic boundary. Since
expansion is figured by expansion rate and radius of object, an atom's
boundary and expansion rate are determind by the electrons not bound
in the nucleus. These bouncing electrons also cause inertia, chemical
bonding, and static electricity.

Light is made of clusters of electrons according to Expansion Theory.
The number of electrons determines wavelength in the spectrum. Radio
waves however are bands of electrons. Only radio is truely waves.
Light is not a wave and can not be treated as such. Most quantum
obsevations of light are observing the electron clusters properties as
they move through space and interact with atomic objects, but not
noting the true nature of light.

Constants in nature like light speed, gravity, and many more are
results of interactions of these expanding particles. In fact the
expansion itself cannot be seen directly as all objects maintain
relative size. However the expansion causes more space to be taken
between objects, the origin of observed gravational attraction. In
fact most bodies in space will go into orbital paths around other
objects. As long as motion of bodies is greater than the radial
expansion of near by body they will continue in orbital path. When
motion is less than radial expansion then observed falling affect or
even object collision will results.

All matter is in motion. Since matter is expanding, then it also not
at rest ever. Also since objects expand, then they will move in curved
paths which is side effect when expanding objects pass each other.
Rarely does any object ever travel in a straight line. Even light
bends around stars and planets it passes due to expansion properties.

Since light is not a wave, the observed hubble-shift is not indication
of motion of galaxies or any other object in cosmos. Which means Big
Bang may in fact be totally untrue. The universe in retrospect most
likely has no center or boundary. The farther you look out into
universe the more objects you'll see. Whether there is a limited
amount of matter is unknown at this time. Sine no theory has explained
what or why the universe should exsist in the first place putting a
limit on space or matter is rather pointless without difintive
evidence. Of which there is none. Since gravity according to Expansion
Theory is not a field or energy then attracts, then Dark Matter and
especially Dark Energy are not likely to exist. Dark Matter and Dark
Energy are after all names to behavior not understood or even needed
in universe that never started in Big Bang. Singularities also do not
exist. Which implies Black Holes are likely leftover remains of
neutron stars. The observed gases around them very likely are in fact
the black hole itself stretched like a disk due it's inner compression
forces and possible rotation. A Black Hole would have a lot of inner
pressure due to it's matter being compressed together as tightly as
possible. Infact it's collapse from a regular star is do to it's
fuzion stopping and the sheer amount of matter in it. Expanding matter
inside any star would be under incredible force due to expanding
matter pushing against one another, as any expanding object expands
from center of mass. The greater the mass the harder it is for object
to expand. So large mass objects have great pressure and stress deep
inside them. The observed jets of radation from a Black Hole are very
likely compressed matter inside trying to get out inside of dead star.
So Black Hole would not be singlarity but just very tightly packed
remains of a neutron star. It's smaller size in fact would give it a
lower surface gravity, because in Expansion theory size is the main
determination for gravity.

It should be noted that particles have no charge in expansion theory.
The observation of charge is really just when electron clouds of
different density interact. Negative charge being actually high
density clouds electron and positive being low density clouds of
electrons. Creating observed magnetic or electrical attraction.
Magnetic Fields are actually clouds of electrons that wrap around a
magnet due to to density varation of electrons at the magnetic poles.
Electrical magnets create similar effect due the way the electricty
flows through it. These same magnetic fields also often in particle
accelerators can only get particles up to light speed being to the
fact lightspeed is the limit of the magnetic fields ability to push
particles. So light speed would be very possible to go past as no true
mass increase happens. Lightspeed is just a limit of a particle
accelerator. So light is not a constant.

In particle accelerators many collisions and even theortical opposite
charge particles have been observed. Which in truth according to
expansion theory are just different combinations of electron clusters
resulting from collision. Many being unstable. Even supposed
anti-particles would be just another result of collisions of expanding
electrons. In fact electrons from magnetic field or city power grid
very likely account for unexpected particles seen from collisions,
since they are taken into consideration from current theories.

Expansion theory on awhole explains more natural phenomena and the
relation of physical behavior and laws than any theory to date. Which
makes it hard to ignore. It does not use any of the multiple dimension
nonsense that is used as popular theory of how natural forces come to
be. The only question it rises is can the cause of expanding electrons
and why they do not pass through each other be determined by physical
beings? Laws of physcis start at the expanding electrons and the
atomic diameter of atoms. What lies beneath these expanding electrons
can not be anything like are familar universe. No in fact they are so
foreign from physical and 3-D dimensional thinking we may never
understand them comepletely if ever. Man as awhole most come to
realize no matter how much we want to, we'll never understand the
universe completely. The human mind is incredible, but also like
anything else of matter it contains a limit of what does.