Coincidence

  • 115 Replies
  • 13296 Views
Re: Coincidence
« Reply #60 on: January 13, 2016, 10:09:21 AM »
As I said...

NO WHERE does the "Allais Effect" say the MOON does not ECLIPSE the SUN.

Indeed, Dr Allais was no quack.  He believed in a round earth and in the standard model of the solar system - including the solar eclipse being caused by the moon passing in front of the sun.  He thought he'd found an interesting anomaly.

Scientists have attempted replication lots of times, occasionally getting similar results.  However the better controlled the experiment, the less likely the anomaly would occur, and nobody has replicated it for 40 years:

Quote
A published article on the topic in a mainstream scientific journal (Flandern, 2003) concludes that there have been "no unambiguous detections [of an Allais effect] within the past 30 years when consciousness of the importance of [experimental] controls was more widespread." This paper also suggests a mechanism that might cause slight gravitational variations during an eclipse (high speed high-altitude winds). They point out that "the gravitation anomaly discussed here is about a factor of 100,000 too small to explain the Allais excess pendulum precession… during eclipses" and from this conclude that the original Allais anomaly was merely due to poor controls.
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6483
Re: Coincidence
« Reply #61 on: January 13, 2016, 10:38:25 AM »
This paper also suggests a mechanism that might cause slight gravitational variations during an eclipse (high speed high-altitude winds).

The paper published by Flandern has major flaws in it.

Let us enumerate them.

"His model, however, presumes that air streams from the surrounding with speeds of the order of several 100 m/s. More realistic air speeds would imply that the “mass concentration” lags behind the shadow by at least 15 min (during which it will be already heated again, in thus way reducing the effect). The magnitude of this effect may therfore also be determined by the velocity of the shadow relative to the Earth surface. The magnitude of this varies from 0.5–1.0 km/s, depending on the eclipse. The amount of barometric pressure increase at sea level of 0.6% which Van Flandern and Yang cite is a rather extreme value, which is confirmed nowhere.

Van Ruymbeke et al.  report changes of the order of 0.5 hPa (~0.05%) in Vienna. The observed pressure change at sea level should, actually, not be too important in the scenario described by Van Flandern and Yang. What is happening in this scenario is that the relation used for correction for atmospheric pressure change (the so-called admittance factor, e.g., –0.3 gal mbar^-1  breaks down.

Also, in this model of Van Flandern and Yang, one would expect deviations of opposite sign around the observed deviations since there would necessarily be a depletion zone around the increased density spot. This is not visible in the data to a level ≤ 10% of the observed decreases in g.

Flandern's model certainly cannot account for the effects observed with torsion, paraconical and Foucault pendula, despite the title of the publication by Van Flandern and Yang. These devices have little sensitivity for changes in the vertical component of gravity. For changes of the magnitude of tidal forces Saxl and Allen determined the influence on the oscillation period of their torsion pendulum to be a factor of 10^5 to small to account for their observations."


Now, Dr. Maurice Allais has stated that a very careful setup of the experiment is needed in order to record the actual effect: the physicists who did this ALWAYS recorded the Allais effect.

THE ALLAIS EFFECT CONFIRMED IN 1961, 1970, 1999, 2003, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1626747#msg1626747

CONFIRMATION OF THE ALLAIS EFFECT DURING THE 2008 SOLAR ECLIPSE:

http://stoner.phys.uaic.ro/jarp/index.php/jarp/article/viewFile/40/22



I did explain the physics behind the very first solar eclipse: this is the most difficult part, which no one, before me, had ever undertaken.

The astronomy recorded in the Book of Enoch tells us the following relationship exists between the New Moon and the Black Sun: the Moon goes behind the sun while the Black Sun blocks the Sun's light (remember, these are all in the shape of a DISK).

The Earth is not entirely plunged into darkness, as the photographs taken by Fred Bruenjes have proven (posted earlier here).


ALL it says is there is another force or forces in effect that people are researching to explain.

The best scientists in the world have tried, for the past 60 years, to explain the Allais effect, using every conceivable explanation available: IT CANNOT BE DONE.

The Allais effect defies the law of universal attraction.


Dr. Maurice Allais:

“… the current theory of gravitation (being the result of the application, within the current theory of relative motions, of the principles of inertia and universal gravitation to any one of the Galilean spaces) complemented or not by the corrections suggested by the theory of relativity, leads to orders of magnitude [many factors of ten] for lunar and solar action (which are strictly not to be perceived experimentally) of some 100 million times less than the effects noted [during the eclipse] ... [emphasis added].”


Let me explain again what happened during the Allais experiment.

Before the eclipse, there was a normal clockwise swing of the pendulum.


AT THE START OF THE SOLAR ECLIPSE, THE PENDULUM STARTED TO REVERSE ITS MOTION: IT RAN BACKWARDS, IN A RAPID COUNTERCLOCKWISE MOTION.

For the next 45 minutes; then, after peaking, the pendulum motion REVERSES direction (moving clockwise again …), only to reverse BACK again (counterclockwise!) … briefly [as the Moon reaches “mid-eclipse”] -- before abruptly reversing once more, accelerating again in a CLOCKWISE direction.


Can everybody here understand these extraordinary details?

THE PENDULUM REVERSED DIRECTION FOR A FULL 45 MINUTES.

A TOTAL DEBUNKING OF NEWTON'S LAW OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION.

At the end of the eclipse, it resumed normal orbiting.


Dr. Maurice Allais:

In both cases, with the experiments with the anisotropic
support and with those with the isotropic support, it is found
that the amplitudes of the periodic effects are considerably
greater than those calculated according to the law of gravitation,
whether or not completed by the theory of relativity.
In the case of the anisotropic support, the amplitude of
the luni-solar component of 24h 50m is about twenty million
times greater than the amplitude calculated by the theory of
universal gravitation.

In the case of the paraconical pendulum with isotropic
support, this relation is about a hundred million.



The Moon could not have possibly have caused this unimaginable effect upon the pendulum: the amplitude is ONE HUNDRED MILLION TIMES GREATER THEN THE AMPLITUDE CALCULATED BY THE THEORY OF UNIVERSAL GRAVITATION.


The most precise calculations: ONLY A NEW, DIFFERENT CELESTIAL BODY COULD HAVE CAUSED THIS INCREDIBLE EFFECT.

ITS RADIATION CAUSED THE ANTIGRAVITATIONAL EFFECT RECORDED BY DR. ALLAIS.

« Last Edit: January 13, 2016, 10:40:50 AM by sandokhan »

Re: Coincidence
« Reply #62 on: January 13, 2016, 11:06:28 AM »
Can't be arsed going through your copy pasta crap.  Try to answer 2 questions without blather:

1 What shape did Dr. Maurice Allais think our planet is?

2 What body did Dr. Maurice Allais think was passing in front of the sun during an eclipse?
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

Re: Coincidence
« Reply #63 on: January 13, 2016, 09:35:44 PM »

THE ALLAIS EFFECT CONFIRMED IN 1961, 1970, 1999, 2003, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1626747#msg1626747

CONFIRMATION OF THE ALLAIS EFFECT DURING THE 2008 SOLAR ECLIPSE:

http://stoner.phys.uaic.ro/jarp/index.php/jarp/article/viewFile/40/22
+ as many eclipses were no such effect was observed.

