![]() |
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
| Tags: aether, came, model, physics |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
"David Thomson" wrote in message ...
I was posting on another list when one of the readers suggested I use my reply as a general introduction to the Aether Physics Model on these newsgroups. So here is how the Aether Physics Model came to be. I was working on a flat spiral coil and placing a fluorescent tube between the top load and ground wire of the coil. I noticed that the spark going to the topload was a thin purple streamer and the spark going to the ground was a thick, white streamer. Until then, I was under the impression that electricity changed its outward form because of the coil arrangement, frequency, current, potential, etc. But here I had a single coil, the same shape feeding both ends. The same frequency existed at both ends. But it became evident that the potential was greater on the topload and the current was greater on the ground end. As a result of these differences, the appearance of the spark changed dramatically. Thus I surmised that the same electrons in a given coil can manifest in two distinctly different forms. I then posted this observation on the pupman list and began searching the literature for an explanation. Finding none, I decided to investigate physics from the ground up to see if something was missed. It didn't take but a few days before I realized that charge should be distributed in the math, since it is also distributed in nature. Ed Philips suggested I read Great Experiments in Physics so I purchased a copy. In this book Charles Coulomb himself clearly stated that all charge must be distributed in order for the inverse square law to work. The first thing I noticed in physics was that Coulomb's constant was precisely equal to a combination of light speed, permeability, permittivity, and a conductance constant, which the established literature does not recognize. I then found that Planck's constant times the conductance constant gives a distributed charge. But I was disappointed that the distributed charge it produced did not equal the elementary charge squared. So I worked with the two distributed charges for a few hours before discovering that they were exactly proportional to each other by way of 8pi times the fine structure constant of the electron. And so I had this equation: e^2 = 8pia e.emax^2 where e is the elementary charge, a is the fine structure of the electron, and e.emax^2 is the derived value of charge equal to: e.emax^2 = h * Cd I then applied the same process to the proton and neutron and found fine structures for both. But since the fine structures and angular momentum of the proton and neutron are not defined in modern physics, I really didn't have an empirical body of data to go by there. However, the lack of data was encouraging since it implied that modern physics was incapable of determining these values based on their chosen model of subatomic behavior. Three weeks went by before it occurred to me that e.emax^2 could be strong charge, which mediates the strong force. I then realized that if it were, then I was looking at the Unified Field Theory. Further research showed me that it has nothing to do with fields, but is rather a Unified Force Theory. I later found that the concept of fields is very ambiguous in the Standard Model and relativity theories, as modern science apparently does not know what a field really is. When I calculated the relative value of the forces for the different subatomic particles, looking at both the electrostatic force and the new concept of strong force, I found that the relative strengths of the forces matched the empirical data. Then I started reading older literature on electromagnetism. I was particularly struck by Ed Leedskalnin's description of electricity as a stream of tiny magnets. Although his view incorrectly denies the electrostatic effect of electrons, he does show a convincing argument for electrons acting as tiny magnets. And then it occurred to me that electromagnetism is caused by the strong charge. Further analysis of the mathematical aspects of the two charges revealed that electrostatic charge has a spherical geometry while strong charge (or electromagnetic charge) has a toroidal geometry. When I applied this knowledge to my coil observations it made perfect sense. When electrons are magnetically moving sideways in the coil, they produce the bright white streamers. When electrons are moving along their z axis, they produce the thin purple streamers. Electrons moving along their z axis are creating pressure on the electrons in front of them, thus potential increases. Electrons moving sideways along the circular y axis and outward on the x axis (it is a polar coordinate system) they move closer to each and form longitudinal waves of electrons. Hertz was broadcasting from the top load and Tesla was broadcasting from the ground. This is why Tesla's system of signaling was notably different from Hertz. Whereas Hertz's system caused the electrons to transform into photons and radiate permanently away from the transmitter, thus causing power loss, Tesla's system was pumped into the ground, which is a closed system. This allowed Tesla to longitudinally broadcast current through the electrostatic field of the Earth and have that current return to his transmitter. Thus he could build up resonance within the Earth with very little power loss. But I as I was working on this Unified Force Theory, it occurred to me that the units were in the wrong dimensions of charge, except three of them. The units of inductance, capacitance, and conductance were in the proper distributed charge, while all other units with charge were in single dimension. Investigating the various changes that take place when the dimensions are corrected in the units led me to the development of the Aether Physics Model. