The Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Believers => Topic started by: sandokhan on July 14, 2009, 06:59:41 AM

Title: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 14, 2009, 06:59:41 AM
Flat Earth Theory

New Radical Chronology of History

Riemann's Zeta Function and the Sacred Cubit

Ether/Aether Theory


FET is a subset of a larger topic: the new radical chronology of history.

The new chronology of history: the correct chronology starts in the year 1000 AD, nothing is known prior to 800 AD.

The new radical chronology of history: each and every event assumed to have taken place prior to 1780 AD has been totally forged/invented/falsified. History is just some 365 years old (I started with a figure of 500 years, and slowly reduced the period to 364-365 years).

Christ was crucified at Constantinople some 260 years ago, and the falsification of each and every known religious text begun soon after, in the period 1775-1790 AD.

The Deluge occurred some 310 years ago; while the dinosaurs were created a few decades earlier, after Adam and Eve joined the one million pairs of humans which already were living beyond the Garden of Eden.

Each and every statement described above will be proven, using the most precise astronomical datings possible, from Gauss' Easter formula, to the dating using the comets' tails rate of dispersion of matter, see pages 7-12.

The architects of the Gizeh pyramid did use the arctangent function, the precise proofs on page 11.

Many more topics covered: the Allais effect, the acceleration of the rate of axial precession, chaos theory and the RE equations of motion, the Tunguska explosion caused by the ball lightning objects created by N. Tesla, many more details included.


https://web.archive.org/web/20101219061827/http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1183 (https://web.archive.org/web/20101219061827/http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1183) ( (the first FET faq written some seven years ago; it includes only a small portion of the information covered/updated here in much more details; at that point in time, the elements concerning the new radical chronology of history were not included)


Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Lord Wilmore on July 15, 2009, 04:18:45 PM
Whilst I greatly admire your research and the wealth of information you have accumulated, I do perhaps think that calling this a 'new FAQ' is perhaps unnecessarily controvertial. I would certainly support it as an alternative theory, but I do think that presenting it as the de facto new FAQ is perhaps as wise. The information is of great value (I am especially interested in the idea of the Antichone), but it is important that we respect the different viewpoints many FE'ers hold.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 19, 2009, 02:00:40 AM
DAYTON MILLER ETHER DRIFT EXPERIMENTS

http://www.orgonelab.org/miller.htm (full analysis)

Galaev's ether-drift experiments used both visible light and
radiowaves, and "confirmed Miller down to the details". And from
there, as I show, the sidereal-hour variations in Miller's
determinations match very precisely to Bernabei's determinations on
seasonal variations in "dark matter wind" -- another word for
ether-drift, in my view. So only from a superficial knowledge of this
issue, it appears there are quite a few scientists making nearly
identicial "systematic errors". It is one thing to claim, a guy with a
compass in his shaking hand can hardly tell where the needle is
pointing, but if he and a half-dozen others all point to the same
general location, in spite of shaking hands, it might pay to do more
than simply dismiss the issue. But there's other good reason to
dismiss your arguments, and retain clarity about Miller's work.


You evaluated Miller's August 1927 data set, but this is hardly
mentioned in his 1933 paper which you cited, and which is among his
most important ones on the subject. The 1933 paper covered a short
history of the ether-drift determinations, but primarily focused upon
his significant 1925-1926 experiments undertaken atop Mt. Wilson. The
Mt. Wilson experiments are what you should be discussing, not the
insignificant tests in Cleveland either before or after Mt. Wilson.
You proclaim, without evidence firstly that the direction of
ether-drift and velocity determinations were "not significantly better
than any other" direction or velocity -- this might be true for the
1927 data you examined. I have not seen it so cannot say. But it is
most definitely NOT the case for the 1925 and 1926 Mt. Wilson data,
which is what is presented in Miller's 1933 paper.

Shankland, et al, did their best to bury Miller's work forever. They
failed, as their approach was sloppy and showed an ignorance of how the
ether-drift experiments were undertaken. Both they and you ignored the
central issue of the needs for doing these experiments over different
times of year. Yes, you can point to one seasonal epoch and try to
argue that the systematic pattern in Miller's data is due to this or
that. Shankland dismissed the patterns as due to "temperature", but
without any proof as such. You say it is some kind of systematic
error. But firstly you don't look at Miller's most important data
sets, from Mt. Wilson. Even Shankland at least reviewed the correct
data sets, though he "cherry picked" only those data sheets by which he
could compose a verbal argument. Secondly, and more importantly,
neither the Shankland critique, nor your critique, addressed the
SYSTEMATIC SIDEREAL-DAY VARIATION IN THE AXIS OF ETHER-DRIFT, APPARENT
DURING ALL FOUR SEASONAL EPOCHS. The pattern was systematic, as MIller
noted repeatedly, as I show in my papers on Miller as well. When the
data are organized by civil-clock time, no pattern exists. When
organized by sidereal-clock (galactic) time, the pattern appears, and
is the same for all four epochs. There's simply no way you can use
math-arguments to overthrow such a pattern, especially since it has
already been confirmed by others.

How long will modern physics refuse to look at this
issue with open eyes and intelligent, fair-minded critique? Sorry to
say, Tom, your analysis is faulty on a number of levels, and does not
touch Miller's findings and conclusions anymore than the Shankland
hit-article did. It is a pity you did not consult with the advocates
of ether-drift prior to undertaking your analysis, as it could have
saved you a lot of time, and perhaps guided you to analyze the proper
set of data, from Mt. Wilson. But I still don't see how your method
can do more than point out the obvious, that the signal is often buried
in the noise. Lots of scientific problems suffer from this difficulty,
but progress nevertheless towards deeper understandings.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg945952#msg945952 (part II)


Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 21, 2009, 02:10:52 AM
DEPALMA SPINNING BALL EXPERIMENT

Dr. Bruce DePalma, MIT and Harvard

One day, one of the greatest experimental physicists of the 20th century was asked a simple question, by one of his students:

If there was any difference in gravitational effect on a rotating object versus a non-rotating object?

After an extensive search in the literature, no evidence could be found that the experiment had been performed before.

This became one of the most celebrated experiments in modern physics: the spinning ball experiment.


"Conceptually, the experiment could not have been much cheaper, or easier to carry out:

Two 1-inch steel balls (like those found in every pinball machine in America ...) were positioned at the business end of an ordinary power drill; one ball was in a cup attached to the drill's motor shaft, so it spun -- at a very high rate of speed; the other ball was in an identical cup, attached by a bracket to the stationary drill casing, adjusted so that it was level with the first ball.

The experiment consisted of positioning the drill vertically, cups "up," and pressing the drill switch on the motor.

The drill motor (and its associated cup, containing one of the steel balls) rapidly spun up to approximately 27,000 RPM. The cup attached to the side of the drill (with the second steel ball inside it ...) was not rotating ....

When the drill motor had attained its maximum speed, DePalma (or, more often, Ed Delvers, his assistant ...) would shove the drill into the air with a fast, upward motion -- suddenly stopping the drill it in mid-flight. This would, of course, cause both 1-inch pinballs to fly out of their retaining cups in the same upward direction -- the "spinning ball" (hence the name ...) and the non-spinning ball, right beside it.

DePalma, from his years spent working with Dr. Herald Edgerton at MIT -- the famed inventor of "stroboscopic photography" -- was an expert in such stop-motion photography as well. By positioning Delvers against a gridded black background, in a darkened laboratory (below), and then illluminating the two upward-flying steel balls with a powerful strobe light, DePalma was able to take time-exposure photographs with the camera's shutter open, the "pinballs" only illuminated (at 60 times per second) by the strobe's periodic flash ....

The result was a striking "stroboscopic, time-lapse photograph" of the parabolic arc of both steel balls -- flying upward and then downward under Earth's gravitational acceleration (below)."

(https://i.ibb.co/b3JdXR2/dep.jpg)

Looked at even casually, one can instantly see in the resulting time-lapse image (above) that the two pinballs did NOT fly along identical parabolic arcs (as they should have); unmistakably, the steel ball that was rotating (at ~27,000 rpm) flew higher ... and fell faster ... than the companion ball that was not rotating!

An experimental result in direct violation of everything physicists have thought they've known about both Newton's Laws and Einstein's Relativity ... for almost (in the case of Newton ...) three full centuries!


Dr. Bruce DePalma graduated from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1958. He attended graduate school in Electrical Engineering and Physics at M.I.T. and Harvard University. At M.I.T. he was a lecturer in Photographic Science in the Laboratory of Dr. Harold Edgerton and directed 3-D color photographic research for Dr. Edwin Land of Polaroid Corporation.


The results of the Spinning Ball Experiment were published in the British Scientific Research Association Journal in 1976. This experiment was also outlined personally by DePalma to Dr. Edward Purcell, one of the most eminent experimental physicists from Harvard at that time. According to DePalma, Purcell, after contemplating the experiment for several minutes, remarked "This will change everything."


The only difference was that one ball was rotating 27,000 times per minute and the other was stationary. The rotating ball traveled higher and then descended faster than its counterpart, which violated all known laws of physics.

The only explanation for this effect is that both balls are drawing energy into themselves from an unseen source, and the rotating ball is thus “soaking up” more of this energy than its counterpart – energy that would normally exist as gravity, moving down into the earth.

With the addition of torsion-field research we can see that the spinning ball was able to harness naturally spiraling torsion waves in its environment, which gave it an additional supply of energy.


A ball spinning at 27,000 RPM and a non-spinning ball were catapulted side-by-side with equal momentum and projection angle. In defiance of all who reject the ether as unrealistic, the spinning ball actually weighed less, and traveled higher than its non-spinning counterpart. Those who attribute this to an aerodynamic or atmospheric effect, please note that it works just as well in a vacuum. Also note, this effect has since been verified by other researchers. The decrease in weight of the spinning ball - anti-gravity - can explain why the spinning object goes higher and falls faster than the identical non-rotating control. Current thinking is that there is no special interaction between rotation and gravity. The behavior of rotating objects is simply the addition of ether energy to whatever motion the rotating object is making.


The law of universal gravitation totally violated: FOR THE SAME MASS OF THE STEEL BALLS, AND THE SAME SUPPOSED LAW OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITY, THE ROTATING BALL WEIGHED LESS AND TRAVELED HIGHER THAN THE NON-ROTATING BALL.


More experiments performed by Dr. Bruce DePalma, one of the America's greatest physicists of the 20th century:

A prime example of this is provided by the spinning ball experiments of Bruce DePalma.

He projected two metal balls upwards inside a vacuum container, one spinning at some 20,000 rpm and the other non-spinning, and observed any differences.
He discovered that the spinning ball moved higher and further and also fell faster than the non-spinning one.

(http://www.esotericscience.com/spinball.gif)

Back in the 70's Bruce Depalma did a series of tests involving spinning objects. In his published findings he goes on to describe that a ball spun at a high rate of speed will actually travel higher (sometimes 20% higher) and fall faster then a ball that is not spinning. Now of course the balls are identical and launched at the same trajectory. This test was also done in a vacuum to go on and prove that drag couldn't have an effect on it.


DePalma’s experiment with steel balls in 1972 showed that certain physical properties of an object are radically altered—both its mass and inertia—if it is rotated. According to DePalma, rotation produces a force field, specifically around the main axis of the rotating object, that he measured and called a torsion field or spin field. Time-lapse stroboscopic photographs revealed that the steel ball rotating at ~27,000 rpm flew higher and fell faster than the companion ball that was not rotating. DePalma had since conducted experiments on “bodies in rotation” including massive objects (e.g., over 30 lbs), spinning at very high velocities (~7600 revolutions/minute).



Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 26, 2009, 06:52:44 AM
GAUSS EASTER FORMULA APPLIED TO THE CHRONOLOGY OF HISTORY

According to the official RE equations of orbital mechanics, the ones in question here, the vernal equinox fell on March 21, in the year 325 AD.

I am going to prove to you that no such thing ever happened, thus showing the utter fallacy of the differential equation approach to understanding orbital mechanics.