You seem to make up some stuff to justify impossibilities of your "theory". I do not mind, because that gives some poeple more entertainment.

?

Jadyyn

  • 1533
Re: Coincidence
« Reply #64 on: January 14, 2016, 09:13:06 AM »
A problem that FEF faces is that it has to conform to (1) the Earth and (2) the sky. It has to do the job of RET and heliocentricity at the same time. Considering it looks like the FEers do not understand astronomy, the second part fails miserably all the time.

A question from the OP is how does FE explain the motion of the planets and when will occultations and transits of the Sun and Moon occur?

Also, the sky is mapped on a Celestial Sphere (not plane). It has the N. Celestial Pole (single point), a Celestial Equator (largest circle in the sky) then goes back down to the S. Celestial Pole (single point). This matches/corresponds to the RET sphere precisely. Using the FE model, why/how do the stars south of the equator make SMALLER circles when the disk continues to get LARGER. The S. Celestial Pole (above Antarctica) would make a 50,000+ mi circle (largest circle). Actually, because the true S. Celestial Pole is below the N. Pole (above the true S. Pole on the underside of the disk), it can not actually be seen.

If anyone has any doubts about the above, try mapping the Celestial Sphere to the FE disk with the S. Pole in the middle. It has not been made clear why the N. Pole is in the middle - other than convenience and not a lot of people complaining south of the equator (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=65369.0). The S. Celestial Pole would exist but not the N. Pole/N. Celestial Pole.
“If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.” W.C. Fields.
"The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it."
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

Re: Coincidence
« Reply #65 on: January 14, 2016, 03:27:07 PM »
Yo dumb dumb ... wake up and pay attention:

1) The "Allias Effect" has nothing to do with the fact the moon eclipses the sun. There are literally thousands of devices, AND PEOPLE, on Earth that follow the moon 24/7 and if you are saying the moon "blipped out" at the last second and was replaced by something else, you need to quit the wacky tobacco! THE MOON ECLIPSES THE SUN, and any anomalous effects are irrelevant to this fact. All it means is that there is some other additional factor at play.

2) The Allias Effect has not been conclusively supported as many have tried the same and similar experiments with mixed results. This is perhaps the strongest evidence that there may be something additionally involved in the equation.

3) Since eclipses are relatively rare, there tends to be a much greater scientific interest in moon/sun observations during an eclipse. This means that it is not possible for the moon to disappear from being monitored and not be present, between the Earth and the sun , during an eclipse.

sandokhan said: "Now, Dr. Maurice Allais has stated that a very careful setup of the experiment is needed in order to record the actual effect: the physicists who did this ALWAYS recorded the Allais effect."
This sounds like the standard disclaimer in every perpetual motion youtube video! LOLOLOLOLOLOL

This paper: T. van Flandern and X. S. Yang, "Allais gravity and pendulum effects during solar eclipses explained,"

The paper suggests that there are "no distinct detection" in the past 30 years. The paper suggested that Dr. Allias' experimental controls were likely the cause of the exaggerated results since it is unlikely that "all" (or any) modern experimenters would be "sloppy" .. effectively. The authors suggest a possible cause of anomalous readings could be a result of high altitude high velocity winds (common during eclipses). This reemphasizes what I stated above: The moon does eclipse the sun and any anomalous effects are due to some other factor!

QUIT QUOTING OBSCURITY UNLESS YOU ARE WILLING TO INCLUDE YOUR MATH AND SCIENTIFIC REASONING ALONG WITH IT, OTHERWISE IT IS NOTHING BUT EMPTY WORDS. WE ARE HERE TO DISCUSS TOPICS OF MUTUAL INTEREST FOR WHATEVER REASONS ... YOU ARE NOTHING BUT A BROKEN RECORD AND YOU CANNOT, YOURSELF, PROVE OR VALIDATE ANYTHING YOU ARE POSTING HERE.

P.S. I find it hilarious that you trust an "economist" that dabbles in physics as a reliable source for evidence in physics.
Aether is akin to pixie dust and has no substantiation in science or math. The Michelson–Morley experiment did not find evidence in support of Aether. Using a fictitious thing to twist reality is simply changing the name of God.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6483
Re: Coincidence
« Reply #66 on: January 14, 2016, 11:44:57 PM »
Dr. Maurice Allais is one of the most respected physicists of the 20th Century: the fact that he also received the Nobel prize in economics is a testimony to his extraordinary skills as a scientist.

Allais' pendulum experiments earned him the 1959 Galabert Prize of the French Astronautical Society, and in 1959 he was made a laureate of the United States Gravity Research Foundation.

I have already carefully debunked the flawed Flandern paper.


THE ALLAIS EFFECT CONFIRMED IN 1961, 1970, 1999, 2003, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1626747#msg1626747

CONFIRMATION OF THE ALLAIS EFFECT DURING THE 2008 SOLAR ECLIPSE:

http://stoner.phys.uaic.ro/jarp/index.php/jarp/article/viewFile/40/22


UNLESS YOU ARE WILLING TO INCLUDE YOUR MATH AND SCIENTIFIC REASONING ALONG WITH IT



Dr. Maurice Allais:

In both cases, with the experiments with the anisotropic
support and with those with the isotropic support, it is found
that the amplitudes of the periodic effects are considerably
greater than those calculated according to the law of gravitation,
whether or not completed by the theory of relativity.
In the case of the anisotropic support, the amplitude of
the luni-solar component of 24h 50m is about twenty million
times greater than the amplitude calculated by the theory of
universal gravitation.

In the case of the paraconical pendulum with isotropic
support, this relation is about a hundred million.




Let me explain again what happened during the Allais experiment.

Before the eclipse, there was a normal clockwise swing of the pendulum.


AT THE START OF THE SOLAR ECLIPSE, THE PENDULUM STARTED TO REVERSE ITS MOTION: IT RAN BACKWARDS, IN A RAPID COUNTERCLOCKWISE MOTION.

For the next 45 minutes!

Then, after peaking, the pendulum motion REVERSES direction (moving clockwise again …), only to reverse BACK again (counterclockwise!) … briefly [as the Moon reaches “mid-eclipse”] -- before abruptly reversing once more, accelerating again in a CLOCKWISE direction.


Can everybody here understand these extraordinary details?

THE PENDULUM REVERSED DIRECTION FOR A FULL 45 MINUTES.

A TOTAL DEBUNKING OF NEWTON'S LAW OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION.

At the end of the eclipse, it resumed normal orbiting.


The Moon could not have possibly have caused this unimaginable effect upon the pendulum: the amplitude is ONE HUNDRED MILLION TIMES GREATER THEN THE AMPLITUDE CALCULATED BY THE THEORY OF UNIVERSAL GRAVITATION.