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- This is very interesting. Not only do I feel that you are on to something. But I have posted ,"Are gravitational waves electromagnetic waves?", on the group. I was relating to the possibility that electromagnetic waves are a compression and expansion of the space-time continuum, rather than gravitational waves. Your posting not only bolsters my own theory (where I am just realising the implications of experimental evidence and well founded theories), but makes some valid points of its own. If LIGO detects gravitational waves (an expansion and compression of space-time), then it is experimental evidence that this 5th dimension exists. I would be interested to hear your thoughts on my discussion with PD(although he thinks I'm making the whole theory up). Regards Ben |
| Ads |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Ben" wrote in message om... "David Thomson" wrote in message ... I was posting on another list when one of the readers suggested I use my reply as a general introduction to the Aether Physics Model on these newsgroups. So here is how the Aether Physics Model came to be. I was working on a flat spiral coil and placing a fluorescent tube between the top load and ground wire of the coil. I noticed that the spark going to the topload was a thin purple streamer and the spark going to the ground was a thick, white streamer. Until then, I was under the impression that electricity changed its outward form because of the coil arrangement, frequency, current, potential, etc. But here I had a single coil, the same shape feeding both ends. The same frequency existed at both ends. But it became evident that the potential was greater on the topload and the current was greater on the ground end. As a result of these differences, the appearance of the spark changed dramatically. Thus I surmised that the same electrons in a given coil can manifest in two distinctly different forms. I then posted this observation on the pupman list and began searching the literature for an explanation. Finding none, I decided to investigate physics from the ground up to see if something was missed. It didn't take but a few days before I realized that charge should be distributed in the math, since it is also distributed in nature. Ed Philips suggested I read Great Experiments in Physics so I purchased a copy. In this book Charles Coulomb himself clearly stated that all charge must be distributed in order for the inverse square law to work. The first thing I noticed in physics was that Coulomb's constant was precisely equal to a combination of light speed, permeability, permittivity, and a conductance constant, which the established literature does not recognize. I then found that Planck's constant times the conductance constant gives a distributed charge. But I was disappointed that the distributed charge it produced did not equal the elementary charge squared. So I worked with the two distributed charges for a few hours before discovering that they were exactly proportional to each other by way of 8pi times the fine structure constant of the electron. And so I had this equation: e^2 = 8pia e.emax^2 where e is the elementary charge, a is the fine structure of the electron, and e.emax^2 is the derived value of charge equal to: e.emax^2 = h * Cd I then applied the same process to the proton and neutron and found fine structures for both. But since the fine structures and angular momentum of the proton and neutron are not defined in modern physics, I really didn't have an empirical body of data to go by there. However, the lack of data was encouraging since it implied that modern physics was incapable of determining these values based on their chosen model of subatomic behavior. Three weeks went by before it occurred to me that e.emax^2 could be strong charge, which mediates the strong force. I then realized that if it were, then I was looking at the Unified Field Theory. Further research showed me that it has nothing to do with fields, but is rather a Unified Force Theory. I later found that the concept of fields is very ambiguous in the Standard Model and relativity theories, as modern science apparently does not know what a field really is. When I calculated the relative value of the forces for the different subatomic particles, looking at both the electrostatic force and the new concept of strong force, I found that the relative strengths of the forces matched the empirical data. Then I started reading older literature on electromagnetism. I was particularly struck by Ed Leedskalnin's description of electricity as a stream of tiny magnets. Although his view incorrectly denies the electrostatic effect of electrons, he does show a convincing argument for electrons acting as tiny magnets. And then it occurred to me that electromagnetism is caused by the strong charge. Further analysis of the mathematical aspects of the two charges revealed that electrostatic charge has a spherical geometry while strong charge (or electromagnetic charge) has a toroidal geometry. When I applied this knowledge to my coil observations it made perfect sense. When electrons are magnetically moving sideways in the coil, they produce the bright white streamers. When electrons are moving along their z axis, they produce the thin purple streamers. Electrons moving along their z axis are creating pressure on the electrons in front of them, thus potential increases. Electrons moving sideways along the circular y axis and outward on the x axis (it is a polar coordinate system) they move closer to each and form longitudinal waves of electrons. Hertz was broadcasting from the top load and Tesla was broadcasting from the ground. This