Gravitational conundrums

  • 158 Replies
  • 19304 Views
*

Goddamnit, Clown

  • 824
  • How else would light work?
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #90 on: May 10, 2014, 07:57:34 PM »
What are you so upset about?  I was insulted at being called a 16th century alchemist and I simply made a factual statement.  No need to get your panties in a wad over it.
Well, to be fair, I only said you sounded like alchemists. You aren't actually alchemists, so you can relax; I'd never call you alchemists. That would imply that your ideas might eventually lead to useful science the way alchemy lead to chemistry ;)

Most people are happy to just use the modern spelling for words. After all, those school children were taught Newton's useful discoveries in modern english, rather than latin.
Big Pendulum have their tentacles everywhere.

*

V

  • 304
  • icosatetrachoron
Re: Explain me this
« Reply #91 on: May 10, 2014, 08:06:52 PM »
Are you asking for proof that Einstein believed in the Aether, or that he believed in the Aether after he published his theories about Special Relativity?
No, I want any experimental evidence that the ether exists.


First of all... "Ether" is a completely different thing. Please call it aether.
Congratulations, you managed to avoid the question and derail the thread.
i don't need a signature. go away.

?

Goth

  • 220
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #92 on: May 14, 2014, 08:14:46 AM »
Many people have heard the story of when Newton sat under an apple tree to think, and suddenly an apple fell on his head and he conceived the theory of gravity. But after a long time, physicists knew gravity was a very strange physical law. Compared to other basic interaction forces, gravity was very difficult to deal with. Now the reasons for this peculiarity may have been explained: gravity is not a fundamental interaction force, but instead may be the derivative of another more fundamental power.

Professor Eric Verlinde, 48, a respected string theorist and a professor of physics at the Institute of Theoretical Physics at the University of Amsterdam, proposed a new theory of gravity as reported by the New York Times on July 12, 2010. He argued in a paper, titled “On the Origin of Gravity and the Laws of Newton” that gravity is a consequence of the laws of thermodynamics.

“For me, gravity doesn’t exist,” Dr. Verlinde told the Times. Of course, the apple will fall to the ground, but the physical laws governing that action may not be the way science has viewed it for the past 300 years.

The core of the theory may be relevant to the lack of order in physical systems. The Times describes his argument as the “bad hair day” theory of gravity. Hair frizzles in the heat because there are more ways for it to curl than to remain straight. Dr. Verlinde postulates that the force we call gravity works in a similar way.

Professor Verlinde’s theory is that gravity is essentially an entropic force. An object moving around other small objects will change the disorder surrounding the objects and gravity will be felt. Based on this idea in the Holographic theory, he can derive Newton’s second law of mechanics. In addition, his theory on the physics of inertial mass is also a new understanding.

Research on the universe in modern science is essentially based on the theory of gravity. If gravity does not exist, then our understanding of the galaxy and the universe’s structure could be wrong. This may be why astronomers often find it difficult to explain gravitational movement’s of distant celestial bodies and have to introduce the concept of “dark matter” to help balance the equations.

While some physicists say Verlinde’s theory is wrong, others are intrigued. Even some who don’t necessarily agree with Verlinde say a new theory of gravity could help resolve some cosmic puzzles that have emerged—like so-called dark energy, a force that seems to be pushing the expansion of the universe. New theories of gravity may stimulate scientists to seek a new understanding of the universe.

“We’ve known for a long time gravity doesn’t exist,” Dr. Verlinde told the Times, “It’s time to yell it.”

Article originally appeared on Pure Insight.

*

Goddamnit, Clown

  • 824
  • How else would light work?
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #93 on: May 14, 2014, 10:08:20 AM »
Yeah, that's an interesting hypothesis although he's not the first or only person to propose it. Time will tell whether some fully defined version of the hypothesis makes any better predictions than current models do.

Perhaps it will, perhaps it will make the same predictions at stellar scales but different ones at galactic scales that obviate the need for the dark matter hypothesis.

Was there a thread-related point you were trying to make, or was it just something interesting?
Big Pendulum have their tentacles everywhere.

*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #94 on: May 14, 2014, 10:13:14 AM »
It is foolish to think that our scientific principles are even correct. We're not that advanced of a species yet to fully understand the universe. Time will shed more light on how the universe really works. I'm sure we're close to the truth here at TFES, but modern principles of gravity and physics held by people with "degrees" has been proven wrong time and time again.
Like the article states, why do physicists need "dark matter" to explain their theories when they can't even explain what dark matter is? Aether and Universal Acceleration explains more than gravity and most accepted physics principles on paper EVERYTIME.
Read the FAQS.