The most precise calculations: ONLY A NEW, DIFFERENT CELESTIAL BODY COULD HAVE CAUSED THIS INCREDIBLE EFFECT.

ITS RADIATION CAUSED THE ANTIGRAVITATIONAL EFFECT RECORDED BY DR. ALLAIS.


It is as simple as this: since no other scientist has been able to explain how the pendulum's swing reversed motion for a full 45 minutes, and the luni-solar component has been exceeded by AN EFFECT ONE HUNDRED MILLION TIMES ITS VALUE, it means the Moon could not have possibly have caused the solar eclipse.

You have been given the most precise mathematical calculations showing the extent of the Allais effect: the ball is in your court - please explain how is it possible for a pendulum's swing to have reversed its motion for a full 45 minutes, only to resume its normal orbiting AFTER the end of the eclipse.

?

Jadyyn

  • 1533
Re: Coincidence
« Reply #67 on: January 15, 2016, 11:36:59 AM »
Quote
It is as simple as this: since no other scientist has been able to explain how the pendulum's swing reversed motion for a full 45 minutes, and the luni-solar component has been exceeded by AN EFFECT ONE HUNDRED MILLION TIMES ITS VALUE, it means the Moon could not have possibly have caused the solar eclipse.
No, as previously stated several times, it means the Moon could not have caused ALL the "PENDULUM SWINGING ANOMALOUSLY" component. Other factors are involved. That is all that is inferred and explicitly stated in your "walls of text". Obviously for you, if the Moon can not explain EVERYTHING, it does not exist!

Furthermore, it has to be demonstrated that this effect happens ALL the time or something really weird is causing the anomaly (may not even even be total eclipse related). Apparently from 1962-1969 (8 yrs)! 1971-1998 (28 yrs)! etc. (1+ times per year) it did not happen! So stop with the Allais Effect. You are drawing the wrong conclusions from spotty data. That is all.

Look at it this way, Pluto was discovered because there was ANOTHER FACTOR perturbing Uranus' orbit besides Neptune. We do not throw out Neptune because it does not explain the whole motion problem. BTW, it would be very interesting to know how FEF would predict finding Neptune and Pluto without gravitational effects like RET/heliocentricity/gravity did - (does UA affect planets' orbits?)

We predict various occultations and transits using heliocentric formulas/methods. THE question, that is ALWAYS asked is how does FE explain things? We are NOT discussing RET/heliocentric methods. THEY WORK. Now show FEF works.
“If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.” W.C. Fields.
"The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it."
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6483
Re: Coincidence
« Reply #68 on: January 15, 2016, 11:55:05 AM »
jadyyn, how can you be so superficial in your research?

No one else duplicated the exact requirements of the Allais experiment (with the exception of the Saxl-Allen team, who did record the full Allais effect), thus, no effects were measured, even though they were always present (do not kid yourself).

As soon as the technical requirements were met, the Allais effect become readily recorded:

THE ALLAIS EFFECT CONFIRMED IN 1961, 1970, 1999, 2003, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1626747#msg1626747

CONFIRMATION OF THE ALLAIS EFFECT DURING THE 2008 SOLAR ECLIPSE:

http://stoner.phys.uaic.ro/jarp/index.php/jarp/article/viewFile/40/22


Dr. Maurice Allais:

In both cases, with the experiments with the anisotropic
support and with those with the isotropic support, it is found
that the amplitudes of the periodic effects are considerably
greater than those calculated according to the law of gravitation,
whether or not completed by the theory of relativity.
In the case of the anisotropic support, the amplitude of
the luni-solar component of 24h 50m is about twenty million
times greater than the amplitude calculated by the theory of
universal gravitation.

In the case of the paraconical pendulum with isotropic
support, this relation is about a hundred million.



Let me explain again what happened during the Allais experiment.

Before the eclipse, there was a normal clockwise swing of the pendulum.


AT THE START OF THE SOLAR ECLIPSE, THE PENDULUM STARTED TO REVERSE ITS MOTION: IT RAN BACKWARDS, IN A RAPID COUNTERCLOCKWISE MOTION.

For the next 45 minutes!

Then, after peaking, the pendulum motion REVERSES direction (moving clockwise again …), only to reverse BACK again (counterclockwise!) … briefly [as the Moon reaches “mid-eclipse”] -- before abruptly reversing once more, accelerating again in a CLOCKWISE direction.


Can everybody here understand these extraordinary details?

THE PENDULUM REVERSED DIRECTION FOR A FULL 45 MINUTES.

A TOTAL DEBUNKING OF NEWTON'S LAW OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION.

At the end of the eclipse, it resumed normal orbiting.


The Moon could not have possibly have caused this unimaginable effect upon the pendulum: the amplitude is ONE HUNDRED MILLION TIMES GREATER THEN THE AMPLITUDE CALCULATED BY THE THEORY OF UNIVERSAL GRAVITATION.


The most precise calculations: ONLY A NEW, DIFFERENT CELESTIAL BODY COULD HAVE CAUSED THIS INCREDIBLE EFFECT.

ITS RADIATION CAUSED THE ANTIGRAVITATIONAL EFFECT RECORDED BY DR. ALLAIS.


It is as simple as this: since no other scientist has been able to explain how the pendulum's swing reversed motion for a full 45 minutes, and the luni-solar component has been exceeded by AN EFFECT ONE HUNDRED MILLION TIMES ITS VALUE, it means the Moon could not have possibly have caused the solar eclipse.

You have been given the most precise mathematical calculations showing the extent of the Allais effect: the ball is in your court - please explain how is it possible for a pendulum's swing to have reversed its motion for a full 45 minutes, only to resume its normal orbiting AFTER the end of the eclipse.

?

Jadyyn

  • 1533
Re: Coincidence
« Reply #69 on: January 15, 2016, 12:21:07 PM »
I don't care about pendulums. You have not demonstrated that the Moon does not cause a total eclipse.

Now please get on topic.
“If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.” W.C. Fields.
"The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it."
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6483
Re: Coincidence
« Reply #70 on: January 15, 2016, 12:34:33 PM »
Each message that you post here counts as a big loss for the RE.

I don't care about pendulums. You have not demonstrated that the Moon does not cause a total eclipse.

The Moon could not have possibly have caused this unimaginable effect upon the pendulum: the amplitude is ONE HUNDRED MILLION TIMES GREATER THEN THE AMPLITUDE CALCULATED BY THE THEORY OF UNIVERSAL GRAVITATION.

The most precise calculations: ONLY A NEW, DIFFERENT CELESTIAL BODY COULD HAVE CAUSED THIS INCREDIBLE EFFECT.

ITS RADIATION CAUSED THE ANTIGRAVITATIONAL EFFECT RECORDED BY DR. ALLAIS.


jadyyn, DO YOU understand the facts about the Allais effect?

At the start of the eclipse, the pendulum REVERSED ITS MOTION FOR A FULL 45 MINUTES.

This means a full defiance of Newton's law of universal gravitation.