You also seem to forget that just as Einstein fudged his Mercury equation to fit the results, so the conspirators who invented the RE differential equations of motion had to modify drastically not only the masses of the planets and the Sun, but also their corresponding distances from Earth, in order to, at least, offer accurate results for a time span not extending beyond some three hundred years.


Now, Gauss' Easter formula is the most accurate astronomical dating tool at our disposal.

A brief summary of the dating of the First Council of Nicaea and the startling conclusions following the fact that the Gregorian calendar reform never occurred in 1582 AD.


Let us turn to the canonical mediaeval ecclesial tractate - Matthew Vlastar’s Collection of Rules Devised by Holy Fathers, or The Alphabet Syntagma. This rather voluminous book represents the rendition of the rules formulated by the Ecclesial and local Councils of the Orthodox Church.

Matthew Vlastar is considered to have been a Holy Hierarch from Thessalonica, and written his tractate in the XIV century. Today’s copies are of a much later date, of course. A large part of Vlastar’s Collection of Rules Devised by Holy Fathers contains the rules for celebrating Easter. Among other things, it says the following:


“The Easter Rules makes the two following restrictions: it should not be celebrated together with the Judaists, and it can only be celebrated after the spring equinox. Two more had to be added later, namely: celebrate after the first full moon after the equinox, but not any day – it should be celebrated on the first Sunday after the equinox. All of these restrictions, except for the last one, are still valid (in times of Matthew Vlastar – the XIV century – Auth.), although nowadays we often celebrate on the Sunday that comes later. Namely, we always count two days after the Lawful Easter (that is, the Passover, or the full moon – Auth.) and end up with the subsequent Sunday. This didn’t happen out of ignorance or lack of skill on the part of the Elders, but due to lunar motion”

Let us emphasize that the quoted Collection of Rules Devised by Holy Fathers is a canonical mediaeval clerical volume, which gives it all the more authority, since we know that up until the XVII century, the Orthodox Church was very meticulous about the immutability of canonical literature and kept the texts exactly the way they were; with any alteration a complicated and widely discussed issue that would not have passed unnoticed.

So, by approximately 1330 AD, when Vlastar wrote his account, the last condition of Easter was violated: if the first Sunday happened to be within two days after the full moon, the celebration of Easter was postponed until the next weekend. This change was necessary because of the difference between the real full moon and the one computed in the Easter Book. The error, of which Vlastar was aware, is twenty-four hours in 304 years.

Therefore the Easter Book must have been written around AD 722 (722 = 1330 - 2 x 304). Had Vlastar known of the Easter Book’s 325 AD canonization, he would have noticed the three-day gap that had accumulated between the dates of the computed and the real full moon in more than a thousand years. So he either was unaware of the Easter Book or knew the correct date when it was written, which could not be near 325 AD.

G. Nosovsky: So, why the astronomical context of the Paschalia contradicts Scaliger’s dating (alleged 325 AD) of the Nicaean Council where the Paschalia was canonized?

This contradiction can easily be seen from the roughest of calculations.

1) The difference between the Paschalian full moons and the real ones grows at the rate of one day in 300 years.

2) A two-day difference had accumulated by the time of Vlastar, which is roughly dated 1330 AD.

3) Ergo, the Paschalia was compiled somewhere around 730 AD, since

1330 – (300 x 2) = 730.

It is understood that the Paschalia could only be canonized by the Council sometime later. But this fails to correspond to Scaliger’s dating of its canonization as 325 AD in any way at all!

Let us emphasize, that Matthew Vlastar himself, doesn’t see any contradiction here, since he is apparently unaware of the Nicaean Council’s dating as the alleged year 325 AD. A natural hypothesis: this traditional dating was introduced much later than Vlastar’s age. Most probably, it was first calculated in Scaliger’s time.

With the Easter formula derived by C.F. Gauss in 1800, Nosovsky calculated the Julian dates of all spring full moons from the first century AD up to his own time and compared them with the Easter dates obtained from the Easter Book. He reached a surprising conclusion: three of the four conditions imposed by the First Council of Nicaea were violated until 784, whereas Vlastar had noted that “all the restrictions except the last one have been kept firmly until now.” When proposing the year 325, Scaliger had no way of detecting this fault, because in the sixteenth century the full-moon calculations for the distant past couldn’t be performed with precision.

Another reason to doubt the validity of 325 AD is that the Easter dates repeat themselves every 532 years. The last cycle started in 1941, and previous ones were 1409 to 1940, 877 to 1408 and 345 to 876. But a periodic process is similar to drawing a circle—you can choose any starting point. Therefore, it seems peculiar for the council to have met in 325 AD and yet not to have begun the Easter cycle until 345.

Nosovsky thought it more reasonable that the First Council of Nicaea had taken place in 876 or 877 AD, the latter being the starting year of the first Easter cycle after 784 AD, which is when the Easter Book must have been compiled. This conclusion about the date of the First Council of Nicaea agreed with his full-moon calculations, which showed that the real and the computed full moons occurred on the same day only between 700 and 1000 AD. From 1000 on, the real full moons occurred more than twenty-four hours after the computed ones, whereas before 700 the order was reversed. The years 784 and 877 also match the traditional opinion that about a century had passed between the compilation and the subsequent canonization of the Easter Book.

G. Nosovky:

The Council that introduced the Paschalia – according to the modern tradition as well as the mediaeval one, was the Nicaean Council – could not have taken place before 784 AD, since this was the first year when the calendar date for the Christian Easter stopped coinciding with the Passover full moon due to slow astronomical shifts of lunar phases.

The last such coincidence occurred in 784 AD, and after that year, the dates of Easter and Passover drifted apart forever. This means the Nicaean Council could not have possibly canonized the Paschalia in IV AD, when the calendar Easter Sunday would coincide with the Passover eight (!) times – in 316, 319, 323, 343, 347, 367, 374, and 394 AD, and would even precede it by two days five (!) times, which is directly forbidden by the fourth Easter rule, that is, in 306 and 326 (allegedly already a year after the Nicaean Council), as well as the years 346, 350, and 370.

Thus, if we’re to follow the consensual chronological version, we’ll have to consider the first Easter celebrations after the Nicaean Council to blatantly contradict three of the four rules that the Council decreed specifically for this feast! The rules allegedly become broken the very next year after the Council decrees them, yet start to be followed zealously and in full detail five centuries (!) after that.

Let us note that J.J. Scaliger could not have noticed this obvious nonsense during his compilation of the consensual ancient chronology, since computing true full moon dates for the distant past had not been a solved problem in his epoch.

The above mentioned absurdity was noticed much later, when the state of astronomical science became satisfactory for said purpose, but it was too late already, since Scaliger’s version of chronology had already been canonized, rigidified, and baptized “scientific”, with all major corrections forbidden.


Now, the ecclesiastical vernal equinox was set on March 21st because the Church of Alexandria, whose staff were reputed to have astronomical expertise, reckoned that March 21st was the date of the equinox in 325 AD, the year of the First Council of Nicaea.

The Council of Laodicea was a regional synod of approximately thirty clerics from Asia Minor that assembled about 363–364 AD in Laodicea, Phrygia Pacatiana, in the official chronology.

The major concerns of the Council involved regulating the conduct of church members. The Council expressed its decrees in the form of written rules or canons.

However, the most pressing issue, the fact that the calendar Easter Sunday would coincide with the Passover eight (!) times – in 316, 319, 323, 343, 347, 367, 374, and 394 AD, and would even precede it by two days five (!) times, which is directly forbidden by the fourth Easter rule, that is, in 306 and 326 (allegedly already a year after the Nicaean Council), as well as the years 346, 350, and 370 was NOT presented during this alleged Council of Laodicea.


We are told that the motivation for the Gregorian reform was that the Julian calendar assumes that the time between vernal equinoxes is 365.25 days, when in fact it is about 11 minutes less. The accumulated error between these values was about 10 days (starting from the Council of Nicaea) when the reform was made, resulting in the equinox occurring on March 11 and moving steadily earlier in the calendar, also by the 16th century AD the winter solstice fell around December 11.


But, in fact, as we see from the information presented in the preceeding paragraphs, the Council of Nicaea could not have taken place any earlier than the year 876-877 e.n., which means that in the year 1582, the winter solstice would have arrived on December 16, not at all on December 11.

Papal Bull, Gregory XIII, 1582:

Therefore we took care not only that the vernal equinox returns on its former date, of which it has already deviated approximately ten days since the Nicene Council, and so that the fourteenth day of the Paschal moon is given its rightful place, from which it is now distant four days and more, but also that there is founded a methodical and rational system which ensures, in the future, that the equinox and the fourteenth day of the moon do not move from their appropriate positions.


Given the fact that in the year 1582, the winter solstice would have arrived on December 16, not at all on December 11, this discrepancy could not have been missed by T. Brahe, or G. Galilei, or J. Kepler - thus we can understand the fiction at work in the official chronology.

Newton agrees with the date of December 11, 1582 as well; moreover, Britain and the British Empire adopted the Gregorian calendar in 1752 (official chronology); again, more fiction at work: no European country could have possibly adopted the Gregorian calendar reformation in the period 1582-1800, given the absolute fact that the winter solstice must have falled on December 16 in the year 1582 AD, and not at all on December 11 (official chronology).


The conclusions are as follows:

No historical or astronomical proof exists that before 1700 AD any gradual shift in the orientation of Earth's axis of rotation (axial precession) ever took place. The 10 day cumulative error in the Vernal Equinox date since the Council of Nicaea until the year 1582 AD is due just to the reform of the Julian calendar: if we add the axial precession argument, then  the cumulative errors would have added to even more than 10 days, because of the reverse precessional movement. No axial precession means that the Earth did not ever orbit around the Sun, as we have been led to believe. And it means that the entire chronology of the official history has been forged at least after 1750 AD.

In the FE theory, the approximately 50 seconds of arc per year (1 degree/71.6 years) change of longitude of the Pole Star is due to the movement of the Pole Star itself and NOT due to any axial precession of the Earth.


EXPLICIT DATING GIVEN BY MATTHEW VLASTAR



It is indeed amazing that Matthew Vlastar’s Collection of Rules Devised by Holy Fathers – the book that every Paschalia researcher refers to – contains an explicit dating of the time the Easter Book was compiled. It is even more amazing that none of the numerous researchers of Vlastar’s text appeared to have noticed it (?!), despite the fact that the date is given directly after the oft-quoted place of Vlastar’s book, about the rules of calculating the Easter date. Moreover, all quoting stops abruptly immediately before the point where Vlastar gives this explicit date.



What could possibly be the matter? Why don’t modern commentators find themselves capable of quoting the rest of Vlastar’s text? We are of the opinion that they attempt to conceal from the reader the fragments of ancient texts that explode the entire edifice of Scaliger’s chronology. We shall quote this part completely:



Matthew Vlastar:



“There are four rules concerning the Easter. The first two are the apostolic rules, and the other two are known from tradition. The first rule is that the Easter should be celebrated after the spring equinox. The second is that is should not be celebrated together with the Judeans. The third: not just after the equinox, but also after the first full moon following the equinox. And the fourth: not just after the full moon, but the first Sunday following the full moon… The current Paschalia was compiled and given to the church by our fathers in full faith that it does not contradict any of the quoted postulates. (This is the place the quoting usually stops, as we have already mentioned – Auth.). They created it the following way: 19 consecutive years were taken starting with the year 6233 since Genesis (= 725 AD – Auth.) and up until the year 6251 (= 743 AD – Auth.), and the date of the first full moon after the spring equinox was looked up for each one of them. The Paschalia makes it obvious that when the Elders were doing it; the equinox fell on the 21st of March” ([518]).



Thus, the Circle for Moon – the foundation of the Paschalia – was devised according to the observations from the years 725-743 AD; hence, the Paschalia couldn’t possibly have been compiled, let alone canonized, before that.


I have just proven to you that the spring equinox could not, and did not, fall on March 21, in the year 325 AD, CONTRARY to the figures implied by the RE equations of orbital mechanics.