*

V

  • 304
  • icosatetrachoron
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #95 on: May 14, 2014, 12:37:51 PM »
It is foolish to think that our scientific principles are even correct. We're not that advanced of a species yet to fully understand the universe. Time will shed more light on how the universe really works. I'm sure we're close to the truth here at TFES, but modern principles of gravity and physics held by people with "degrees" has been proven wrong time and time again.
Like the article states, why do physicists need "dark matter" to explain their theories when they can't even explain what dark matter is? Aether and Universal Acceleration explains more than gravity and most accepted physics principles on paper EVERYTIME.
You are using a hypocritical ad hominem attack.
We are looking for an explanation for dark matter.
Do you have any idea what aether is or what is causing the UA?
I didn't think so.
i don't need a signature. go away.

*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #96 on: May 14, 2014, 12:49:08 PM »
Most of this is paraphrased from Tinangel's explanation of Aether, which I agree with.

Aetheric Wind is the upward flow of aether swirling about the earth-disc due to UA.  Aether is moving faster than the Earth, and it actually causes the earth to accelerate upward.  UA is the force that gives rise to gravity, and as Aether propagates light, its motion upward also causes the curvature of light that causes us to perceive sunrise/set, as well as accounting for round-earth-esque phenomena such as certain observations of the sinking ship effect.

... connected to Aetheric Wind is the idea of the Aetheric Whirlpool.  Aether rushes up around the disc of earth, it comes back together above us swirling in a great vortex, not entirely dissimilar to water in a drain.  It is this swirling motion that is thought to give rise to the relative motions of the sun and moon, and also accounts for the fact that the sun moves faster in its orbit when it is closer to the edge of the disc, where it is inferred that the aetheric whirlpool spins faster, or at the very least has a more direct effect on the sun and moon.  Eddies in this aetheric whirlpool also account for discrepancies in things like sight distance and local gravity.
Read the FAQS.

?

Starman

  • 3860
  • Never miss a day to learn something
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #97 on: May 14, 2014, 12:53:50 PM »
Where do Aetheric Wind comes from?

*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #98 on: May 14, 2014, 01:04:54 PM »
Where do Aetheric Wind comes from?

I will answer your question, but before I do I would like to ask some of my own... Where does mass come from? Where does dark matter come from? Where does gravity come from? What happens to the force you perceive as "gravity" when there is no mass? Does it just vanish? How is that possible?
Read the FAQS.

Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #99 on: May 14, 2014, 01:12:45 PM »
Where do Aetheric Wind comes from?

I will answer your question,
You won't though, will you?
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.

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #100 on: May 14, 2014, 01:30:37 PM »
Where do Aetheric Wind comes from?

I will answer your question, but before I do I would like to ask some of my own... Where does mass come from? Where does dark matter come from? Where does gravity come from? What happens to the force you perceive as "gravity" when there is no mass? Does it just vanish? How is that possible?

Since you don't have the ability to perform a web search I'll happily answer these questions. Keep in mind that I subscribe to Relativity.

Where does mass come from? From matter.

Where does dark matter come from? It is matter that we can't observe, because it is dark.

Where does gravity come from? From mass. Mass displaces spacetime. The more massive, the more displacement.

What happens to the force you perceive as "gravity" when there is no mass? A gravitational wave is unleashed.


*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #101 on: May 14, 2014, 01:34:01 PM »
Serious answers only, please.
Read the FAQS.

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #102 on: May 14, 2014, 01:35:04 PM »
Serious answers only, please.

Are you talking to me? Those are very serious answers. They also make plenty of sense. If there is something you don't understand I can point you in the right direction.

*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #103 on: May 14, 2014, 01:38:36 PM »
"Because it is dark" is not a serious answer. Try again.
Read the FAQS.

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #104 on: May 14, 2014, 01:42:23 PM »
"Because it is dark" is not a serious answer. Try again.

That's actually what it is. It's matter that we infer to be there because objects around it are obeying laws of gravity. We don't see the dark matter because it is black and dark. I know you want it to be something magical.

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #105 on: May 14, 2014, 01:44:48 PM »
Quote from: first paragraph of wikipedia article on dark matter
"Dark matter is a type of matter in astronomy and cosmology hypothesized to account for effects that appear to be the result of mass where no such mass can be seen. Dark matter cannot be seen directly with telescopes; evidently it neither emits nor absorbs light or other electromagnetic radiation at any significant level. It is otherwise hypothesized to simply be matter that is not reactant to light."

*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #106 on: May 14, 2014, 01:49:24 PM »
Quote from: first paragraph of wikipedia article on dark matter
"Dark matter is a type of matter in astronomy and cosmology hypothesized to account for effects that appear to be the result of mass where no such mass can be seen. Dark matter cannot be seen directly with telescopes; evidently it neither emits nor absorbs light or other electromagnetic radiation at any significant level. It is otherwise hypothesized to simply be matter that is not reactant to light."