Then, after peaking, the pendulum REVERSED ITS MOTION AGAIN: returning to a clockwise motion.

It reversed briefly to A COUNTERCLOCKWISE MOTION, then abruptly reversed once again to a clockwise direction.


jadyyn, if you want anyone to believe you, YOU MUST EXPLAIN HOW THIS WAS POSSIBLE.


Not only the pendulum's motion, totally and absolutely defied the law of universal gravitation, but it was directly correlated to the solar eclipse.

The Moon could not possibly have caused these effects: only if we take into consideration the fact that a different heavenly body passed between the Sun and the Earth, we can solve the problem.

You have been given the most precise mathematical calculations showing the extent of the Allais effect: the ball is in your court - please explain how is it possible for a pendulum's swing to have reversed its motion for a full 45 minutes, only to resume its normal orbiting AFTER the end of the eclipse.

?

Jadyyn

  • 1533
Re: Coincidence
« Reply #71 on: January 15, 2016, 01:08:01 PM »
Whatever... You are talking to the WRONG person. If you believe YOU solved this problem, you need to get out there and prove it and get a Nobel Prize! See if anyone in the Astronomical Community will buy your "Dark Sun" hypothesis. You need to explain to astronomers and others where the Moon goes when your "Dark Sun" appears from the edge of the Earth (you will probably have to demonstrate to everyone there even IS an edge of the Earth). Go for it.

As I have repeatedly stated, nowhere in anything you have presented, does it say the Moon does not cause the total eclipse. At best, all you have shown is one or more unknown factors cause the Allais Effect - nothing more. Repeating that SOMETHING must cause the effect implies the Moon doesn't cause total eclipses doesn't follow. You can post this stuff a million times and it was just as false with your first "wall of text" as it is false with the previous one. You have not shown the Moon doesn't cause solar eclipses just pendulums do weird things during an eclipse.

*I* don't need to explain the Allais Effect (lots of people have tried to explain it) as it may or may not have anything to do with the Moon. The Moon causes solar eclipses. The Moon occults planets (and eclipse is the Moon occulting the Sun). Other than YOU, everyone believes me because everyone experiences the Moon creating solar eclipses. YOU are the one that needs to convince everyone that it doesn't because an unknown factor causes an anomalous effect on a pendulum. Good luck with that.
« Last Edit: January 15, 2016, 01:09:40 PM by Jadyyn »
“If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.” W.C. Fields.
"The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it."
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6483
Re: Coincidence
« Reply #72 on: January 15, 2016, 01:35:05 PM »
jadyyn, please try and understand.

Each and every possible explanation has been offered by some of the greatest scientists over the last 60 years: nothing works, nothing can explain the sudden reversal of the pendulum's swing.

The Moon doesn't cause total eclipses doesn't follow.

But it does.

Dr. Maurice Allais explains:

In both cases, with the experiments with the anisotropic
support and with those with the isotropic support, it is found
that the amplitudes of the periodic effects are considerably
greater than those calculated according to the law of gravitation,
whether or not completed by the theory of relativity.
In the case of the anisotropic support, the amplitude of
the luni-solar component of 24h 50m is about twenty million
times greater than the amplitude calculated by the theory of
universal gravitation.

In the case of the paraconical pendulum with isotropic
support, this relation is about a hundred million.



AN EFFECT ONE HUNDRED MILLION TIMES GREATER THAN THE CALCULATED LUNI-SOLAR COMPONENT MEANS THAT THE MOON COULD NOT POSSIBLY HAVE CAUSED THIS EFFECT.

The effect lasted ONLY as long as the heavenly body passed between the Earth and the Sun.

Thus, it was the radiation of that body which did reverse the pendulum's swing.

IT COULD NOT POSSIBLY HAVE BEEN THE MOON: the calculated effect was one hundred million times greater.

Moreover, the reversal of motion is A DEFIANCE OF NEWTON'S LAW OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION, THE END FOR RE.


FURTHER PROOF: the Moon could not possibly have caused the Allais effect

http://stoner.phys.uaic.ro/jarp/index.php/jarp/article/viewFile/40/22

During the solar eclipse of 1 August 2008 three
programs of physics observations were independently
conducted by teams in Kiev, Ukraine, and Suceava, Romania,
separated by about 440 km. The Ukraine team operated five
independent miniature torsion balances, one Romania team
operated two independent short ball-borne pendulums, and the
other Romania team operated a long Foucault-type pendulum.
All three teams detected unexplained disturbances, and these
disturbances were mutually correlated. The overall pattern of
the observations exhibits certain perplexing features.


During the period before the eclipse no particular
disturbance was detected, and the 10-minute precession amounts of both
pendulums generally exhibited the same behavior. After the local eclipse
maximum the precession amount of the automatic pendulum started to
increase steadily, while that of the manual pendulum started to decrease
steadily.
This trend continued unabated until about forty minutes after
fourth contact, when the sense of change of the precession of the manual
pendulum changed to be the same as that of the automatic pendulum.
After this both pendulum precession amounts marched together in almost
perfect lockstep, decreasing until about 12:15, then executing an abrupt
spike upwards and back downwards which ended at about 13:15, and then
increasing until about 14:20, at which point the manual pendulum
precession again reversed its trend. It is clear from the calmness of the
environmental data that these phenomena were not linked to any variation
of meteorological conditions.


Do you understand English jadyyn?


Both pendulums DEFIED THE LAW OF UNIVERSAL GRAVITATION.

some influence exerted itself upon the Eastern European region
containing our three sets of equipment, extending over a field at
least hundreds of kilometers in width.
The nature of this common influence is unknown, but plainly it cannot be
considered as gravitational in the usually accepted sense of Newtonian or
Einsteinian gravitation. The basic reason is that in those models the
gravitational influences of several bodies are combined by addition, at least
to the accuracy detectable by molar equipment. However all three of our
experiments exhibited rather brusque variations (the abrupt jumps of the
Kiev balances, the humps and particularly the sharp spikes in the Suceava
short pendulum charts, and the deviation of the Suceava long pendulum)
which cannot have resulted from linear combination of the gravitational/tidal
influences of the Sun and the Moon, the magnitudes and angles of which
vary only gently over the time scales of the effects seen.



Another confirmation of the Allais effect: the abrupt effect is due to an external radiation caused by the heavenly body which does pass between the Earth and the Sun.


Now, jadyyn please EXPLAIN the sudden reversal of the motion of the pendulums involved in the experiment: not only a defiance of newtonian gravitation, but also could not have resulted from the linear gravitational influences of the Moon.

*

sokarul

  • 18130
  • Discount Chemist
Re: Coincidence
« Reply #73 on: January 15, 2016, 03:56:25 PM »
Solar eclipses only happen during the new moon phase. End of your claims.
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

?