Gauss' Easter formula proves immediately the colossal errors inherent in the present day calculations based on the faulty RE equations of orbital mechanics.


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1674108#msg1674108

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1674662#msg1674662

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1638504#msg1638504

Gauss' Easter formula proves that the Council of Nicaea could not have taken place before the year 876-877 AD, and that the vernal equinox fell on March 21, in the year 743 AD (and not in the year 325 AD).


Dead Sea scrolls forgery:

https://web.archive.org/web/20071018054645/http://www.thebulletin.us/site/news.cfm?newsid=18840220&BRD=2737&PAG=461&dept_id=576361&rfi=6

http://salainenevankelista.blogspot.ro/2012/02/who-claimed-dead-sea-scrolls-hoax.html

http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=30145#30145

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 27, 2009, 06:01:41 AM
MAGNETRICITY = ETHER MAGNETISM

Electricity = Magnetism - both consist of subquark flow, one in a conductor, the other in space

This flow is made up of TWO currents, of opposing spin, traveling in double torsion fashion: the dextrorotatory subquarks and the laevorotatory subquarks.


The recent discovery of magnetic monopoles:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1615813#msg1615813 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1615813#msg1615813)

Magnetic monopoles = subquarks

https://web.archive.org/web/20120303052100/http://smphillips.8m.com/pdfs/ESP_of_Quarks.pdf (https://web.archive.org/web/20120303052100/http://smphillips.8m.com/pdfs/ESP_of_Quarks.pdf) (Dr. Stephen Phillips, Cambridge, UCLA)


PRECISE, REAL TIME, PHOTOGRAPHS OF ELECTRICAL CURRENTS, THE DOUBLE VORTEX/SPIN/STRINGS AT WORK:

(https://image.ibb.co/mQxM0d/ma1_zpstnoewm3f.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/dzvKmJ/ma2_zps4ijijfcw.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/diVr0d/ma3_zpsyg7asb12.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/dEuUmJ/spintro1.jpg)

SPINTRONICS, secret world of magnets, the most thorough work on the double helix theory of the magnetic field (double helix of the telluric currents):

https://web.archive.org/web/20160508175955/http://freenrg.info/Misc/The_Secret_World_Of_Magnets.pdf

HERE IS HOW THE FLOW OF SUBQUARKS OCCURS IN A MAGNET:

(https://i.ibb.co/C83PjcW/leed.jpg)

Not only North-Center-South laevorotatory subquarks, but ALSO a South-Center-North flow of dextrorotatory subquarks/magnetic monopoles.

(http://peswiki.com/images/a/ab/Ed_Leedskalnin-magnets_circulation.gif)


Absolute proof of the existence of subquarks:


http://web.archive.org/web/20150424110749/http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_09_4_phillips.pdf (http://web.archive.org/web/20150424110749/http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_09_4_phillips.pdf) (Dr. Stephen Phillips, UCLA, Cambridge)


http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1401101#msg1401101 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1401101#msg1401101) (what baryons, mesons, quarks, subquarks look like)

This is what the graviton/magnetic monopole looks like, both spins:

(http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/fig003.gif)

HYDROGEN ATOM: 18 SUBQUARKS - 9 LAEVOROTATORY AND 9 DEXTROROTATORY subquarks

A proton is made up of NINE laevorotatory subquarks - an electron is actually comprised of NINE dextrorotatory subquarks (called now preons).

However, modern science has mistakenly named a SINGLE dextrorotatory subquark as an electron and has ascribed THE TOTAL charge of the NINE corresponding subquarks as the total negative charge of a single electron, thus confusing the whole matter.


TELLURIC CURRENTS are represented by double torsion waves of BOTH laevorotatory (antigravity) and dextrorotatory (terrestrial gravity) subquarks.


NOW WE CAN UNDERSTAND HOW ELECTRICITY FLOWS:

An electric current brought to bear upon the subquarks checks their proper motions, i.e., renders them slower; the subquarks exposed to it arrange themselves in parallel lines, and in each line the heart-shaped depression receives the flow, which passes out through the apex into the depression of the next, and so on. The subquarks always set themselves to the current.  In all the diagrams the heart-shaped body, exaggerated to show the depression caused by the inflow and the point caused by the outflow, is a single subquark.

(http://www.alliancesforhumanity.com/matter/matter_files/image016.jpg)


Let us now back to the Nipher experiments.

The relationship between gravitation and the electric field was first observed experimentally by Dr. Francis Nipher. Nipher's conclusion was that sheilded electrostatic fields directly influence the action of gravitation. He further concluded that gravitation and electrical fields are absolutely linked.


http://www.rexresearch.com/nipher/nipher1.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/nipher/nipher1.htm)

The relationship between gravitation and the electric field was first observed experimentally by Dr. Francis Nipher. Dr. Francis Nipher conducted extensive experiments during 1918, on a modified Cavendish experiment. He reproduced the classical arrangements for the experiment, where gravitational attraction could be measured between free-swinging masses, and a large fixed central mass. Dr. Nipher modified the Cavendish experiment by applying a large electrical field to the large central mass, which was sheilded inside a Faraday cage. When electrostatic charge was applied to the large fixed mass, the free-swinging masses exhibited a reduced attraction to the central mass, when the central mass was only slightly charged. As the electric field strength was increased, there arose a voltage threshold which resulted in no attraction at all between the fixed mass and the free-swinging masses. Increasing the potential applied to the central mass beyond that threshold, resulted in the free-swinging masses being repelled (!) from the fixed central mass. Nipher's conclusion was that sheilded electrostatic fields directly influence the action of gravitation. He further concluded that gravitation and electrical fields are absolutely linked.



Electricity is absolutely linked to terrestrial gravity.

Since subquarks = magnetic monopoles, we can see the beautiful and superb link between the Biefeld-Brown effect and the DePalma/Kozyrev/Allais effects:

In one case (Biefeld-Brown effect, performed in vacuum) the very strong electrical field will act as an attractor to telluric/subquark strings to form a plasma tornado around the capacitor, thus rendering it opaque to the usual dextrorotatory strings which do cause terrestrial gravity.

In the other, by torsion, in the DePalma experiment, the subquarks strings will also form a tornado around the ball/object thus producing the noted/recorded antigravitational effects.

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 28, 2009, 05:13:28 AM
BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT

Dr. Paul Biefeld - former classmate of A. Einstein

T. Townsend Brown - student of Dr. Biefeld, studied at CalTech, he demonstrated his ideas on electricity and gravity to invited guests such as the physicist and Nobel laureate, Dr. Robert A. Millikan.

When the poles of a freely suspended charged capacitor (even in vacuum) were placed on a horizontal axis, a forward thrust would be produced which would move the capacitor in the direction of the positive pole. The direction of thrust would reverse in conjunction with a polarity change. This is the phenomenon known as the Biefield-Brown Effect.


VACUUM TEST #1

http://lifters.online.fr/lifters/ascvacuum/index.htm (http://lifters.online.fr/lifters/ascvacuum/index.htm) (includes all necessary technical information and the video itself)


At the pressure of 1.72 x 10^-6 Torr ( High Vacuum conditions ), the apparatus rotates when the High Voltage is increased from 0 to +45 KV.


VACUUM TEST #2

https://web.archive.org/web/20050216062907/http://www-personal.umich.edu/~reginald/liftvac.html (https://web.archive.org/web/20050216062907/http://www-personal.umich.edu/~reginald/liftvac.html) (includes technical information and video)


VACUUM TEST #3

https://web.archive.org/web/20070212193741/http://www.t-spark.de/t-spark/t-sparke/liftere.htm (https://web.archive.org/web/20070212193741/http://www.t-spark.de/t-spark/t-sparke/liftere.htm) (includes technical information and video)


MULTIPLE TESTS PERFORMED IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT ION WIND COULD NOT HAVE AN INFLUENCE ON THE EXPERIMENTS THEMSELVES:

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/lifteriw.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/lifteriw.htm)


VACUUM TEST #4: PROJECT MONTGOLFIER

https://web.archive.org/web/20140110041712/http://projetmontgolfier.info/ (https://web.archive.org/web/20140110041712/http://projetmontgolfier.info/)

https://web.archive.org/web/20131025082102/http://projetmontgolfier.info/TT_Brown_Proposal.html (https://web.archive.org/web/20131025082102/http://projetmontgolfier.info/TT_Brown_Proposal.html)

https://web.archive.org/web/20130522083124/http://projetmontgolfier.info/uploads/Section_3__Final_Report.pdf (https://web.archive.org/web/20130522083124/http://projetmontgolfier.info/uploads/Section_3__Final_Report.pdf)

In 1955 and 1956 Townsend Brown made two trips to Paris where he conducted tests of his electrokinetic apparatus and electrogravitic vacuum chamber tests in collaboration with the French aeronautical company Société National de Construction Aeronautiques du Sud Ouest (S.N.C.A.S.O.) .

In addition the Project Montgolfier team constructed a very large vacuum chamber for performing vacuum tests of smaller discs at a pressure of 5 X 10-5 mm Hg:

(http://starburstfound.org/electrograviticsblog/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Mont-3-1024x720.jpg)

Left: Vacuum chamber vessel (1.4 m diameter) for conducting electrogravitic tests. Right: Vessel opened to show test rotor rig within. (photos courtesy of J. Cornillon)


Reading the section describing the vacuum chamber results, we learn that when the discs are operated at atmospheric pressure they move in the direction of the leading edge wire regardless of outboard wire polarity.  This indicates that in normal atmospheric conditions the discs are propelled forward primarily by unbalanced electrostatic forces due to the prevailing nonlinear field configuration (which causes thrust in the direction of the low field intensity ion cloud regardless of the ion polarity).  On the other hand, the report says that under high vacuum conditions the discs always moved in the direction of the positive pole, regardless of the polarity on the outboard wire. 

These vacuum chamber experiments were a decisive milestone in that they demonstrated beyond a doubt that electrogravitic propulsion was a real physical phenomenon. 

PAGE 26 OF THE FINAL REPORT FULLY DESCRIBES THE OBSERVED BIEFELD BROWN EFFECT IN FULL VACUUM CHAMBER

When the DISK SHAPED CAPACITOR WAS USED, the total deviation/movement was A FULL 30 DEGREES (deviation totale du systeme 30 degre).


http://users.erols.com/iri/TTBROWN2.htm (http://users.erols.com/iri/TTBROWN2.htm)

In 1985, Dr. Paul LaViolette was in the Library of Congress in Washington, DC and looked up the work "gravity" in the card catalog. Surprisingly, he found the listing for "Electrogravitics Systems," a report that was missing from the stacks. When the librarian tried to locate any other copies through interlibrary loan, she commented, "It must be an exotic document" because she could find only one in the country which was at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. Thus, LaViolette was successful in obtaining a copy of the formerly classified document. The mystery continued: seven years later when contacting the Wright-Patterson AFB Technical Library, they surprisingly found no reference in the computer-based card catalog. They did locate the document on the shelves, however, after being asked to search for it. To summarize, the report has historic value because:

It validates T.T. Brown's experiments;
It lists the major corporations that were collaborating on electrogravitics;
It includes the requirements for supersonic speed;
It shows the continuity from Project Winterhaven in 1952;
The report includes a list of electrostatic patents;
It had been classified by the Air Force for an undetermined amount of time which underscores its importance.


This is real science, the greatest American physicist of the 20th century, T. Townsend Brown: it should be the privilege of the FES to immediately claim that the Biefeld-Brown effect can only take place on a flat surface of the earth, but instead, it chooses to post on its official page (no less) the catastrophic UA conjecture, without any proofs.