Paraphrased: "dark matter is something we made up to explain things that we cannot explain"

How convenient that it's invisible to the human eye.
Read the FAQS.

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #107 on: May 14, 2014, 01:52:23 PM »
Quote from: first paragraph of wikipedia article on dark matter
"Dark matter is a type of matter in astronomy and cosmology hypothesized to account for effects that appear to be the result of mass where no such mass can be seen. Dark matter cannot be seen directly with telescopes; evidently it neither emits nor absorbs light or other electromagnetic radiation at any significant level. It is otherwise hypothesized to simply be matter that is not reactant to light."

Paraphrased: "dark matter is something we made up to explain things that we cannot explain"

How convenient that it's invisible to the human eye.

I agree. We have not directly observed dark matter. What we do have is indirect evidence. In light of that evidence we use this placeholder name [Dark Matter] until a time in which we know more information. Is it ok with you that humanity does not have answers for everything? Does this make the world flat?

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #108 on: May 14, 2014, 01:56:53 PM »
Also, I just want to point out....

In your view, scientists and society lies to us about space, the earth, etc....

So why don't they just make up some convincing stuff about what dark matter is and then show us some CGI and say that it is real? If it is so easy to lie to us about stuff like this, then why not make up some better lies about dark matter? Why would science instead choose to be humble and admit that we don't really know what it is.

Seems pretty honorable to me. It seems pretty "scientific".


*

V

  • 304
  • icosatetrachoron
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #109 on: May 14, 2014, 01:59:28 PM »
Most of this is paraphrased from Tinangel's explanation of Aether, which I agree with.

Aetheric Wind is the upward flow of aether swirling about the earth-disc due to UA.  Aether is moving faster than the Earth, and it actually causes the earth to accelerate upward.  UA is the force that gives rise to gravity, and as Aether propagates light, its motion upward also causes the curvature of light that causes us to perceive sunrise/set, as well as accounting for round-earth-esque phenomena such as certain observations of the sinking ship effect.

... connected to Aetheric Wind is the idea of the Aetheric Whirlpool.  Aether rushes up around the disc of earth, it comes back together above us swirling in a great vortex, not entirely dissimilar to water in a drain.  It is this swirling motion that is thought to give rise to the relative motions of the sun and moon, and also accounts for the fact that the sun moves faster in its orbit when it is closer to the edge of the disc, where it is inferred that the aetheric whirlpool spins faster, or at the very least has a more direct effect on the sun and moon.  Eddies in this aetheric whirlpool also account for discrepancies in things like sight distance and local gravity.
What is the Aether made of?
What causes the Aether to move?
i don't need a signature. go away.

*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #110 on: May 14, 2014, 02:00:00 PM »
Is it ok with you that humanity does not have answers for everything? Does this make the world flat?

It's not OK when FE theory explains it better. Thank you for admitting that dark matter is made up, however. That's more than other RE'ers have admitted.

In your view, scientists and society lies to us about space, the earth, etc....

So why don't they just make up some convincing stuff about what dark matter is and then show us some CGI and say that it is real? If it is so easy to lie to us about stuff like this, then why not make up some better lies about dark matter? Why would science instead choose to be humble and admit that we don't really know what it is.

Seems pretty honorable to me. It seems pretty "scientific".

This is because independent scientists would disprove the fabricated evidence, like we've done with gravity and other RE theories. The NWO would not want to put itself out there to be disproved so easily because this would expose them.

What is the Aether made of?
What causes the Aether to move?

Aether is made of aether. Aether propels itself. Aether was formed during the Big Bang and has been traveling outward ever since. The Earth disc just happened to get caught up in the blast. Since there is nothing to slow aether down, it just keeps swirling and moving through space... pushing everything it comes in contact with.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2014, 02:02:01 PM by Vauxhall »
Read the FAQS.

*

V

  • 304
  • icosatetrachoron
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #111 on: May 14, 2014, 02:03:41 PM »
What causes the Earth to not disintegrate? Gravity is holding it together.

Why does the aether keep moving? It should lose energy if it is pushing the earth upwards.

What particle is the aether made of? Neutrinos?

Also, you haven't proven anything wrong about gravitation.

Dark matter is not made up. We know that 23% of all energy in the universe consists of dark matter, 4.9% of matter and the rest dark energy. That's more than you know about your aether.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2014, 02:05:52 PM by V »
i don't need a signature. go away.

?

Starman

  • 3860
  • Never miss a day to learn something
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #112 on: May 14, 2014, 02:05:25 PM »
Where do Aetheric Wind comes from?