Jadyyn

  • 1533
Re: Coincidence
« Reply #74 on: January 15, 2016, 08:42:20 PM »
Again, YOU don't understand that nowhere in anything you said does it say or even imply that the Moon doesn't cause a solar eclipse. OK, let me make it simple, (1) demonstrate ANYWHERE ANYONE EXPLICITLY has said the Moon doesn't cause the solar eclipse and (2) ONLY the SUN + ONLY ONE (1) OTHER FACTOR (not 2+) explain the total "Allais Effect". The Earth-Moon not providing enough BANG does not mean the Moon provides NONE. Why blame the Moon? Why not the Sun? Why not the pendulum?

Mathematically - if A(Sun)+B(NEW Moon)+C(unknown factors)=Y that does not prove in any way that A(Sun)+C(unknown factors)=Y. YOU are the ONLY ONE arbitrarily saying you no longer need B(NEW Moon) in the equation. That does not follow. Everyone knows B(NEW Moon) IS in the equation. Your logic is faulty. You have proved nothing.

This is typical of FEers. The Sun, Moon and planets motions can be accurately calculated MONTHS in advance but because you found an anomaly that SOMETIMES happens that is unexplained about a PENDULUM, you are willing to throw away known science for some fantasy that has nothing to do with orbits, occultations, retrogrades and the motion of heavenly bodies in general. Do you have any idea how ridiculous you are?

Furthermore, FEF doesn't have ANY explanation.

I am done. I have tried to explain this to you different ways but you do not understand. Besides, this derailment is pointless. Nowhere have you even addressed the OP.
« Last Edit: January 15, 2016, 08:45:23 PM by Jadyyn »
“If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.” W.C. Fields.
"The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it."
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6483
Re: Coincidence
« Reply #75 on: January 15, 2016, 11:13:59 PM »
Why blame the Moon?

Because the mathematics and the physics do prove that the Moon is not there to cause the solar eclipse.

jadyyn, please inform yourself, here is the precise data on the Allais effect:



In order to arrive at an explanation, M. Allais considered a wide range
of known periodic phenomena, including the terrestrial tides, variations in
the intensity of gravity, thermal or barometric effects, magnetic variations,
microseismic effects, cosmic rays, and the periodic character of human
activity. Yet, on close examination, the very peculiar nature of the
periodicity shown by the change in azimuth of the pendulum forced the
elimination of all of these as cause.


THE PENDULUM DEFIED NEWTON'S LAW OF UNIVERSAL GRAVITATIOIN.


FOR THE SAME MASSES OF THE EARTH, SUN AND THE "MOON", AND THE PENDULUM, THE SAME SUPPOSED LAW OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION, THE PENDULUM REVERSED MOTION FOR A FULL 45 MINUTES; RETURNED TO ITS CLOCKWISE MOTION BRIEFLY, THEN REVERSED MOTION AGAIN, RETURNING TO ITS NORMAL ORBITING MOTION AFTER THE END OF THE ECLIPSE.

jadyyn: EXPLAIN how this could have been possible on a round earth.

You haven't got a clue, have you?


Dr. Maurice Allais:

In both cases, with the experiments with the anisotropic
support and with those with the isotropic support, it is found
that the amplitudes of the periodic effects are considerably
greater than those calculated according to the law of gravitation,
whether or not completed by the theory of relativity.
In the case of the anisotropic support, the amplitude of
the luni-solar component of 24h 50m is about twenty million
times greater than the amplitude calculated by the theory of
universal gravitation.

In the case of the paraconical pendulum with isotropic
support, this relation is about a hundred million.


There is only way out of this quandary: it was the radiation emitted by the heavenly body which did cause the solar eclipse as it passed over France at the time of Dr. Allais' celebrated experiments were carried out.

That planet could not possibly be the Moon.

In the case of the anisotropic support, the amplitude of
the luni-solar component of 24h 50m is about twenty million
times greater than the amplitude calculated by the theory of
universal gravitation.

In the case of the paraconical pendulum with isotropic
support, this relation is about a hundred million.



If it had been the Moon, then nothing would have happened at all.

ONLY A DIFFERENT PLANET COULD HAVE CAUSED AN EFFECT ONE HUNDRED MILLION TIMES GREATER THAN THAT CALCULATED BY NEWTON'S LAW OF GRAVITATION.


The Moon's possible gravitational influence had already been taken into account: it cannot have caused anything, any movement of the pendulum.

Don't you understand?


Dr. Erwin Saxl experiment (1970)

Saxl and Allen went on to note that to explain these remarkable eclipse observations, according to "conventional Newtonian/Einsteinian gravitational theory," an increase in the weight of the pendumum bob itself on the order of ~5% would be required ... amounting to (for the ~51.5-lb pendulum bob in the experiment) an increase of ~2.64 lbs!

This would be on the order of one hundred thousand (100,000) times greater than any possible "gravitational tidal effects" Saxl and Allen calculated (using Newtonian Gravitational Theory/ Relativity Theory).


A TOTAL DEFIANCE OF NEWTON'S LAW OF UNIVERSAL GRAVITATION.


FOR THE SAME MASS OF THE SUN, EARTH, AND THE "MOON", AND THE OF THE PENDULUM, THE PENDULUM'S MOTION DEFIED THE ACCEPTED LAWS OF PHYSICS.

jadyyn, please explain the ALLAIS EFFECT: an effect one hundred million times greater than that calculated by taking the Moon's possible gravitational influence upon the pendulum.

jadyyn, please explain why the pendulum defied Newton's law of universal gravitation.

jadyyn, please explain why the pendulum reversed motion for a full 45 minutes, exactly as the heavenly body was passing overhead, during the eclipse.

jadyyn, please explain why the pendulum reversed motion again, returning to its normal clockwise orbiting motion, only after the end of the eclipse.
« Last Edit: January 16, 2016, 07:12:50 AM by sandokhan »

Re: Coincidence
« Reply #76 on: January 16, 2016, 12:37:43 AM »
Could be gravitomagnetism? That isn't considered in the equations. http://www.relativitybook.com/resources/gravitomagnetism.html

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6483
Re: Coincidence
« Reply #77 on: January 16, 2016, 02:23:23 AM »
Very well done, empirical, a nice try on your part.

Here is the geomagnetic data concerning the solar eclipse (August 11, 1999) data:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2001JA900006/abstract

However, contrary to claims elsewhere, the decreased conductivity did not cause an obvious effect in the geomagnetic recordings at the Earth's surface. Recordings of several European geomagnetic observatories and of a temporary variometer network, set up specially to observe an eclipse effect in detail, have been studied directly and in terms of equivalent currents in the ionosphere.

On the anomalies observed during the August 11, 1999 solar eclipse:

http://www.academiaromana.ro/sectii2002/proceedings/doc3_2004/03_Mihaila.pdf

http://www.acad.ro/sectii2002/proceedings/doc1-2003/n01_mihaila.pdf (in French, it includes a brief summary in English, also)


Here is a work dedicated exactly to the subject raised by you:

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0207065

Comparison of the magnitude of gravitomagnetic effects with the magnitude of the eclipse effects make it unlikely that the eclipse effects can be explained within the framework of General Relativity.