Dr. Francis Nipher one of the most distinguished physicists of the United States:

http://www.accessgenealogy.com/missouri/biography-of-francis-eugene-nipher-ll-d.htm (http://www.accessgenealogy.com/missouri/biography-of-francis-eugene-nipher-ll-d.htm)

The relationship between gravitation and the electric field was first observed experimentally by Dr. Francis Nipher. Nipher's conclusion was that sheilded electrostatic fields directly influence the action of gravitation. He further concluded that gravitation and electrical fields are absolutely linked.


http://www.rexresearch.com/nipher/nipher1.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/nipher/nipher1.htm)

The relationship between gravitation and the electric field was first observed experimentally by Dr. Francis Nipher. Dr. Francis Nipher conducted extensive experiments during 1918, on a modified Cavendish experiment. He reproduced the classical arrangements for the experiment, where gravitational attraction could be measured between free-swinging masses, and a large fixed central mass. Dr. Nipher modified the Cavendish experiment by applying a large electrical field to the large central mass, which was sheilded inside a Faraday cage. When electrostatic charge was applied to the large fixed mass, the free-swinging masses exhibited a reduced attraction to the central mass, when the central mass was only slightly charged. As the electric field strength was increased, there arose a voltage threshold which resulted in no attraction at all between the fixed mass and the free-swinging masses. Increasing the potential applied to the central mass beyond that threshold, resulted in the free-swinging masses being repelled (!) from the fixed central mass. Nipher's conclusion was that sheilded electrostatic fields directly influence the action of gravitation. He further concluded that gravitation and electrical fields are absolutely linked.


Let us also remember the Eotvos experiments, which recorded gravitational anomalies, which also would contradict the UA:

http://mek.oszk.hu/02000/02054/html/onehund.html (http://mek.oszk.hu/02000/02054/html/onehund.html)

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 28, 2009, 07:47:31 AM
CLOUDS

Let us now apply the foregoing mass of theory and experimental data to the one problem which has NEVER been solved in either the RE scenario, or the failed UA conjecture.


A CLOUD IS A VISIBLE MASS OF DROPLETS. The small droplets of water WHICH DO MAKE UP A CLOUD, will have 0.01 mm in diameter.

The tiny particles of water are very densely packed, and may even combine to form larger water molecules, which ARE denser than the surrounding air.

"Water, though eight hundred times heavier than air, is held in droplets, by the millions of tons, miles above the ground. Clouds and mist are composed of droplets which defy gravitation."

In order to explain this on a round earth, with attractive gravity, WE SHOULD HAVE AN UPWARD MOTION PRODUCED BY A CONSTANT STREAM OF WIND, RIGHT UNDERNEATH THE CLOUD, which would move right along with the cloud on a random trajectory.

Under the catastrophic UA scenario, there is no way to explain the presence of clouds from a gravitational point of view: clouds are the most obvious and apparent counterexample to the failed hypothesis in which the Earth is moving upwards.


Let us take a look at the weight of some clouds.


Clouds can have a height ranging from 50 meters to over 5 km, and a length ranging from 100 meters to 1000 km; a cumulus cloud, 1 kilometer in diameter, will weigh 1 million pounds. A cumulonimbus cloud, 5 kilometers in height, and having a diameter of 15 kilometers, will actually weigh 1 MILLION TONS.

Let us go directly to the official textbook on ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCE.


Cloud droplets are also about 1000 times heavier than evaporated water, so they are much heavier than air.

Official science: typical cumulus cloud has some 1/2 g per cubic meter of water density

Typical cumulus cloud = one cubic kilometer in size = one billion km in volume

total water content of the cloud = 500,000,000 grams of water, or 1.1 million pounds

OFFICIAL STANDARD TEXTBOOKS:

Clouds can have a large range of mass per volume, depending on how large and numerous the cloud droplets or ice crystals are that are in them.

How much does the water in a cumulus cloud weigh? Peggy limee, senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado, did the numbers.

"The water in the little cloud weighs about 550 tons," she calculates.



Another concerned scientist writes:

But that doesn't explain why water molecules condensed into liquid form 1000 times denser than the air directly below them, manage to suspend themselves against gravity. The cloud argument based on wind holding them up does not work in this case. And neither does the moist air less dense than dry air argument (although that doesn't work for clouds either because we are talking about condensed water in liquid form not the gaseous vapour form).

Fog can appear on frozen lakes so I doubt convection is operating in that case. We are talking about droplets that are 1000 times the density and weight of the very slow moving warm air below moving upward. There shouldn't be any physical process to overide the gravity pulling on those droplets.

I think it's obvious there is another unexplained process of an electrical nature suspending the water against the pull of gravity.

I find it hard to accept that 1000 times denser and heavier water droplets are able to be suspended by air molecules. They may counteract the pull of gravity for a short while for but the weight should overwhelm this buffeting pretty quick. For it to last even a short while the air molecules would need to be flowing mainly upwards but this certainly isn't true within a milimeter of the surface of the earth. There is a reason the gravity is counteracted and its not convection or updraft. I only state that I believe the reason to have an electrical nature.

I am certain that electricity plays a far larger role generally in the atmosphere than the mainstream is aware of or is willing to admit.

Another writer states:

Floating clouds that defy gravity are a direct observational contradiction to the pseudoscientific cult of gravitation.


http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2007/arch07/071217electricclouds.htm (http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2007/arch07/071217electricclouds.htm)

Cloud formations often exhibit structure that could be the result of something other than blowing winds. Does ionized plasma actually shape the clouds?

In a recent press release, scientists from the Weizmann Institute and the Goddard Space Flight Center announced that a mysterious zone of previously undiscovered particles fills the airspace around clouds.


ONLY the Biefeld-Brown effect can explain HOW clouds weighing billions of tons manage to float above the ground.


"It is proposed that water droplets in clouds experience an antigravity effect. It appears to be related to the Biefield-Brown Effect, where a charged high-voltage planar capacitor tends to move in the direction of the positive electrode. That effect may explain how millions of tons of water can be suspended kilometers above the ground, when cloud droplets are about 1,000 times denser than the surrounding air.


THE BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT EXPLAINS HOW millions of tons of water can remain suspended kilometers above the earth by electrical means.

http://repository.ias.ac.in/16485/

The relaxation time required for a ventilated drop to reach its equilibrium temperature increases with the drop size and is higher for the charged than for the uncharged drops. It is concluded that in a given distance, charged drops will evaporate less than that of uncharged drops.


THE CHARGED DROPS WILL EVAPORATE LESS THAN THE UNCHARGED DROPS. WHY? BECAUSE OF THE BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT, WHICH DOES PROVIDE THE ADDITIONAL ENERGY (ANTIGRAVITATIONAL) IN THE FORM OF LAEVOROTATORY SUBQUARKS.

A TOTAL CONFIRMATION OF THE EXPERIMENTS CARRIED OUT BY DR. FRANCIS NIPHER.

Nikola Tesla, clouds, and stationary waves (telluric currents, ether strings), confirming the discoveries made by the Weizmann Institute and the Goddard Space Flight Center:

“It was on the third of July–the date I shall never forget–when I obtained the first decisive experimental evidence of a truth of overwhelming importance for the advancement of humanity.

A dense mass of strongly charged clouds gathered in the west and towards the evening a violent storm broke loose which, after spending its fury in the mountains, was driven away with great velocity over the plains. Heavy and long persisting arcs formed almost in regular time intervals.

My observations were now greatly facilitated and rendered more accurate by the experiences already gained. I was able to handle my instruments quickly and I was prepared. The recording apparatus being properly adjusted, its indications became fainter and fainter with the increasing distance of the storm until they ceased altogether. I was watching in eager expectation. Surely enough, in a little while the indications again began, grew stronger and stronger and, after passing thru a maximum, gradually decreased and ceased once more.

Many times, in regularly recurring intervals, the same actions were repeated until the storm, which, as evident from simple computations, was moving with nearly constant speed, had retreated to a distance of about three hundred kilometers. Nor did these strange actions stop then, but continued to manifest themselves with undiminished force. Subsequently, similar observations were also made by my assistant, Mr. Fritz Lowenstein, and shortly afterwards several admirable opportunities presented themselves which brought out still more forcibly and unmistakably, the true nature of the wonderful phenomenon. No doubt whatever remained: I was observing stationary waves."

Nikola Tesla, “Transmitting Electrical Energy Without Wires, Scientific American, June 4, 1904, supplement

Tesla's device recorded the influence of stationary waves (telluric currents) upon and from the charged clouds.

"The discovery of the stationary terrestrial waves [indicates]... that, despite its vast extent, the entire planet can be thrown into resonant vibration like a little tuning fork; that electrical oscillations suited to its physical properties and dimensions pass through it unimpeded, in strict obedience to a simple mathematical law, has proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that the Earth, considered as a channel for conveying electrical energy... is infinitely superior to a wire or cable...

Nikola Tesla, 'Tuned Lightening', 1907


THE FRANCIS NIPHER EXPERIMENTS ARE A FACT OF SCIENCE.

www.rexresearch.com/nipher/nipher1.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/nipher/nipher1.htm)

"These results seem to indicate clearly that gravitational attraction between masses of matter depends upon electrical potential due to electrical charges upon them."

Every working day of the following college year has been devoted to testing the validity of the above statement. No results in conflict with it have been obtained. Not only has gravitational attraction been diminished by electrification of the attracting bodies when direct electrical action has been wholly cut off by a metal shield, but it has been made negative. It has been converted into a repulsion. This result has been obtained many times throughout the year. On one occasion during the latter part of the year, this repulsion was made somewhat more than twice as great as normal attraction."

Increasing the potential applied to the central mass beyond that threshold, resulted in the free-swinging masses being repelled (!) from the fixed central mass. Nipher's conclusion was that sheilded electrostatic fields directly influence the action of gravitation. He further concluded that gravitation and electrical fields are absolutely linked.

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 29, 2009, 05:49:46 AM
ALLAIS EFFECT

REFERENCE #1

CONFIRMATION OF THE ALLAIS EFFECT DURING THE 2003 SOLAR ECLIPSE:

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

(it also shows that the effect was confirmed during the August 1999 solar eclipse)


The title of the paper is as follows:

A NEW CONFIRMATION OF THE ALLAIS EFFECT
DURING THE SOLAR ECLIPSE OF 31 MAY 2003

"During the total solar eclipse of 11 August 1999, the existence of the Allais effect was confirmed."

The authors indicate that more measurements/experiments have to be undertaken during future solar eclipses.


REFERENCE #2

CONFIRMATION OF THE ALLAIS EFFECT DURING THE SEPT. 2006 SOLAR ECLIPSE:

http://www.hessdalen.org/sse/program/Articol.pdf

The title of the article is as follows:

A confirmation of the Allais and Jeverdan-Rusu-Antonescu effects
during the solar eclipse from 22 September 2006 , and the quantization
of behaviour of pendulum


"The experiments made with a paraconical pendulum during annular solar eclipse from 22 September 2006 confirm once again the existence of the Allais effect."


REFERENCE #3

CONFIRMATION OF THE ALLAIS EFFECT DURING THE 2008 SOLAR ECLIPSE:

http://ivanik3.narod.ru/Astrophiz/AnomSunEclip/pugarticleGoodey.pdf

Published in the Journal of Advanced Research in Physics


Given the above, the authors consider that it is an inescapable conclusion from our experiments that after the end of the visible eclipse, as the Moon departed the angular vicinity of the Sun, 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.


We therefore are compelled to the opinion that some currently unknown physical influence was at work.


REFERENCE #4

The Allais pendulum effect confirmed in an experiment performed in 1961:

http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf074/sf074a05.htm


REFERENCE #5

Observations of Correlated Behavior of Two Light Torsion Balances and a Paraconical Pendulum in Separate Locations during the Solar Eclipse of January 26th, 2009:


http://www.researchgate.net/publication/235701910_Observations_of_Correlated_Behavior_of_Two_Light_TorsionBalances_and_a_Paraconical_Pendulum_in_Separate_Locationsduring_the_Solar_Eclipse_of_January_26th_2009

http://www.hindawi.com/journals/aa/2012/263818/

Published in the Advances in Astronomy Journal

Another independent confirmation has been obtained of the previously established fact that at the time of solar eclipses, a specific reaction of the torsion balance can be observed. During a solar eclipse, the readings of two neighboring TBs seem to be correlated. This fact demonstrates the nonaleatory character of the reactions of TBs. Consequently, the reaction of these devices is deterministic, not random. A solar eclipse is such a determinant, since upon termination of a solar eclipse, the correlation becomes insignificant. This conclusion is supported by the PP observations. The PP graph and the TB graphs showed obvious similarity, with the coefficient of correlation of these two independent curves being close to 1.