is why Tesla's system of signaling was notably different from Hertz. Whereas Hertz's system caused the electrons to transform into photons and radiate permanently away from the transmitter, thus causing power loss, Tesla's system was pumped into the ground, which is a closed system. This allowed Tesla to longitudinally broadcast current through the electrostatic field of the Earth and have that current return to his transmitter. Thus he could build up resonance within the Earth with very little power loss. But I as I was working on this Unified Force Theory, it occurred to me that the units were in the wrong dimensions of charge, except three of them. The units of inductance, capacitance, and conductance were in the proper distributed charge, while all other units with charge were in single dimension. Investigating the various changes that take place when the dimensions are corrected in the units led me to the development of the Aether Physics Model. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- This is very interesting. Not only do I feel that you are on to something. But I have posted ,"Are gravitational waves electromagnetic waves?", on the group. I was relating to the possibility that electromagnetic waves are a compression and expansion of the space-time continuum, rather than gravitational waves. The problem is you do not know basic physics. EM is described by a 4 vector gravity by a tensor. Your posting not only bolsters my own theory (where I am just realising the implications of experimental evidence and well founded theories), but makes some valid points of its own. David Thomson is a well known crank whose views, in this posting alone, have been thoughly discredited by Bilge. If LIGO detects gravitational waves (an expansion and compression of space-time), then it is experimental evidence that this 5th dimension exists. You are intermixing ideas atrociously. First you say that that 'electromagnetic waves are a compression and expansion of the space-time continuum' then you invoke the 5th dimension where EM is an artifact of the cylinder condition imposed on the 5th dimension having nothing to do with the space-time continuum. If you are considering Kaluza-Klien theories then EM results from the left over covariance imposed by the cylinder condition - see http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/9805018. I would be interested to hear your thoughts on my discussion with PD(although he thinks I'm making the whole theory up). How about being precise in detialing those ideas? Bill Regards Ben |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ben:
This is very interesting. Not only do I feel that you are on to something. But I have posted ,"Are gravitational waves electromagnetic waves?", on the group. I was relating to the possibility that electromagnetic waves are a compression and expansion of the space-time continuum, rather than gravitational waves. Electromagnetic waves cannot be compression waves. Compression waves are longitudinal. Electromagnetic waves are purely transverse. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Bill Hobba" wrote in message ...
"Ben" wrote in message om... "David Thomson" wrote in message ... I was posting on another list when one of the readers suggested I use my reply as a general introduction to the Aether Physics Model on these newsgroups. So here is how the Aether Physics Model came to be. I was working on a flat spiral coil and placing a fluorescent tube between the top load and ground wire of the coil. I noticed that the spark going to the topload was a thin purple streamer and the spark going to the ground was a thick, white streamer. Until then, I was under the impression that electricity changed its outward form because of the coil arrangement, frequency, current, potential, etc. But here I had a single coil, the same shape feeding both ends. The same frequency existed at both ends. But it became evident that the potential was greater on the topload and the current was greater on the ground end. As a result of these differences, the appearance of the spark changed dramatically. Thus I surmised that the same electrons in a given coil can manifest in two distinctly different forms. I then posted this observation on the pupman list and began searching the literature for an explanation. Finding none, I decided to investigate physics from the ground up to see if something was missed. It didn't take but a few days before I realized that charge should be distributed in the math, since it is also distributed in nature. Ed Philips suggested I read Great Experiments in Physics so I purchased a copy. In this book Charles Coulomb himself clearly stated that all charge must be distributed in order for the inverse square law to work. The first thing I noticed in physics was that Coulomb's constant was precisely equal to a combination of light speed, permeability, permittivity, and a conductance constant, which the established literature does not recognize. I then found that Planck's constant times the conductance constant gives a distributed charge. But I was disappointed that the distributed charge it produced did not equal the elementary charge squared. So I worked with the two distributed charges for a few hours before discovering that they were exactly proportional to each other by way of 8pi times the fine structure constant of the electron. And so I had this equation: e^2 = 8pia e.emax^2 where e is the elementary charge, a is the fine structure of the electron, and e.emax^2 is the derived value of charge equal to: e.emax^2 = h * Cd I then applied the same process to the proton and neutron and found fine structures for both. But since the fine structures and angular momentum of the proton and neutron are not defined in modern physics, I really didn't have an