Now, there is no such thing as gravitomagnetism in the context of relativity theory, because relativity theory does not exist:

http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=2715.msg80203#msg80203


ETHER GRAVITOMAGNETISM (MAGNETRICITY):

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg759332#msg759332


Aether frame dragging, here are best works:

http://www.cellularuniverse.org/R1RelativityofTime.pdf

http://worldnpa.org/abstracts/abstracts_1130.pdf

http://www.treurniet.ca/physics/framedragging.htm

http://www.wbabin.net/weuro/agathan5.pdf
« Last Edit: January 16, 2016, 02:24:57 AM by sandokhan »

Re: Coincidence
« Reply #78 on: January 16, 2016, 05:19:58 AM »
You guys have got to be kidding with this one *facepalm* a three-body gravitational system works perfectly if you look at it as a a four-dimensional "plane" and assuming all bodies are in fourth-dimensional freefall. Which they are. If you have trouble comprehending four dimensions (which is ok. The majority of people do) feel free to use any of the 3-dimensional representations you can find in books, online, or the NOVA program on PBS if you only have access to public television.

?

Jadyyn

  • 1533
Re: Coincidence
« Reply #79 on: January 16, 2016, 06:38:10 AM »
sandokhan, fine...

Tell me when the next total solar eclipse will be. Where should I go on Earth to view it and do the pendulum experiment? I don't believe your spotty data. DON'T use the Moon's orbit. ONLY use your "Black Sun" (BS). Please use ONLY FE formulas. Provide the ACCURATE FE math.
“If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.” W.C. Fields.
"The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it."
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6483
Re: Coincidence
« Reply #80 on: January 16, 2016, 07:11:18 AM »
fine...

No, it is not fine.

The Allais effect conclusively and absolutely defies Newton's law of universal gravitation.

Therefore YOU don't have a clue as to where the next eclipse might occur, EXCEPT for the faked RE orbital equations.

Without the law of universal gravitation, the RE is pure garbage.

Now, had J.C. Maxwell's original set of ether equations been studied in universities and colleges everywhere, you would have at your disposal, at last, the finest equations of motion (based on electrogravity) to use to make predictions in astronomy.

As such, we are left with the only officially accepted equations (RE orbital equations), the faked set of differential equations, the falsity of which we have been discussing in our thread.


FOR THE SAME MASS OF THE SUN, EARTH, AND THE "MOON", AND THE OF THE PENDULUM, THE PENDULUM'S MOTION DEFIED THE ACCEPTED LAWS OF PHYSICS.

jadyyn, please explain the ALLAIS EFFECT: an effect one hundred million times greater than that calculated by taking the Moon's possible gravitational influence upon the pendulum.

jadyyn, please explain why the pendulum defied Newton's law of universal gravitation.

jadyyn, please explain why the pendulum reversed motion for a full 45 minutes, exactly as the heavenly body was passing overhead, during the eclipse.

jadyyn, please explain why the pendulum reversed motion again, returning to its normal clockwise orbiting motion, only after the end of the eclipse.

?

Jadyyn

  • 1533
Re: Coincidence
« Reply #81 on: January 16, 2016, 09:24:55 AM »
RET/heliocentric "BS":

"The eclipse will begin at 23:20 UTC, on March 8[, 2016] with the maximum point of the eclipse occurring at 02:00 UTC on March 9. Totality will last for 4 mins 09 secs."


Since it will also be a supermoon (Moon maximum size - Moon > Sun), why doesn't the whole FE go dark?

Now let's hear about the FEF BS ("Black Sun") - pun intended. Nuf said...
« Last Edit: January 16, 2016, 09:57:25 AM by Jadyyn »
“If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.” W.C. Fields.
"The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it."
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

Re: Coincidence
« Reply #82 on: January 16, 2016, 09:43:42 AM »
Dr. Maurice Allais is one of the most respected physicists of the 20th Century: the fact that he also received the Nobel prize in economics is a testimony to his extraordinary skills as a scientist.

Allais' pendulum experiments earned him the 1959 Galabert Prize of the French Astronautical Society, and in 1959 he was made a laureate of the United States Gravity Research Foundation.

I have already carefully debunked the flawed Flandern paper.


THE ALLAIS EFFECT CONFIRMED IN 1961, 1970, 1999, 2003, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1626747#msg1626747

CONFIRMATION OF THE ALLAIS EFFECT DURING THE 2008 SOLAR ECLIPSE:

http://stoner.phys.uaic.ro/jarp/index.php/jarp/article/viewFile/40/22


UNLESS YOU ARE WILLING TO INCLUDE YOUR MATH AND SCIENTIFIC REASONING ALONG WITH IT



Dr. Maurice Allais:

In both cases, with the experiments with the anisotropic
support and with those with the isotropic support, it is found
that the amplitudes of the periodic effects are considerably
greater than those calculated according to the law of gravitation,
whether or not completed by the theory of relativity.
In the case of the anisotropic support, the amplitude of
the luni-solar component of 24h 50m is about twenty million
times greater than the amplitude calculated by the theory of
universal gravitation.

In the case of the paraconical pendulum with isotropic
support, this relation is about a hundred million.


What I have read says in the order of 100,000 not 100,000,000!

Let me explain again what happened during the Allais experiment.

Before the eclipse, there was a normal clockwise swing of the pendulum.


AT THE START OF THE SOLAR ECLIPSE, THE PENDULUM STARTED TO REVERSE ITS MOTION: IT RAN BACKWARDS, IN A RAPID COUNTERCLOCKWISE MOTION.

For the next 45 minutes!

Then, after peaking, the pendulum motion REVERSES direction (moving clockwise again …), only to reverse BACK again (counterclockwise!) … briefly [as the Moon reaches “mid-eclipse”] -- before abruptly reversing once more, accelerating again in a CLOCKWISE direction.


Can everybody here understand these extraordinary details?

THE PENDULUM REVERSED DIRECTION FOR A FULL 45 MINUTES.

A TOTAL DEBUNKING OF NEWTON'S LAW OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION.

At the end of the eclipse, it resumed normal orbiting.


The Moon could not have possibly have caused this unimaginable effect upon the pendulum: the amplitude is ONE HUNDRED MILLION TIMES GREATER THEN THE AMPLITUDE CALCULATED BY THE THEORY OF UNIVERSAL GRAVITATION.


The most precise calculations: ONLY A NEW, DIFFERENT CELESTIAL BODY COULD HAVE CAUSED THIS INCREDIBLE EFFECT.

ITS RADIATION CAUSED THE ANTIGRAVITATIONAL EFFECT RECORDED BY DR. ALLAIS.


It is as simple as this: since no other scientist has been able to explain how the pendulum's swing reversed motion for a full 45 minutes, and the luni-solar component has been exceeded by AN EFFECT ONE HUNDRED MILLION TIMES ITS VALUE, it means the Moon could not have possibly have caused the solar eclipse.

You have been given the most precise mathematical calculations showing the extent of the Allais effect: the ball is in your court - please explain how is it possible for a pendulum's swing to have reversed its motion for a full 45 minutes, only to resume its normal orbiting AFTER the end of the eclipse.