In particular, we wonder how any physical momentum can be transferred to our instrument during a solar eclipse. Gravity can hardly suffice as an explanation even for understanding the results of the PP measurements. The gravitational potential grows slowly and smoothly over a number of days before eclipse and then declines smoothly afterwards without any sudden variations, but we see relatively short-term events. Moreover, gravity is certainly not applicable to the explanation of the results of the TB observations, since the TB is not sensitive to changes in gravitational potential.

The cause of the time lag between the response of the device in Suceava and the reactions of the devices in Kiev also remains unknown. What can be this force which acts so selectively in space and time?

The anomalies found, that defy understanding in terms of modern physics, are in line with other anomalies, described in a recently published compendium “Should the Laws of Gravitation be reconsidered?” [14].


REFERENCE #6

Precise Underground Observations of the Partial Solar Eclipse of 1 June 2011 Using a Foucault Pendulum and a Very Light Torsion Balance

Published in the International Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics Journal


http://www.researchgate.net/publication/235701885_Precise_Underground_Observations_of_the_Partial_Solar_Eclipse_of_1_June_2011_Using_a_Foucault_Pendulum_and_a_Very_Light_Torsion_Balance

http://file.scirp.org/Html/3-4500094_26045.htm

http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=26045


Simultaneous observations of the solar eclipse on 06/01/2011 were carried out using a Foucault pendulum and a torsion balance. The instruments were installed in a salt mine, where the interference was minimal. Both instruments clearly reacted to the eclipse. We conclude that these reactions should not be considered as being gravitational effects.

REFERENCE #7

Dr. Erwin Saxl experiment (1970)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1629054#msg1629054

Published in the Physical Review Journal

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 NEWTONIAN MECHANICS.

For the same masses/corresponding distances of the Earth, Sun and the Moon, during the Allais experiment, the pendulum's direction of rotation changed from clockwise to counterclockwise, at the end of the eclipse it resumed its normal direction of rotation.

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.


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.


In other words, the pendulum motions Allais observed during his two eclipses – 1954 and 1959 -- were physically IMPOSSIBLE … according to all known “textbook physics!”


"Allais used the phrase “a brutal displacement” … to describe the “sudden, extraordinary backwards movement” of the pendulum his laboratory chief had seen (and carefully recorded!), even while not knowing its “mysterious” cause ... until later that same afternoon.

Here (below) is what those “anomalous eclipse motions” in Allias’ pendulum looked like; this graphic, adapted from Scientific American, depicts the mechanical arrangement of Allais’ unique paraconical pendulum (below – left).

The three vertical panels to its right illustrate the pendulum’s “highly anomalous motions” -- recorded during two partial solar eclipses to cross Allais’ Paris laboratory in the 1950’s (the first in 1954, the second in 1959); the phase of each eclipse that corresponded with these “anomalous motions,” is depicted in the last three vertical strips (far right)."

(http://www.enterprisemission.com/Eclipse-Allais-Pendulum-motions.jpg)


"This normal, downward-sloping trend is abruptly REVERSED!

From there, things rapidly got even more bizarre--

As the pendulum’s azimuth motion continues in an accelerating, COUNTER-clockwise direction … 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” (the central green line)] -- before abruptly reversing once more, accelerating again in a CLOCKWISE direction … before eventually “bottoming out” … parallel to the ORIGINAL “Foucault/Earth rotation” downward-sloping trend line!"

HERE ARE THE PRECISE CALCULATIONS INVOLVING THE ALLAIS EFFECT:

(https://image.ibb.co/bNG9mJ/Capture_zpskd3rcykr.jpg)


Dr. Maurice Allais:

With regard to the validity of my experiments, it seems
best to reproduce here the testimony of General Paul Bergeron,
ex-president of the Committee for Scientific Activities for
National Defense, in his letter of May 1959 to Werner von
Braun:

"Before writing to you, I considered it necessary to
visit the two laboratories of Professor Allais (one 60
meters underground), in the company of eminent
specialists – including two professors at the Ecole
Polytechnique. During several hours of discussion, we
could find no source of significant error, nor did any
attempt at explanation survive analysis.

"I should also tell you that during the last two years,
more than ten members of the Academy of Sciences and
more than thirty eminent personalities, specialists in
various aspects of gravitation, have visited both his
laboratory at Saint-Germain, and his underground
laboratory at Bougival.

"Deep discussions took place, not only on these
occasions, but many times in various scientific contexts,
notably at the Academy of Sciences and the National
Center for Scientific Research. None of these discussions
could evolve any explanation within the framework of
currently accepted theories."


This letter confirms clearly the fact that was finally
admitted at the time - the total impossibility of explaining the
perceived anomalies within the framework of currently
accepted theory.



An overview of the Allais effect (parts I - VII):

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1676115#msg1676115 (the Black Sun and the laevorotatory subquarks)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 11, 2009, 11:42:18 AM
TOTAL DEMOLITION OF STR/GTR

There is no such thing as space-time geometry. Here is the step by step demonstration.

Tesla underlined that time was a mere man-made reference used for convenience and as such the idea of a 'curved space-time' was delusional, hence there was no basis for the Relativistic 'space-time' binomium concept.

Motion through space produces the 'illusion of time'.

He considered time as a mere man-made 'measure' of the rate at which events occur such as a distance travelled (in miles or kms) in a certain period of time, for a frame of reference. He considered the 'curving' of space to be absurd (putting it in gentle terms) saying that if a moving body curved space the 'equal and opposite' reaction of space on the body would 'straighten space back out'.

'... Supposing that the bodies act upon the surrounding space causing curving of the same, it appears to my simple mind that the curved spaces must react on the bodies, and producing the opposite effects, straightening out the curves. Since action and reaction are coexistent, it follows that the supposed curvature of space is entirely impossible - But even if it existed it would not explain the motions of the bodies as observed. Only the existence of a field of force can account for the motions of the bodies as observed, and its assumption dispenses with space curvature. All literature on this subject is futile and destined to oblivion. So are all attempts to explain the workings of the universe without recognizing the existence of the ether and the indispensable function it plays in the phenomena.'


G.F. Riemann introduced the additional variables as a supporting theory for his logarithm branch cuts, NOT ever to present time as a new variable.

(http://wpcontent.answcdn.com/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/41/Riemann_surface_log.jpg/220px-Riemann_surface_log.jpg)


http://www.maths.tcd.ie/pub/HistMath/People/Riemann/Geom/WKCGeom.html (http://www.maths.tcd.ie/pub/HistMath/People/Riemann/Geom/WKCGeom.html)

the abstract concept of n-dimensional geometry to facilitate the geometric representation of functions of a complex variable (especially logarithm branch cut). 'Such researches have become a necessity for many parts of mathematics, e.g., for the treatment of many-valued analytical functions.'

Never did he think to introduce TIME as a separate dimension or variable.

How was this done?

In contrast Riemann’s original non-Euclidian geometry dealt solely with space and was therefore an “amorphous continuum.” Einstein and Minkowski made it metric.

Minkowski's four-dimensional space was transformed by using an imaginary (√-1.ct ) term in place of the real time ( t ). So the coordinates of Minkowski's Four-Dimensional Continuum, ( x1, x2, x3, x4 ) are all treated as space coordinates, but were in fact originally ( x1, x2, x3, t ) or rather ( x1, x2, x3,√-1.ct ), therefore the 4th space dimension x4 is in fact the imaginary √-1.ct substitute. This imaginary 4-dimensional union of time and space was termed by Minkowski as 'world'. Einstein called it 'Spacetime Continuum'. In fact, Minkowski never meant it to be used in curved space. His 4th dimension was meant to be Euclidean dimensions (straight), because it was well before the introduction of General Relativity. Einstein forcibly adopted it for 'curved' or 'None Euclidean' measurements without giving a word of explanations why he could do it. In fact, if there was an explanation Einstein would have given it. Yet, this was how 'Time' became 'Space' or '4th dimensional space' for mathematical purpose, which was then used in 'Spacetime Curvature', 'Ripples of Spacetime' and other applications in General Relativity, relativistic gravitation, which then went on to become Black Hole, etc., ...



EINSTEIN HIMSELF ON THE ABSURDITY OF THE SPACE TIME CONTINUUM CONCEPT:

Einstein, following Minkowski, welded space and time together into what critics have called ‘the monstrosity called space-time’. In this abstract, four-dimensional continuum, time is treated as a negative length, and metres and seconds are added together to obtain one ‘event’. Every point in the spacetime continuum is assigned four coordinates, which, according to Einstein, ‘have not the least direct physical significance’. He says that his field equations, whose derivation requires many pages of abstract mathematical operations, deprive space and time of ‘the last trace of objective reality’.


EINSTEIN FALLACIES:

http://web.archive.org/web/20090309113407/http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dp5/relativ.htm (http://web.archive.org/web/20090309113407/http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dp5/relativ.htm)


REASONS WHY EINSTEIN WAS WRONG:

http://web.archive.org/web/20120205135201/http://www.kevin.harkess.btinternet.co.uk/reasons_einstein_wrong/reasons_einstein_wrong.html (http://web.archive.org/web/20120205135201/http://www.kevin.harkess.btinternet.co.uk/reasons_einstein_wrong/reasons_einstein_wrong.html) (one of the best works on the variability of light)


EINSTEIN'S THEORY OF RELATIVITY: SCIENTIFIC THEORY OR ILLUSION? by Milan Pavlovic

http://web.archive.org/web/20080705084812/http://users.net.yu/~mrp/chapter5.html (http://web.archive.org/web/20080705084812/http://users.net.yu/~mrp/chapter5.html)


“it is difficult to find a theory so popular, and yet so unclear, incomplete, paradoxical
and contradictory, as is the theory of relativity…. The special theory of relativity can be said to be, in essence, a sum of deceptions.”



ALBERT IN RELATIVITYLAND

http://www.gsjournal.net/old/ntham/amesbury.pdf (http://www.gsjournal.net/old/ntham/amesbury.pdf)

However, space-time as a fourth dimension is nothing more than the product of professor Minkowski's cerebral and mathematical imagination.


Einstein’s relativity theory is a central plank of 20th-century science and is commonly said to have passed every experimental test with flying colours. However, there are plausible alternative explanations for all the experimental data and astronomical observations cited in support of the special and general theories of relativity, and the internal inconsistencies and unwarranted assumptions of standard relativity theory have been pointed out by dozens of scientists.

Pari Spolter writes: ‘Many physicists who believe Einstein’s theory of relativity to be flawed have not been able to get their papers accepted for publication in most scientific journals. Eminent scientists are intimidated and warned that they may spoil their career prospects, if they openly opposed Einstein’s relativity.’ Louis Essen, inventor of the atomic clock, stated that physicists seem to abandon their critical faculties when considering relativity. He also remarked: ‘Students are told that the theory must be accepted although they cannot expect to understand it. They are encouraged right at the beginning of their careers to forsake science in favor of dogma.’ Thomas Phipps writes: ‘The (politically obligatory) claim that Einstein’s theories are the only ones capable of covering the known range of empirical physical knowledge is laughable.’

William Cantrell identifies several reasons why Einstein’s relativity theory has remained so popular:

First, the alternative theories have never been given much attention nor taught at any university. Second, the establishmentarians have invested a lifetime of learning in maintaining the status quo, and they will act to protect their investment. . . . Third, Einstein’s theory, being rather vaguely defined and self-contradictory by its own construction, allows some practitioners to display an aura of elitism and hubris in their ability to manipulate it. There is an exclusive quality to the theory – like a country club, and that is part of its allure. Fourth, to admit a fundamental mistake in such a hyped-up theory would be an embarrassment, not only to the physics community at large, but also to the memory of a man whose portrait hangs in nearly every physics department around the world.