empirical body of data to go by there. However, the lack of data was encouraging since it implied that modern physics was incapable of determining these values based on their chosen model of subatomic behavior. Three weeks went by before it occurred to me that e.emax^2 could be strong charge, which mediates the strong force. I then realized that if it were, then I was looking at the Unified Field Theory. Further research showed me that it has nothing to do with fields, but is rather a Unified Force Theory. I later found that the concept of fields is very ambiguous in the Standard Model and relativity theories, as modern science apparently does not know what a field really is. When I calculated the relative value of the forces for the different subatomic particles, looking at both the electrostatic force and the new concept of strong force, I found that the relative strengths of the forces matched the empirical data. Then I started reading older literature on electromagnetism. I was particularly struck by Ed Leedskalnin's description of electricity as a stream of tiny magnets. Although his view incorrectly denies the electrostatic effect of electrons, he does show a convincing argument for electrons acting as tiny magnets. And then it occurred to me that electromagnetism is caused by the strong charge. Further analysis of the mathematical aspects of the two charges revealed that electrostatic charge has a spherical geometry while strong charge (or electromagnetic charge) has a toroidal geometry. When I applied this knowledge to my coil observations it made perfect sense. When electrons are magnetically moving sideways in the coil, they produce the bright white streamers. When electrons are moving along their z axis, they produce the thin purple streamers. Electrons moving along their z axis are creating pressure on the electrons in front of them, thus potential increases. Electrons moving sideways along the circular y axis and outward on the x axis (it is a polar coordinate system) they move closer to each and form longitudinal waves of electrons. Hertz was broadcasting from the top load and Tesla was broadcasting from the ground. This is why Tesla's system of signaling was notably different from Hertz. Whereas Hertz's system caused the electrons to transform into photons and radiate permanently away from the transmitter, thus causing power loss, Tesla's system was pumped into the ground, which is a closed system. This allowed Tesla to longitudinally broadcast current through the electrostatic field of the Earth and have that current return to his transmitter. Thus he could build up resonance within the Earth with very little power loss. But I as I was working on this Unified Force Theory, it occurred to me that the units were in the wrong dimensions of charge, except three of them. The units of inductance, capacitance, and conductance were in the proper distributed charge, while all other units with charge were in single dimension. Investigating the various changes that take place when the dimensions are corrected in the units led me to the development of the Aether Physics Model. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- This is very interesting. Not only do I feel that you are on to something. But I have posted ,"Are gravitational waves electromagnetic waves?", on the group. I was relating to the possibility that electromagnetic waves are a compression and expansion of the space-time continuum, rather than gravitational waves. The problem is you do not know basic physics. EM is described by a 4 vector gravity by a tensor. Your posting not only bolsters my own theory (where I am just realising the implications of experimental evidence and well founded theories), but makes some valid points of its own. David Thomson is a well known crank whose views, in this posting alone, have been thoughly discredited by Bilge. If LIGO detects gravitational waves (an expansion and compression of space-time), then it is experimental evidence that this 5th dimension exists. You are intermixing ideas atrociously. First you say that that 'electromagnetic waves are a compression and expansion of the space-time continuum' then you invoke the 5th dimension where EM is an artifact of the cylinder condition imposed on the 5th dimension having nothing to do with the space-time continuum. If you are considering Kaluza-Klien theories then EM results from the left over covariance imposed by the cylinder condition - see http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/9805018. I would be interested to hear your thoughts on my discussion with PD(although he thinks I'm making the whole theory up). How about being precise in detialing those ideas? Bill Would you describe the compression of space-time, by a body such as a star, to be a separate dimension from the 4 existing dimensions. I ask because, surely there must be a dimension to alter the existing 4. If this was not the case, then wouldn't these dimensions have to remain unchanged? Regards Ben |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dear Ben:
"Ben" wrote in message om... "Bill Hobba" wrote in message ... .... I would be interested to hear your thoughts on my discussion with PD(although he thinks I'm making the whole theory up). How about being precise in detialing those ideas? Would you describe the compression of space-time, by a body such as a star, to be a separate dimension from the 4 existing dimensions. Compression by definition is within the discussed dimensions. I ask because, surely there must be a dimension to alter the existing 4. Surely there is no correlation. If I compress the distance between two points by 0.0001 m, then the effect is contained in that "axis". Nothing else "gave up or got" that 0.0001 m. If this was not the case, then wouldn't these dimensions have to remain unchanged? No. Spacetime is the product of mass/energy. If mass/energy alters this relationship, then there is no other agent necessary. David A. Smith |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ben:
(Bilge) wrote in message news: Ben: This is very interesting. Not only do I feel that you are on to something. But I have posted ,"Are gravitational waves electromagnetic waves?", on the group. I was relating to the possibility that electromagnetic waves are a compression and expansion of the space-time continuum, rather than gravitational waves. Electromagnetic waves cannot be compression waves. Compression waves are longitudinal. Electromagnetic waves are purely transverse. How would you describe a sound wave in the same respect? Sound waves are compression waves. |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Ben" wrote in message om... "Bill Hobba" wrote in message ... "Ben" wrote in message om... "David Thomson" wrote in message ... I was posting on another list when one of the readers suggested I use my reply as a general introduction to the Aether Physics Model on these newsgroups. So here is how the Aether Physics Model came to be. I was working on a flat spiral coil and placing a fluorescent tube between the top load and ground wire of the coil. I noticed that the spark going to the topload was a thin purple streamer and the spark going to the ground was a thick, white streamer. Until then, I was under the impression that electricity changed its outward form because of the coil arrangement, frequency, current, potential, etc. But here I had a single coil, the same shape feeding both ends. The same frequency existed at both ends. But it became evident that the potential was greater on the topload and the current was greater on the ground end. As a result of these differences, the appearance of the spark changed dramatically. Thus I surmised that the same electrons in a given coil can manifest in two distinctly different forms. I then posted this observation on the pupman list and began searching the literature for an explanation. Finding none, I decided to investigate physics from the ground up to see if something was missed. It didn't take but a few days before I realized that charge should be distributed in the math, since it is also distributed in nature. Ed Philips suggested I read Great Experiments in Physics so I purchased a copy. In this book Charles Coulomb himself clearly stated that all charge must be distributed in order for the inverse square law to work. The first thing I noticed in physics was that Coulomb's constant was precisely equal to a combination of light speed, permeability, permittivity, and a conductance constant, which the established literature does not recognize. I then found that Planck's constant times the conductance constant gives a distributed charge. But I was disappointed that the distributed charge it produced did not equal the elementary charge squared. So I worked with the two distributed charges for a few hours before discovering that they were exactly proportional to each other by way of 8pi times the fine structure constant of the electron. And so I had this equation: e^2 = 8pia e.emax^2 where e is the elementary charge, a is the fine structure of the electron, and e.emax^2 is the derived value of charge equal to: e.emax^2 = h * Cd I then applied the same process to the proton and neutron and found fine structures for both. But since the fine structures and angular momentum of the proton and neutron are not defined in modern physics, I really didn't have an empirical body of data to go by there. However, the lack of data was encouraging since it implied that modern physics was incapable of determining these values based on their chosen model of subatomic behavior. Three weeks went by before it occurred to me that e.emax^2 could be strong charge, which mediates the strong force. I then realized that if it were, then I was looking at the Unified Field Theory. Further research showed me that it has nothing to do with fields, but is rather a Unified Force Theory. I later found that the concept of fields is very ambiguous in the Standard Model and relativity theories, as modern science apparently does not know what a field really is. When I calculated the relative value of the forces for the different subatomic particles, looking at both the electrostatic force and the new concept of strong force, I found that the relative strengths of the forces matched the empirical data. Then I started reading older literature on electromagnetism. I was particularly struck by Ed Leedskalnin's description of electricity as a stream of tiny magnets. Although his view incorrectly denies the electrostatic effect of electrons, he does show a convincing argument for electrons acting as tiny magnets. And then it occurred to me that electromagnetism is caused by the strong charge. Further analysis of the mathematical aspects of the two charges revealed that electrostatic charge has a spherical geometry while strong charge (or electromagnetic charge) has a toroidal geometry. When I applied this knowledge to my coil observations it made perfect sense. When electrons are magnetically moving sideways in the coil, they produce the bright white streamers. When electrons are moving along their z axis, they produce the thin purple streamers. Electrons moving along their z axis are creating pressure on the electrons in front of them, thus potential increases. Electrons moving sideways along the circular y axis and outward on the x axis (it is a polar coordinate system) they move closer to each and form longitudinal waves of electrons. Hertz was broadcasting from the top load and Tesla was broadcasting from the ground. This is why Tesla's system of signaling was notably different from Hertz. Whereas