![]() |
| 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: accelerationsquot, gravitational, inertial, quotdefining |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Defining Inertial and Gravitational Accelerations"
Basis physics texts define acceleration as the second derivative of position with respect to time (d^2*L/dT^2) or, in more straight forward language as the rate of change of the rate of change of position with respect to time. This experienced directly when one is in an automobile which is increasing its speed. The speed, which is the distance traveled in a given time, increases as time passes and, for a constant acceleration, the distance traveled increases in proportion to the square of the elapsed time. When one considers gravitational an unfortunate semantic problem arises. Quite often the force applied to the seat of your pants by your chair is asserted to be the acceleration of gravity. This assertion is false and apparently leads to confusion. The force one feels is not the acceleration of gravity but rather is the force which would produce the downward acceleration (the second derivative of elevation with respect to time) which we call free fall. The force you feel against the chair a force which opposes the force of gravity, it is not the acceleration of gravity. This acceleration only occurs when you are in free fall and hence cannot sense the force of gravity, It is this careless of definition which allows theoretical physicists to assert that there is no force of gravity an what we consider to be the force of gravity occurs because the chair restricts you from following a null geodesic path around the center of the Earth. What the theoreticians have done is to combine two independent effects which interact (inertial and gravitational acceleration) into a single entity which they falsely assert to be fundamental. Newton's Second Law of Motion asserts that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. That is to say that for a force to exist there must be an opposing force equal in magnitude and opposite direction. Modern physicists admit of only two exceptions to this rule, the force exerted during inertial acceleration and the force exerted by a gravitational field. Since these forces supposedly have nothing to sustain them they are named "fictitious forces". If however, one admitted the existence of the classical Aether, these forces would no longer need to be considered "fictitious", they would exist as simple pushes or pulls against that Aether. It is too bad that modern physics has falsely asserted that the non-existence of the Aether has been proven. if the classical Aether existed the answers to many puzzles would be apparent. The source material for this posting may be found in http://einsteinhoax/hoax.htm ("The Einstein Hoax" {1997}); http://einsteinhoax/gravity.htm; ("Gravity" {1987}); and http://einsteinhoax/relcor.htm ("Corrections to Special Relativity" {1997}). EVERYTHING WHICH WE ACCEPT AS TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH EVERYTHING ELSE WE HAVE ACCEPTED AS TRUE, IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL OBSERVATIONS, AND IT MUST BE MATHEMATICALLY VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT ALWAYS MEET THIS REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF WORKMANSHIP FROM THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD CLASS STATUS. All of the Newsposts made by this site may be viewed at http://einsteinhoax.com/postinglog.htm . Please make any response via E-mail as Newsgroups are not monitored on a regular basis. Objective responses will be treated with the same courtesy as they are presented. To prevent the wastage of time on both of our parts, please do not raise objections that are not related to material that you have read at the Website. This posting is merely a summary. E-mail:- The material at the Website has been posted continuously for over 5 years. In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF ANY OF THE MATERIAL PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by individuals who have mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom without questioning it. If anyone provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be objectively answered, the material at the Website will be withdrawn. Challenges to date have revealed only the responder's inadequacy with one exception for which a correction was provided. |
| Ads |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| "Defining Inertial and Gravitational Accelerations" | Gol | Physics - General Discussion | 0 | March 18th 06 03:03 PM |
| "Defining Inertial and Gravitational Accelerations" | Emor | Physics - General Discussion | 2 | October 10th 05 07:02 PM |
| "Defining Inertial and Gravitational Accelerations" | Emor | Physics - General Discussion | 0 | October 10th 05 05:19 PM |
| "Defining Inertial and Gravitational Accelerations" | Sme | Physics - General Discussion | 2 | August 31st 05 07:37 PM |