G. de Purucker took a more critical stance: ‘The theory of Relativity is founded on unquestionable essentials or points of truth, but the deductions drawn in many cases by many Relativist speculators appear to be mere “brain-mind” constructions or phantasies.


In 1949 Einstein wisely remarked: ‘There is not a single concept, of which I am convinced that it will survive, and I am not sure whether I am on the right way at all.

This statement applies especially to the baseless assumption that the speed of light is a constant.


In addition to Lorentz, other Nobel Prize winners who opposed Einstein included Planck, Michelson, Ernest Rutherford, and Frederick Soddy. Louis Essen wrote:

Insofar as [Einstein’s] theory is thought to explain the result of the Michelson-Morley experiment I am inclined to agree with Soddy that it is a swindle; and I do not think Rutherford would have regarded it as a joke had he realised how it would retard the rational development of science.

There is no real evidence for the curvature of space. We can speak of curved lines, paths, and surfaces in space, but the idea that space itself can be curved is meaningless unless we conjure up a fourth dimension of space for it to be curved in. G. de Purucker called the concept of curved space a ‘mathematical pipe-dream’.


Pari Spolter characterizes relativity theory as ‘science fiction or pseudoscience’. She writes: ‘Mathematics, which is the most advanced science, should be used to analyze observations and experimental data. It should not be used to create a new physical science based on hypothetical equations.’ Al Kelly comments: ‘Relativity theory has assumed the status of a religion whose mysteries are to be believed without question. For how long can nonsense stave off common sense?’


Here is a critical view to each and every aspect of the relativity theory:

http://www.gsjournal.net/old/ntham/amesbury.pdf (http://www.gsjournal.net/old/ntham/amesbury.pdf)

Sections:

The Wrong Turn #1: FitzGerald Length Contraction
Wrong Turn #2: Relativistic Time Dilation
Non-Evidence A: Flights of Fantasy
Non-Evidence B: GPS Satellites
Non-Evidence C: Muon Decay

The Wrong Turn #3: Mass Distortion
The Wrong Turn #4: The Universal Speed Limit
Wrong Turn #5: Space-time

The Second Postulate regarding the speed of light as both constant and unsurpassable
was unoriginal because it came right from Poincaré, as we have just seen.
Both of these postulates are set forth in the introduction of this paper, second paragraph.
Yet, inasmuch as Albert presents no persuasive experimental or observational evidence in support of them, they are simply not acceptable and we need not proceed with any of his
reasoning or arguments, mathematical or otherwise, that follow, as they are not worth the paper they are printed on. To do so would be philosophy or academic math, maybe, but not science.

In 1962, J. Fox, of the Carnegie Institute of Technology published a paper in the
American Journal of Physics in which he reviewed the experimental evidence in support of the
Second Postulate and concluded that the evidence was “either irrelevant or inconclusive.”70 This was over “half a century after the inception of special relativity”. Yet even today relativist scientists would have us turn our minds off and accept the Second Postulate as dogma and an absolute law of physics.


Here is Tesla's classic experiment: FASTER THAN LIGHT SPEED

Tesla's classic 1900 experiment proves that light can and does travel faster than 299,792,458 m/s; moreover, it proves the existence of telluric currents (ether), which means that terrestrial gravity is a force exerted by the pressure of the same telluric currents.

Nikola Tesla:

The most essential requirement is that irrespective of frequency the wave or wave-train should continue for a certain period of time, which I have estimated to be not less than one-twelfth or probably 0.08484 of a second and which is taken in passing to and returning from the region diametrically opposite the pole over the earth's surface with a mean velocity of about 471,240 kilometers per second [292,822 miles per second, a velocity equal to one and a half times the "official" speed of light].


Tesla Patent/original paper:

http://www.classictesla.com/Patent/us000787412.pdf (http://www.classictesla.com/Patent/us000787412.pdf)


With the discrediting of the Second Postulate, in the words of MIT-trained geophysicist
Enders Robinson, PhD “we must kiss relativity theory goodbye.

“Einstein‟s theory of relativity” is substantially science fiction, fantasy or philosophy,
and represents the worst of science: how science can become political, how political factors can affect funding, how funding can affect scientists‟ jobs and careers, how experimental data can be manipulated to serve as propaganda, and how theory can be presented as fact.

http://web.archive.org/web/20120205135201/http://www.kevin.harkess.btinternet.co.uk/reasons_einstein_wrong/reasons_einstein_wrong.html (http://web.archive.org/web/20120205135201/http://www.kevin.harkess.btinternet.co.uk/reasons_einstein_wrong/reasons_einstein_wrong.html) (all the sections especially: Tests that have been carried out that show Einstein was wrong)

Both Pound and Rebka ASSUMED that the speed of light is constant and not a variable.

If the speed of the light pulses in the gravitational field is VARIABLE, then the frequency shift measured by Pound and Rebka is a direct consequence of this variability and there is no gravitational time dilation.

See the discussion here: http://blog.hasslberger.com/2006/04/recovering_the_lorentz_ether_c.html (http://blog.hasslberger.com/2006/04/recovering_the_lorentz_ether_c.html)



The most extraordinary proofs on HOW EINSTEIN FAKED HIS 1919/1922 DATA FOR THE SO CALLED EINSTEIN SHIFT:

http://einstein52.tripod.com/alberteinsteinprophetorplagiarist/id9.html (http://einstein52.tripod.com/alberteinsteinprophetorplagiarist/id9.html)


http://www.ekkehard-friebe.de/dishones.htm (http://www.ekkehard-friebe.de/dishones.htm) (scroll down to the section: With regard to the politics that led to Einstein's fame Dr. S. Chandrasekhar's article [46] states...)


http://web.archive.org/web/20070202201854/http://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/einstein.html (http://web.archive.org/web/20070202201854/http://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/einstein.html)



HOW EINSTEIN MODIFIED HIS FORMULA RELATING TO MERCURY'S ORBIT IN ORDER TO FIT THE RESULTS:

http://www.gravitywarpdrive.com/Rethinking_Relativity.htm (http://www.gravitywarpdrive.com/Rethinking_Relativity.htm) (scroll down to The advance of the perihelion of Mercury’s orbit, another famous confirmation of General Relativity, is worth a closer look...)


Dr. F. Schmeidler of the Munich University Observatory has published a paper  titled "The Einstein Shift An Unsettled Problem," and a plot of shifts for 92 stars for the 1922 eclipse shows shifts going in all directions, many of them going the wrong way by as large a deflection as those shifted in the predicted direction! Further examination of the 1919 and 1922 data originally interpreted as confirming relativity, tended to favor a larger shift, the results depended very strongly on the manner for reducing the measurements and the effect of omitting individual stars.


Moreover, Einstein made a terrible blunder.

Einstein, 1905:

"The principle of the constancy of the velocity of light is of course contained in Maxwell's equations”

We can infer immediately that Einstein had no knowledge whatsoever of the original ether equations derived by Maxwell, and based his false/erroneous conclusions on the MODIFIED/CENSORED Heaviside-Lorentz equations.


"Einstein claims that “The principle of the constancy of the velocityof light is of course contained in Maxwell's equations”.

If the Lorentz force had still been included as one of Maxwell’s equations, they could
have been written in total time derivative format (see Appendix A in ‘The Double
Helix Theory of the Magnetic Field’) and Einstein would not have been able to make
this claim. A total time derivative electromagnetic wave equation would allow the
electromagnetic wave speed to alter from the perspective of a moving observer."


Here are the censored Heaviside-Lorentz equations, USED BY EINSTEIN to justify his erronous claim regarding the speed of light:

(http://www.irregularwebcomic.net/annotations/annot1420a.gif)

HERE IS THE ORIGINAL SET OF JAMES CLERK MAXWELL'S EQUATIONS: THE EXISTENCE OF ETHER, AETHER AND THE VARIABILITY OF THE SPEED OF LIGHT:

(https://image.ibb.co/f1Coyy/88.jpg)


http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1608815#msg1608815 (more information on the set of original Maxwell equations)


http://web.archive.org/web/20071006083222/http://www.wbabin.net/science/tombe4.pdf
(also includes the appendix called Maxwell's Minor Errors discussing the wrong minus sign in equation D)

E = vXB − ∂Α/dt +gradψ

The most important scientific paper ever published: ON PHYSICAL LINES OF FORCE, by JAMES CLERK MAXWELL - the original set of ether equations, which are almost unknown to modern physics.

http://vacuum-physics.com/Maxwell/maxwell_oplf.pdf


"A solution to the original/corrected Maxwell equations indicates that these equations are invariant under the Galilean transformation. Velocity vectors are additive, which means that the speed of light can be exceeded."

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1848776#msg1848776


The Michelson-Morley catastrophe:

http://web.archive.org/web/20040612113918/ca.geocities.com/rayredbourne/docs/b.htm

http://web.archive.org/web/20080705084812/http://users.net.yu/~mrp/chapter5.html

https://web.archive.org/web/20101128012239/http://spinbitz.net/anpheon.org/html/AnpheonIntro2003.htm (history revisited section, one of the very best works on the unimaginable errors of the MM experiment)




Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 12, 2009, 10:35:03 AM
PAGE 10

The Allais effect and the Black Sun


EDIT

A compendium of my messages posted on the proboards website for the past several years (http://only1rad.proboards.com/ (http://only1rad.proboards.com/) )...

As I said five years ago: it is very easy to see/discover that the Beatles songs are actually modified classical scores.

Martha my Dear is a modified classical song, Martha by von Flotow (see (http://#) ). It is obvious that Paul II had no idea about this connection, when he said that Martha refers to his sheepdog...

Yellow Submarine is actually the theme from Verdi’s Aida March combined the Toreador song from Carmen by Bizet.


I invite everybody here again to study the actual complexity of the Beatles songs: it is unimaginable that, as raylo said before: "the beatles went from being a garage band to suddenly composing sophisticated tracks like 'and i love her' overnight, then advanced exponentially and levelled off quickly maintaining that level of musical quality and then broke up and suddenly became virtual garage players again. as judge judy says, 'if it doesn't make sense, it's probably not true'."


www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/VOLUME01/A_Beatles_Odyssey.shtml (http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/VOLUME01/A_Beatles_Odyssey.shtml)
www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/awp-notes_on.shtml (http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/awp-notes_on.shtml)


Absolute proofs that only an expert in classical music could have been responsible for writing the Beatles music.


Yes, Adorno wrote the entire British invasion by modifying classical tunes, and yes he developed different styles for each and every group; he did not compose the music for money, not at all. Adorno was part of a secret society who recognized his amazing skills in teaching/understanding classical music and put them to good use. Before his death in August 1969 (the very reason the Beatles disbanded, as their master composer was gone) Adorno wrote hundreds of songs to be distributed later (1969 - 1975) to various groups, that is why the early 70s music sounded so much better than the late 70s music, and the very reason why Led Zeppelin were musically dead after the last of the Adorno songs, KASHMIR, was included on Physical Graffiti.

Perhaps you all are curious to understand how did Adorno manage to create a masterpiece such as KASHMIR. Actually it is made up of three classical songs: Ravel's Bolero and Holst's Mars the Bringer of War, combined with the 1st movement from Korsakov's Scheherazade ( (http://#)  5:05 to 5:30, especially 5:20 to 5:30  )


Here is another example for all of you.

(http://#)

The adaggio from Spartacus was modified by Adorno: first into SOMETHING (of course, for the Beatles), then into the RAIN SONG (given to Led Zeppelin).