I still don't see any math by YOU! You cut and pasted a picture of math .. by someone else .. and the "values" are absent. There is also no explanation ... and especially not an explanation by YOU. I reiterate, you have little or no MATH or physics skill or knowledge ... all you do is quote articles in ONE stream of research and ignore main stream science.

Your retort to my last post was essentially to re post what you previously posted ... guess what, it didn't answer my quarries the first time ... why should it the second time?

BTW: the 1999 "torsion bar" test for the Allias effect is perhaps the most precise test to date and its results were negative.

MORE TO COME ... I HAVE FOUND AN INTERESTING CORRELATION I AM FURTHER INVESTIGATING. 
Aether is akin to pixie dust and has no substantiation in science or math. The Michelson–Morley experiment did not find evidence in support of Aether. Using a fictitious thing to twist reality is simply changing the name of God.

Re: Coincidence
« Reply #83 on: January 16, 2016, 05:23:07 PM »
I think I have found reason or explanation for the Allias effect. My reasoning would account for varied results and both positive and negative results ... Be patient ... still getting data.

BTW, It has nothing to do with a so called black body, but it does have a lot to do with the moon!
Aether is akin to pixie dust and has no substantiation in science or math. The Michelson–Morley experiment did not find evidence in support of Aether. Using a fictitious thing to twist reality is simply changing the name of God.

Re: Coincidence
« Reply #84 on: January 16, 2016, 07:47:10 PM »
I find it interesting and supportive to the avenue I am investigating that the results of the 2008 experiment show activity AFTER the eclipse whereas Allais's 1954 results indicated the anomaly DURING the eclipse. Other experiment have shown results before the eclipse proper. 

Also, all test sites fall within about 4 degrees of longitudinal separation regardless of the 400+km of separation ... this is also significant within the data of my analysis. The comment by the author re: "... but over the period that we have been working with these miniature torsion balances we have often observed similar phenomena ..." this also supports my line of research.

BTW, have you read: http://stoner.phys.uaic.ro/jarp/index.php/jarp/article/viewFile/40/22 because the authors admit that their methodology and equipment introduced errors that could not be accurately accounted for, errors that would have been present for Allais as well.

Further, the authors of the article you quoted state: "Anomalies in the behavior of long Foucault-type pendulums during solar eclipses have been reported by ... (BUT APPARENTLY LATER REFUTED)." (emphasis added)


Aether is akin to pixie dust and has no substantiation in science or math. The Michelson–Morley experiment did not find evidence in support of Aether. Using a fictitious thing to twist reality is simply changing the name of God.

Re: Coincidence
« Reply #85 on: January 16, 2016, 09:50:01 PM »
a three-body gravitational system works perfectly if you look at it as a a four-dimensional "plane" and assuming all bodies are in fourth-dimensional freefall. Which they are. If you have trouble comprehending four dimensions (which is ok. The majority of people do)
Of course it works. There are even stable configurations for 4, 5, 10 bodies (but usually with equal masses). That 4D comparision amazed be,  I have never thougth about it that way.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6483
Re: Coincidence
« Reply #86 on: January 16, 2016, 11:14:20 PM »
kibitzer, you are embarrassing yourself beyond redemption.

Nowhere do the authors state that their methodology included errors unaccounted for: your tricks do not work with me.

IN FACT, THEY STATE THE FOLLOWING:

For this reason we have no hesitation in
asserting that the deviation shown in Fig. 11 is a genuine
external disturbance of unknown origin, and absolutely
cannot be ascribed to experimental error.



Some experiments recorded the anomalies before the eclipse, during the eclipse and also after the eclipse.


I TOLD YOU THAT YOU DO NOT KNOW HOW TO READ A SCIENTIFIC PAPER.

http://www.allais.info/docs/pugarticle.pdf

Anomalies in the behavior of long pendulums during solar eclipses have
been reported by Jeverdan (Ref. 11), Popescu & Olenici (Ref. 12), and
Mihaila (Refs. 13, 14, and 15), and also by Wuchterl (but later apparently
repudiated) (Ref. 16).


That is, ONLY the paper by Wuchterl was repudiated, NOT THE OTHER PROPERLY CARRIED OUT EXPERIMENTS.

Why was it repudiated? Because Wuchterl did not provide the data requested:

http://www.allais.info/priorartdocs/vienna.htm


Your tricks do not work with me kibitzer.


Now, let us get back to the Allais effect.

Here is Dr. Maurice Allais report to NASA:

http://www.allais.info/alltrans/nasareport.pdf

LET US GO TO PAGE 42R: an immediate orders-of-magnitude calculations

"The ratio of the calculated effects of order 10-13 and the observed effects of order 10-5 is of the order of 10-8, i.e. of the order of a hundred million."

Nobody has yet been able to impugn the validity of this calculation.


CAN YOU READ ENGLISH kibitzer?

Dr. Maurice Allais:

In both cases, with the experiments with the anisotropic
support and with those with the isotropic support, it is found
that the amplitudes of the periodic effects are considerably
greater than those calculated according to the law of gravitation,
whether or not completed by the theory of relativity.
In the case of the anisotropic support, the amplitude of
the luni-solar component of 24h 50m is about twenty million
times greater than the amplitude calculated by the theory of
universal gravitation.

In the case of the paraconical pendulum with isotropic
support, this relation is about a hundred million.


Let me explain again what happened during the Allais experiment.

Before the eclipse, there was a normal clockwise swing of the pendulum.


AT THE START OF THE SOLAR ECLIPSE, THE PENDULUM STARTED TO REVERSE ITS MOTION: IT RAN BACKWARDS, IN A RAPID COUNTERCLOCKWISE MOTION.

For the next 45 minutes!

Then, after peaking, the pendulum motion REVERSES direction (moving clockwise again …), only to reverse BACK again (counterclockwise!) … briefly [as the Moon reaches “mid-eclipse”] -- before abruptly reversing once more, accelerating again in a CLOCKWISE direction.


Can everybody here understand these extraordinary details?

THE PENDULUM REVERSED DIRECTION FOR A FULL 45 MINUTES.

A TOTAL DEBUNKING OF NEWTON'S LAW OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION.

At the end of the eclipse, it resumed normal orbiting.


The Moon could not have possibly have caused this unimaginable effect upon the pendulum: the amplitude is ONE HUNDRED MILLION TIMES GREATER THEN THE AMPLITUDE CALCULATED BY THE THEORY OF UNIVERSAL GRAVITATION.


The most precise calculations: ONLY A NEW, DIFFERENT CELESTIAL BODY COULD HAVE CAUSED THIS INCREDIBLE EFFECT.

ITS RADIATION CAUSED THE ANTIGRAVITATIONAL EFFECT RECORDED BY DR. ALLAIS.


kibitzer, please explain the ALLAIS EFFECT: an effect one hundred million times greater than that calculated by taking the Moon's possible gravitational influence upon the pendulum.

kibitzer, please explain why the pendulum defied Newton's law of universal gravitation.

kibitzer, please explain why the pendulum reversed motion for a full 45 minutes, exactly as the heavenly body was passing overhead, during the eclipse.

kibitzer, please explain why the pendulum reversed motion again, returning to its normal clockwise orbiting motion, only after the end of the eclipse.