I will answer your question, but before I do I would like to ask some of my own... Where does mass come from? Where does dark matter come from? Where does gravity come from? What happens to the force you perceive as "gravity" when there is no mass? Does it just vanish? How is that possible?
Sorry but you first. I know you want to divert your answer with endless question but one at a time. I ask a simple question and not a series of question. We were debating  Aetheric Winds not gravity.

?

Starman

  • 3860
  • Never miss a day to learn something
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #113 on: May 14, 2014, 02:07:57 PM »
"Because it is dark" is not a serious answer. Try again.
I can explain how dark matter is theorized but that is not the topic.

*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #114 on: May 14, 2014, 02:09:00 PM »
Sorry but you first. I know you want to divert your answer with endless question but one at a time. I ask a simple question and not a series of question. We were debating  Aetheric Winds not gravity.

Are you saying that you cannot answer my questions?

Besides, I have already answered your question. Try to keep up, Starboy.
Read the FAQS.

?

Starman

  • 3860
  • Never miss a day to learn something
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #115 on: May 14, 2014, 02:09:56 PM »
Quote from: first paragraph of wikipedia article on dark matter
"Dark matter is a type of matter in astronomy and cosmology hypothesized to account for effects that appear to be the result of mass where no such mass can be seen. Dark matter cannot be seen directly with telescopes; evidently it neither emits nor absorbs light or other electromagnetic radiation at any significant level. It is otherwise hypothesized to simply be matter that is not reactant to light."

Paraphrased: "dark matter is something we made up to explain things that we cannot explain"

How convenient that it's invisible to the human eye.
That is completely not true.

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #116 on: May 14, 2014, 02:10:14 PM »
It's not OK when FE theory explains it better. Thank you for admitting that dark matter is made up, however. That's more than other RE'ers have admitted.

Bullshit. I've never witnessed FET explain anything, ever. It fails on everything. In any case, I did not admit Dark Matter is made up. There is INDIRECT evidence of it's existence. Which is more evidence than there is of anything that FET offers.

This is because independent scientists would disprove the fabricated evidence, like we've done with gravity and other RE theories. The NWO would not want to put itself out there to be disproved so easily because this would expose them.

You've done no such thing. It sounds like you are trying to appeal to authority here despite the fact that the authority unanimously believes in gravity and a spherical earth. There is this corner of trolls on the internet called the Flat Earth Society who might tell you otherwise, without a smidgen of evidence. If you are gonna appeal to authority, make sure that authority at least agrees with your claim.

Aether is made of aether. Aether propels itself. Aether was formed during the Big Bang and has been traveling outward ever since. The Earth disc just happened to get caught up in the blast. Since there is nothing to slow aether down, it just keeps swirling and moving through space... pushing everything it comes in contact with.

You are just talking about dark energy now. Aether was invented because of what we didn't understand about light. We assumed that there must be a medium in space for light to propagate through. It was never suggested that it is anything more than a medium. We now know that light does not need a medium and so died the hypothesis of the aether.

I do believe, however, that the big bang caused a massive gravitational wave and that that is essentially what dark energy is.

?

Starman

  • 3860
  • Never miss a day to learn something
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #117 on: May 14, 2014, 02:10:54 PM »
Sorry but you first. I know you want to divert your answer with endless question but one at a time. I ask a simple question and not a series of question. We were debating  Aetheric Winds not gravity.

Are you saying that you cannot answer my questions?

Besides, I have already answered your question. Try to keep up, Starboy.
I can but like you said one at a time. You first.

*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #118 on: May 14, 2014, 02:13:47 PM »
Sorry but you first. I know you want to divert your answer with endless question but one at a time. I ask a simple question and not a series of question. We were debating  Aetheric Winds not gravity.

Are you saying that you cannot answer my questions?

Besides, I have already answered your question. Try to keep up, Starboy.
I can but like you said one at a time. You first.

I have answered your question, Starboy.

Please read previous posts. Aether is made of aether which was created during the big bang. If you don't accept my answer, too bad. That doesn't change the fact that I gave you an explanation already. Now, answer my questions please.
Read the FAQS.

*

V

  • 304
  • icosatetrachoron
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #119 on: May 14, 2014, 02:16:38 PM »
Aether was formed during the Big Bang

Good job, you have just admitted that gravity exists. That's more than most FE'ers have admitted.

During the first 10^-30 seconds or so of the universe, gravity was repulsive and the universe expanded by a factor of 10^30. This is a fundamental element of the Big Bang (called inflation) and there is strong evidence to support it.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2014, 02:22:53 PM by V »
i don't need a signature. go away.