Hertz's system caused the electrons to transform into photons and radiate permanently away from the transmitter, thus causing power loss, Tesla's system was pumped into the ground, which is a closed system. This allowed Tesla to longitudinally broadcast current through the electrostatic field of the Earth and have that current return to his transmitter. Thus he could build up resonance within the Earth with very little power loss. But I as I was working on this Unified Force Theory, it occurred to me that the units were in the wrong dimensions of charge, except three of them. The units of inductance, capacitance, and conductance were in the proper distributed charge, while all other units with charge were in single dimension. Investigating the various changes that take place when the dimensions are corrected in the units led me to the development of the Aether Physics Model. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- This is very interesting. Not only do I feel that you are on to something. But I have posted ,"Are gravitational waves electromagnetic waves?", on the group. I was relating to the possibility that electromagnetic waves are a compression and expansion of the space-time continuum, rather than gravitational waves. The problem is you do not know basic physics. EM is described by a 4 vector gravity by a tensor. Your posting not only bolsters my own theory (where I am just realising the implications of experimental evidence and well founded theories), but makes some valid points of its own. David Thomson is a well known crank whose views, in this posting alone, have been thoughly discredited by Bilge. If LIGO detects gravitational waves (an expansion and compression of space-time), then it is experimental evidence that this 5th dimension exists. You are intermixing ideas atrociously. First you say that that 'electromagnetic waves are a compression and expansion of the space-time continuum' then you invoke the 5th dimension where EM is an artifact of the cylinder condition imposed on the 5th dimension having nothing to do with the space-time continuum. If you are considering Kaluza-Klien theories then EM results from the left over covariance imposed by the cylinder condition - see http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/9805018. I would be interested to hear your thoughts on my discussion with PD(although he thinks I'm making the whole theory up). How about being precise in detialing those ideas? Bill Would you describe the compression of space-time, by a body such as a star, to be a separate dimension from the 4 existing dimensions. I do not know what you mean by compression of space-time. Space-time is curved by gravity - in fact according to GR gravity is space-time curvature. I ask because, surely there must be a dimension to alter the existing 4. I do not really know what you are trying to say. You may be thinking of the ideas promulgated by the popular press where they liken space-time curvature to the bending of a rubber sheet or something like that. That is bad IMHO because it creates the false impression (among other things) that the curvature must be taking place in a higher dimension. Unfortunately the mathematics of the situation does not necessity imply such an interpretation. If this was not the case, then wouldn't these dimensions have to remain unchanged? ?????????????. Bill Regards Ben |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Ben" wrote in message
om... This is very interesting. Not only do I feel that you are on to something. But I have posted ,"Are gravitational waves electromagnetic waves?", on the group. I was relating to the possibility that electromagnetic waves are a compression and expansion of the space-time continuum, rather than gravitational waves. My physics shows that the space-time continuum can be modulated as longitudinal waves via magnetic pulses. This is consistent with Nikola Tesla's work in this area. My theories also show that force is a primary phenomenon to matter. That is, the Aether has inherent force and it is this inherent force that ultimately led to the formation of electrons and protons. The electrons and protons are not the cause of force. Your posting not only bolsters my own theory (where I am just realising the implications of experimental evidence and well founded theories), but makes some valid points of its own. Thanks. If LIGO detects gravitational waves (an expansion and compression of space-time), then it is experimental evidence that this 5th dimension exists. Any expansion and contraction of the Aether would be due to the strong force. In my system of physics, the strong force and gravitational force are exactly proportional to each other. This is because mass is orthogonal to strong charge. The strong force and the gravitational force are the same thing but seen from orthogonal perspectives. This is why Einstein's GR can produce the correct result based on the wrong theory. Gravity has absolutely nothing to do with the bending of space-time around massive objects. It is all due to the strong force in all the matter, which pulls space-time toward the barycenter of the nuclei. Dave ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| How the Aether Physics Model came to be | David Thomson | The Theory of Relativity | 18 | February 27th 05 08:16 PM |
| How the Aether Physics Model came to be | guskz@hotmail.com | The Theory of Relativity | 10 | February 24th 05 02:58 AM |
| How the Aether Physics Model came to be | David Thomson | The Theory of Relativity | 3 | February 16th 05 05:00 AM |
| How the Aether Physics Model came to be | David Thomson | The Theory of Relativity | 0 | February 13th 05 01:43 AM |
| How the Aether Physics Model came to be | geraldkelleher@hotmail.com | The Theory of Relativity | 0 | February 12th 05 08:53 PM |