Had Adorno lived a few more years, there would have been more Beatles albums containing the following songs, among others already mentioned in my first two messages:

Admiral Holsy
Live and Let Die
My Love
Imagine
What is Love


Again, raylo:

"about a yr ago at a friends party i mentioned the theory to the host who is a classically trained musician. he raised an eyebrow and said there's no way they could have written all that music in that little time. it's just not possible. someone helped, coached or wrote for them.
lyrically i believe they, especially lennon wrote a great deal even if the subject matter was impressed upon him. he was clever with words. he was no dummy, but he was no musical genius. listen to his 'rock and roll' solo album. come on people. listen to free as a bird and most of the other feeble efforts he soloed. yes i'm aware of instant karma, imagine, etc. but most of it was dribble compared to the beatles. it's like comparing basic addition with advanced trigonometry.
a few days ago after reading the first comment on this thread i called my previous mentioned friend and started naming the songlist of classical music and its corresponding beatles song. i said 'aiva' etc was yellow sub. he paused for a second, i heard a few 'da da hum daaah, DEE dah da's' and then a yup or ahuh. this was the case for every song on the list. he also stated that it was common in HWD, NY and motown, etc to have classical composers in almost every studio to smooth out the song."


PS Can anybody here guess which classical tune was copied by Adorno and transformed into OVER THE HILLS AND FAR AWAY given to Led Zeppelin?




Let us concentrate on just two songs: Martha My Dear and Kashmir.


MARTHA MY DEAR


www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/mmd.shtml (http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/mmd.shtml)

The original Paul had no knowledge of the Martha classical tune by von Flotow, nor could he have modified it into Martha My Dear as he could not write/read music; George Martin certainly knew about the classical tune, but he had no musical skills to turn it into Martha My Dear; after 1969 the magical orchestration in the Beatles music (see the Let It Be album) and Paul II's own albums was completely gone.


Analysis of the Martha My Dear musical notes/melody:

The intro/verse section is an extremely unusual fourteen and a half measures in length, the first of its four phrases being foreshortened by six beats; the musical equivalent of a receding chin :-) In this case, the effect is motivated by the dog-chasing-its-tail motif with which the tune opens.

Well before the true E-flat home key is established, the section veers off sharply in the direction of a possible modulation to the key of B-flat Major. Though the B-flat chord becomes clearly established by section's end as V, not I; you still might say that the tonal center of gravity is weighted deceptively more in favor of B-flat rather than E-flat.

The ninths and sevenths applied to all of the A-flat-Major chords above fall under the category of "free" dissonance.

The abrupt transition back to the home key of the verse features that root move of a major third that we discussed back in of all places, "Wild Honey Pie". Note how the second bridge embellishes this gesture with a novel "3-4-5" hook in the toppermost voice.


A clear proof that only a musical genius who could absolutely write/read music could transform the classical tune Martha into Martha My Dear.


Therefore, your assertion that Paul I could have written Martha My Dear is false.

There is no way that Paul I, not knowing at all that he would disappear from the public scene after September 1966, could have written Sgt. Pepper, Magical Mystery Tour, White Album, Abbey Road, not to mention the singles, in the timespan of just two months: July-August 1966.

Martha My Dear is a song which is written in the MUSICAL STYLE of the year 1968, it belongs to that year/age (not to 1966/1967): this style in turn in based on the musical direction/influence offerred by the  Sgt. Pepper album, a fact which could not have been known to Paul I. Paul I could not possibly have anticipated the social/cultural changes brought upon by Sgt. Pepper which in turn lead to the musical style of the White Album.

Martha My Dear includes the magical orchestration which was a hallmark of the Beatles songs; whoever wrote Martha My Dear also wrote all the other songs.


No channeling was responsible for the Beatles songs (as you try to assert): it was a very methodical work, based upon careful modifications of classical tunes/songs, performed by Theodor Adorno.

Please feel free to investigate each and every Beatles song to see how incorrect the channeling notion is:

ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF ALL THE BEATLES SONGS:

www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/awp-alphabet.shtml (http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/awp-alphabet.shtml)



KASHMIR

(http://#)

Listen from 0:55 to 1:06


Now listen to this:

1st movement from Korsakov's Scheherazade

(http://#)

5:05 to 5:30, especially 5:20 to 5:30

Obviously, one portion of the song is a modified version of the other, notwithstanding your earlier statements..


Each and every other Led Zeppelin song was NOT written by Jimmy Page (his supposed musical writing skills were gone after 1975, and he had none before 1968; granted he was one of the greatest guitarists ever).




Read carefully here:

www.furious.com/perfect/jimmypage.html (http://www.furious.com/perfect/jimmypage.html)


Certainly the Adaggio from Spartacus was modified into the RAIN SONG.

Certainly OVER THE HILLS AND FAR AWAY is a modified Afternoon of a Faun by Debussy.


In fact, in 1970, J. Page was accused of plagiarism (Friends, a modified version of Carry On by Crosby, Stills and Nash).


Since J. Page did not write a single Led Zeppelin song, and since both Something (Beatles) and the Rain Song resemble strongly the Adaggio from Spartacus, I say that the same person wrote both songs.




George Martin did not have the genius to produce/create the magic of the Beatles music orchestration/sound.

Paul McCartney II's albums LACK completely the hallmark of what constituted the Beatles songs: that spellbound/miraculous orchestral arrangements unsurpassed to this very day and unprecedented before 1964.

There is only one person who could have done it: Theodor Adorno, his death in August 1969 is what actually put an end to the Beatles.

Paul II, John II, George were given then the remaining Beatles songs (Imagine, Live and Let Die, Admiral Holsy, Give Me Love, My Sweet Lord, Mind Games, My Love and much more) to start up their solo careers...but the magic was gone.


Your facts so far amount to this:

1. Paul dreamed up 200 songs, of which about 80 just in the period September - November 5, 1966, or, even more amazingly,

2. Paul wrote, somehow, someway, all these 200 songs; again, of which maybe 80 in that same period.

If you say that you know something about music (see for example the comments by sunssol), then it should strike you immediately, upon actually seeing how the songs were composed (see below), that a person who could not write or read music could not, even in his dreams, get such a job done, that is, to compose 200 songs with no musicological concepts whatsoever, and with no studies of classical music.

The songs themselves speak loud and clear: Paul could not have even dreamed to write such songs, given the way they are structured and written:

www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/awp-alphabet.shtml (http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/awp-alphabet.shtml) (alphabetical order)

www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/awp-beatles_canon.shtml (http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/awp-beatles_canon.shtml) (chronologically)

www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/awp-notes_on.shtml (http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/awp-notes_on.shtml) (step by step analysis of all the songs)


Let us have a closer look at Yesterday, for example (supposedly dreamed up by Paul):

www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/y.shtml (http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/y.shtml)

Here is what A. Pollack has to say:

The overall home key is F Major but the music demonstrates a curious tendency to repeatedly veer off toward the relative minor key of d. This device subtly sets a mood for the song in which all attempts at putting on a positive face are betrayed by pervasive melancholy; shades of "beneath this mask I am wearing a frown." Interestingly, Paul had used a similar harmonic trick (actually the same basic idea but in reverse) in his very similar earlier offering of "And I Love Her".

By funny coincidence, we find here the same harmonic cross-relation between G and B-flat chords as we saw last time in "It's Only Love". Granted, the order of the two chords is reversed here, and the semantic meaning of the progression is changed by the difference in home key between the two songs. It's an uncanny parallel, nevertheless.

Let us now look at And I love Her:

Major and minor keys are said to be mutual relatives then they share the same key signature — e.g. C Major/a minor, F Major/d minor etc.

Implicit in the sharing of a key signature is the fact that they share the same chords, although each chord has a different harmonic/grammatical meaning — i.e. crudely put, a different Roman numeral — depending on which mode you're in. For example, in the pair of keys C Major/a minor, the d minor triad is common to both but it's the ii chord of C and the iv chord of A.

The ample selection of common chords in this situation makes it very easy to modulate between the two keys. Such chords are called pivot chords when they're used to effect a smooth modulation from one key to another. In terms of aural perception, one experiences such a chord initially in the old key, but within the following two chords, one retrospectively hears it as part of the new key; a kind of harmonic pun.

This amazing technical know-how of musical arrangement to come from Paul's dreams, or from a guy who could neither write nor read music?

www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/ailh.shtml (http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/ailh.shtml)

It's Only Love: www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/iol.shtml (http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/iol.shtml)

Very much like what we saw last time in "I've Just Seen A Face", the verse here is a twelve measure section whose AAB phrasing pattern matches that of the blues even though such a connection is supported by neither the harmony nor the style.

The downward chromatic bassline at the start "forces" a strange root progression of I -» iii -» flat-VII. The effect of this is somewhat softened by the linear logic of the bassline itself and the placement of the iii chord in so-called second inversion; try playing the same progression with the iii chord in root position and see how much more strange it sounds.

With the verse ending on the vi chord (a-minor), you'd much sooner expect the first chord of this refrain to be either IV (F) or ii (d); try this out and see how well it actually works. The move to B-flat, while not at all unsatisfying does work as a surprise, and furthermore sets up a cross-relation when the next chord after it is V (G). This use of flat-VII as a subdominant is something we saw for the first time way back in "All My Loving", of all places. As a device, you might describe it as similar in structure and effect to the gambit in which V-of-V is followed by IV.


Let us remember what the Beatles could actually do, 1960 - 1962:

Beatle biographer Philip Norman writes: "Their only regular engagement was a strip club. The club owner paid them ten shillings each to strum their guitars while a stripper named Janice grimly shed her clothes before an audience of sailors, guilty businessmen and habitués with raincoat- covered laps."
Now, to go from this to actually write I want to hold your hand defies the imagination, and the fact that neither John nor Paul could write or read music, which is absolutely necessary to express any musical talent.

It is sometimes said that G. Martin orchestrated some of the Beatles songs; nothing he published after 1969 resembles in any way shape or form the actual Beatles orchestrations, for example on Strawberry Fields and Martha my Dear.

If you want to believe in a myth, go right ahead, I will not try to stop you, but the fact of the matter is that none of the Beatles could write music, it is obvious that a powerhouse in music writing was behind their success.

Listen closely to the McCartney and Lennon post Beatles albums; they are a far cry from any Beatles LP.

Please explain to me how these songs could have been written (take a look at the extraordinary skill in manipulating the keys and notes to write the songs) by two persons who could neither write nor read music.

www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/VOLUME01/A_Beatles_Odyssey.shtml (http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/VOLUME01/A_Beatles_Odyssey.shtml)
www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/awp-notes_on.shtml (http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/awp-notes_on.shtml)


Imagine having Mozart, Beethoven, and Tchaikovsky, together, writing songs for you; you'd instantly become the very best musical artist the world has ever seen, and this is EXACTLY what happened to The Beatles, their songs are modified classical themes, cleverly done by T. Adorno.

The fact that their music was written by Adorno was concealed from public view.

Under the the strict guidance of EMI's recording director George Martin, and Brian Epstein, the Beatles were scrubbed, washed, and their hair styled into the Beatles cut. EMI's Martin created the Beatles in his recording studio.

Martin was a trained classical musician, and had studied the oboe and piano at the London School of Music. The Beatles could neither read music nor play any instrument other than guitar. For Martin, the Beatles musicianship was a bad joke. On their first hit record, "Love Me Do," Martin replaced Ringo on the drums with a studio musician. Martin said Ringo, "couldn't do a [drum] roll to save his life."

The insiders at EMI knew very well that J. Lennon and P. McCartney had no musical talent whatsoever; what they had abundantly was charisma, and that is what won the audience, nobody else since has been able to duplicate The Beatles phenomenon.


Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 08, 2009, 01:24:54 AM
Let us read carefully the only correct description of the actual orbit of the Sun that we have at our disposal (the reason the year had only 364 days is explained later in this thread):

http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#71 (http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#71)

It becomes very clear that the orbit of the Sun cannot just be made up of two arches of a circle; the actual orbit is a bit more complicated than that; in my opinion it consists of several arches which make up a complete daily orbit, something resembling a rhombus with curved sides or even an enneagram.


Here is a description of the phases of the moon:

http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#77 (http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#77)

Thus, the resultant orbital lag between the sun and the moon causes the phases of the moon.