« Last Edit: January 16, 2016, 11:32:28 PM by sandokhan »

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Coincidence
« Reply #87 on: January 17, 2016, 02:41:25 AM »
The Allais effect conclusively and absolutely defies Newton's law of universal gravitation.
Therefore YOU don't have a clue as to where the next eclipse might occur, EXCEPT for the faked RE orbital equations.
Without the law of universal gravitation, the RE is pure garbage.

I won't pretend to explain or understand the cause of the Allais effect, but just what Is the justification that it alone demolishes Universal Gravitation?   
Is there any evidence that something that shows only during an eclipse has any effect at other times?

We do have a lot of experimental evidence that something causes masses to attract.
Cavendish's experiment is often criticised but similar experiments have been performed dozens of times from then till the present day. Many use variations and improvements on his method, others use completely different approaches,yet get fairly consistent results for such a difficult piece of experimental work.

Cavendish got within 1% of the current value, modern results are within about 3 parts in 100,000 of each other,  not that the experimenters are at all satisfied with that level of inaccuracy. .
Results as close as that are hardly accidental! Even so, it is certainly acknowledged that there are still many unknowns in relation to Gravitation.
So there is pretty much evidence that masses do attract.

Notwithstanding the Allais effect solar and lunar eclipses still seem to manage to come on time.

I just wonder whether your theories have any similar predictive power yet.

PS Are there any other researchers that share these views.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6483
Re: Coincidence
« Reply #88 on: January 17, 2016, 03:37:14 AM »
We do have a lot of experimental evidence that something causes masses to attract.

The mistakes committed by Cavendish were simply repeated by other researchers.

THE ULTIMATE PRESSURE GRAVITY EXPERIMENT: LAMOREAUX EFFECT

LAMOREAUX-CASIMIR EFFECT: THE ULTIMATE PROOF OF THE EXISTENCE OF PRESSURE GRAVITY


" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

Steve Lamoreaux (Yale University): proof of the existence of negative energy (zero point vacuum energy - that is, subquark strings/telluric currents/magnetic monopoles double torsion strings):

starts at 9:31 (negative energy and pressure gravity experiment)


Steve reasoned that if he created a narrow-enough region of empty space like the area between the two ships, then some of the shimmering zero-point energy would not fit inside it.
The energy of empty space outside the narrow region would be stronger and force it to shrink.
That force would be the signature of negative energy, and Steve set out to create it in his lab.
It was an idea that would consume him for more than a decade.


Inside this vacuum chamber are two small metal plates sitting less than the width of a human hair apart from one another.
To get them that close and not touch, the metal has to be perfectly flat, down almost to the atomic level.
The zero-point fluctuations of free space won't fit between those plates, as well, so when you bring these two plates together, there are fewer fluctuations between the plates than there are outside the plates.

The force builds up, and it actually gets stronger and stronger as the plates get closer together, and that force we refer to as arising from negative energy.
The zero-point energy fluctuations outside the plates are stronger than those between, so pressure from the outside pushes them together.

Or think of it another way.
The negative energy between the plates expands space around it.
Steve's years of meticulous labor have made him the first person on Earth to have measured a force produced by negative energy.


In case you didn't know, Newton fully believed in pressure gravity.

Newton, student notes on Descartes:

Gravity is a force in a body impelling it to descend. Here, however, by descent is not only meant a motion towards the centre of the Earth but also towards any part or region...

His belief at that time was that, to quote Westfall, ‘gravity (heaviness) is caused by the descent of a subtle invisible matter which strikes all bodies and carries them down'.


As for the Cavendish disaster,  please do your homework:

http://milesmathis.com/caven.html


But just what Is the justification that it alone demolishes Universal Gravitation?   


THE VERY FACT THAT THE ALLAIS EFFECT DEFIES/DEMOLISHES/DESTROYS THE FAKED/FALSE/CATASTROPHIC LAW OF UNIVERSAL GRAVITATION.

HERE IS EXACTLY HOW.

Dr. Maurice Allais:

In both cases, with the experiments with the anisotropic
support and with those with the isotropic support, it is found
that the amplitudes of the periodic effects are considerably
greater than those calculated according to the law of gravitation,
whether or not completed by the theory of relativity.
In the case of the anisotropic support, the amplitude of
the luni-solar component of 24h 50m is about twenty million
times greater than the amplitude calculated by the theory of
universal gravitation.

In the case of the paraconical pendulum with isotropic
support, this relation is about a hundred million.


Let me explain again what happened during the Allais experiment.

Before the eclipse, there was a normal clockwise swing of the pendulum.


AT THE START OF THE SOLAR ECLIPSE, THE PENDULUM STARTED TO REVERSE ITS MOTION: IT RAN BACKWARDS, IN A RAPID COUNTERCLOCKWISE MOTION.

For the next 45 minutes!

Then, after peaking, the pendulum motion REVERSES direction (moving clockwise again …), only to reverse BACK again (counterclockwise!) … briefly [as the Moon reaches “mid-eclipse”] -- before abruptly reversing once more, accelerating again in a CLOCKWISE direction.


Can everybody here understand these extraordinary details?

THE PENDULUM REVERSED DIRECTION FOR A FULL 45 MINUTES.

A TOTAL DEBUNKING OF NEWTON'S LAW OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION.

At the end of the eclipse, it resumed normal orbiting.


The Moon could not have possibly have caused this unimaginable effect upon the pendulum: the amplitude is ONE HUNDRED MILLION TIMES GREATER THEN THE AMPLITUDE CALCULATED BY THE THEORY OF UNIVERSAL GRAVITATION.


Is there any evidence that something that shows only during an eclipse has any effect at other times?

You still don't get it.

It is the VERY FACT that the Allais effect can be observed ONLY during eclipses that confirms my FE model: a dome with openings which allows radiation from the sun/stars to reach the earth. The direct radiation of the Black Sun, in the form of magnetic monopoles/laevorotatory subquarks, only affects the Earth as it approaches the Sun, during the eclipse, and as it departs from the Sun.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2016, 10:44:15 PM by sandokhan »

Re: Coincidence
« Reply #89 on: January 17, 2016, 04:44:08 AM »
a three-body gravitational system works perfectly if you look at it as a a four-dimensional "plane" and assuming all bodies are in fourth-dimensional freefall. Which they are. If you have trouble comprehending four dimensions (which is ok. The majority of people do)
Of course it works. There are even stable configurations for 4, 5, 10 bodies (but usually with equal masses). That 4D comparision amazed be,  I have never thougth about it that way.

Its actually quite interesting. If you take that all the planets and everything are "falling" through space-time, you can begin to calculate Gravity as resistance to 4d freefall rather than just an attraction, which is why it often noticably distorts time when in large quantities.