GASES IN THE ATMOSPHERE PARADOX

The gases in the atmosphere REFUSE to obey the law of universal gravitation.


"The ingredients of the air—oxygen, nitrogen, argon and other gases—though not in a compound but in a mixture, are found in equal proportions at various levels of the atmosphere despite great differences in specific weights.


The explanation accepted in science is this: “Swift winds keep the gases thoroughly mixed, so that except for water-vapor the composition of the atmosphere is the same throughout the troposphere to a high degree of approximation.”  This explanation cannot be true. If it were true, then the moment the wind subsides, the nitrogen should stream upward, and the oxygen should drop, preceded by the argon.


If winds are caused by a difference in weight between warm and cold air, the difference in weight between heavy gases high in the atmosphere and light gases at the lower levels should create storms, which would subside only after they had carried each gas to its natural place in accordance with its gravity or specific weight. But nothing of the kind happens.

When some aviators expressed the belief that “pockets of noxious gas” are in the air, the scientists replied:

“There are no ‘pockets of noxious gas.’ No single gas, and no other likely mixture of gases, has, at ordinary temperatures and pressures, the same density as atmospheric air. Therefore, a pocket of foreign gas in that atmosphere would almost certainly either bob up like a balloon, or sink like a stone in water.”

Why, then, do not the atmospheric gases separate and stay apart in accordance with the specific gravities?"


Ozone, though heavier than oxygen, is absent in the lower layers of the atmosphere, is present in the upper layers, and is not subject to the “mixing effect of the wind.” The presence of ozone high in the atmosphere suggests that oxygen must be still higher: “As oxygen is less dense than ozone, it will tend to rise to even greater heights.”  Nowhere is it asked why ozone does not descend of its own weight or at least why it is not mixed by the wind with other gases.



The ozone layer is kept in a stable balance. And, moreover, in the stratosphere, the ozone layer concentrations are about 2 to 8 parts per million, which is much higher than in the lower atmosphere.

We are talking here about TRIOXYGEN (O3), THAT IS, OZONE.

Thus, the ozone layer is kept in a stable balance. And, moreover, in the stratosphere, the ozone layer concentrations are about 2 to 8 parts per million, which is much higher than in the lower atmosphere

With attractive gravity, OZONE WOULD DESCEND IMMEDIATELY AS ITS SPECIFIC WEIGHT IS GREATER THAN THAT OF OXYGEN.

BUT IN FACT the atomic oxygen IMMEDIATELY REACTS WITH other oxygen molecules, to form ozone again.

The overall effect of the ozone-oxygen cycle is to convert penetrating UV radiation into heat, WITHOUT ANY NET LOSS OF OZONE.


Had attractive gravity been a real phenomenon, ozone would descend immediately as its own specific weight (trioxygen) is greater than of oxygen.

Here is the law of attractive, universal gravitation as it is being presented in our textbooks:

(https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/8c6ee5510ba3c7d6664775c0e76b53e72468303a)

Gravity, we are told, is proportional to MASS and DISTANCE.


Why, then, do not the atmospheric gases separate and stay apart in accordance with the specific gravities?


Let us go to the textbook on atmospheric physics.

The earth's atmosphere is a complex mixture of several "gases", either atomic or molecular in nature. Air consists primarily of N2 (78%) and O2 (21%), with small amounts of several other substances, including Ar (0.9%).


Let us take, as an example, the troposphere.


http://www.geo.arizona.edu/Antevs/nats104/00lect25atmcompo.html

NITROGEN 78%
OXYGEN 21%
ARGON 0.9%


Now, the thermosphere.

http://www.enotes.com/homework-help/what-gases-that-separate-by-weight-upper-layers-469654

Thermosphere: 80% nitrogen and 20% oxygen

Even in the troposphere, nitrogen is thoroughly mixed with oxygen.


Why, then, do not the atmospheric gases separate and stay apart in accordance with the specific gravities?



The gases in the atmosphere totally and absolutely defy Newton's supposed law of universal gravitation.



Let us now read Newton's infamous denial of the law of universal gravitation again:

“That gravity should be innate, inherent, and essential to matter, so that one body can act upon another at a distance through a vacuum without the mediation of anything else, by and through which their action and force may be conveyed from one to another, is to me so great an absurdity that I believe no man, who has in philosophical matters a competent faculty of thinking, can ever fall into it.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 27, 2009, 05:56:39 AM
PAGES 2 - 12

New radical chronology theory


EDIT

Messages from the proboards website continued...

I estimate he wrote at least 800 songs during that time...

How long did it take Adorno to modify the theme from Spartacus by Khachaturian to come up with Something? 5 minutes

How long did it take him to modify the same theme to write the Rain Song for Led Zeppelin? Another 5 minutes

Adorno wrote extremely fast, all he had to do was to modify existing music; not only that, but he wrote all partitures backwards, to get more ideas from them, he did that most conspicuously with Because (Moonlight sonata played backwards). He could write the entire Pet Sounds album in one day, or a Rolling Stones album in one week, and time to spare.

Who actually wrote the Beatles music?

The person who actually wrote all the Beatles songs was Theodor Adorno, a music professor from Frankfurt University. And none of the songs were original, Adorno, a genius on the subject of theoretical music cleverly adapted well-known classical partitures, to create the Beatles songs.

Here are some examples...

Yellow Submarine is actually the theme from Verdi's Aida combined the Toreador song from Carmen by Bizet.

Can't buy me love is actually Aine Kleine Nacht Musik by Mozart, ingeniously modified.

Penny Lane is the Elvira Madigan Piano Concerto No. 21 by Mozart, modified.

From me to you is the Peer Gynt suite, Morning Mood, by E. Grieg

I want to hold your hand is a modified From me to you (listen carefully and compare the two songs)

Yesterday is a modified Neapolitan song, called "Piccere' Che Vene a Dicere"

Let us remember that the original J. Lennon/P. McCartney duo could neither write nor read music; in the period 1960-1962 they sang only cover songs, and manifested no music writing talent whatsoever

Got to get into my life is a modified Can't buy me love

I feel fine is actually Fire Dance by M. de Falla

Martha my Dear is a modified classical song, Martha by von Flotow:

(http://)

Something is nothing more than the theme from Spartacus by Khachaturian

For Hey Jude, Adorno pulled out all stops, he grouped into one song, masterfully, the Ride of the Walkiries by Wagner, the theme from the Piano Concerto no. 1 by Tchaikovsky, and the theme from Symphony no 9 by Beethoven

Blackbird is actually the second movement from Beethoven's Seventh Symphony, modified

Get Back is Obladi Oblada modified

Sgt. Pepper is clever combination of the Radetzky March and the Romanian rhapsody no 1 by Enescu

And Adorno reworked some of the Beatles songs to create others: She Loves You is a modified From Me to You, as is You're gonna lose that girl

A Hard Day's Night is Rossini's Wilhelm Tell overture, modified

Ballad of John and Yoko is a modified And Your Bird can Sing


Theodor Adorno (seen here: http://www.nndb.com/people/754/000026676/adorno.gif (http://www.nndb.com/people/754/000026676/adorno.gif) ) also wrote the entire British invasion: that is, the music of the Rolling Stones, Kinks, the Who, See Emily Play by Pink Floyd, and also Moody Blues' Days of Future Past (Nights in white satin is a modified theme from Swan Lake by Tchaikovsky), the songs for Mamas and the Papas, Doors, Jimi Hendrix, Crosby Stills and Nash, Iron Butterfly (Adorno wrote In a gadda da vida), Cream, Queen (We are the Champions, a modified Hey Jude, and Seaside Rendezvous, a modified Martha my Dear).

John Coleman actually discovered that Adorno owned the Beatles catalogue, from 1962 until his death in August 1969, and that he invented the heavy metal/punk styles of music.

The first five Led Zeppelin albums were also written by Adorno (he wrote music extensively, borrowing from Beatles songs and other, from 1964 to 1969); the Rain Song is a modified Something (that is the theme from Spartacus by Khachaturian), see the thieving magpies google search details.

The music for Jethro Tull (the early albums, including Aqualung and Thick as a Brick) were also written years ahead by Adorno, as was the Machine Head album by Deep Purple (Highway Star is a modified Magical Mystery Tour song).

The best B. Sabbath songs, Spiral Architect and She's Gone were also among the songs written for them by Adorno (copies of She's Leaving Home and the Rain Song).

Upon leaving the Featles project (1967-1969), Fohn Lennon was given some songs written also by Adorno to continue a possible solo carrier: Imagine, Bless You, Mind Games (a modified All You Need is Love).

John Lennon: doppelganger: http://doppels.proboards.com/thread/97 (http://doppels.proboards.com/thread/97)

(http://)



F. McCartney was given more songs, but not enough to compare disasters like Ram to the Beatles albums: Another Day, Maybe Im Amazed (a modified Long and winding Road), My Love (a modified All my Loving), Live and Let Die (a modified Magical Mystery Tour), Admiral Holsy (the best post Beatles song by McCartney, that is, by Adorno) and some others.

F. Harrison was given Dark Horse (a modified Gallows Pole by Adorno, who was inspired from black soul music), What is Love (a modified Satisfaction), and What is Life, not to mention My Sweet Lord (which Adorno copied from some early sixties music, and got Harrison into plagiarism trouble).

The Rolling Stones music was written by Adorno, as I have mentioned already: Satisfaction is a modified Ticket to Ride, Lady Jane is a modified Norwegian Wood, Jumpin Jack Flash is a modified Satisfaction, and so on...

The Beach Boys were also created musically by Adorno, who wrote the entire Pet Sounds album, God only Knows (a modified Michelle), Sloop John B (a modified Eight Days a Week), and later California Girls...


Adorno was a master at adapting classical music to suit his own purposes, that is, the institute which hired him to social engineer the entire 60s and 70s.

On the complexity of the Beatles songs:

http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/VOLUME01/A_Beatles_Odyssey.shtml (http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/VOLUME01/A_Beatles_Odyssey.shtml)
http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/awp-notes_on.shtml (http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/awp-notes_on.shtml)

And, all of the ABBA songs are nothing more than modified Beatles songs:

Dum Dum Diddle is a modified Obladi Oblada

Voulez Vous is Hello Goodbye all over again

Rock Me is actually a copied With a Little Help from My Friends

Dancing Queen is a modified Goodnight (from the White Album)

Mamma Mia is a modified Penny Lane

SOS is a modified Here Comes the Sun

Money Money Money is a modified Sgt. Pepper

Move on is a modified Blackbird

Take a chance on me is a modified We can Work it out (which is a modified Help)

Dance while the music still goes on is a modified I Saw Her Standing Her (borrowed by Adorno from one of Mozart's serenades)


Eagle is a modified Maybe Im Amazed

Waterloo is a modified A Hard Days Night

Prior to 1972 both B. Anderson and B. Ulvaeus manifested no musical talent whatsoever (that is, at composing songs), all of a sudden, beginning with 1972, they came up, unexplicably, with a Mozart genius-like talent at writing songs, which expired suddenly in 1979.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 28, 2009, 12:44:09 AM
CAVENDISH EXPERIMENT DEBUNKED


http://milesmathis.com/caven.html

The Cavendish experiment is routinely included in a short list of the greatest or most elegant experiments ever done. Like all of the other existing dogma, it has surrounded itself with a nearly impenetrable slag heap of boasting and idolatry, most if not all of it sloppy and unanalyzed. This was true even before the internet arose, but now it is true to the nth degree. Like everything else, the Cavendish experiment has added to its armor a thousand Wikipedia-like entries and glosses by a thousand mid-level physics professors. Of the many thousand recent reruns of the experiment, not one appears to have begun with any level of skepticism. Not one is actually set up to test or extend the experiment. Not one starts with the assumption that Cavendish might have been wrong. Despite the stated sacred nature of the scientific method, actually having an open mind about any standard model theory now appears to be equivalent to heresy or sacrilege.

For instance, S.J. Barnett was a professor at UCLA, then went to work at Cal Tech and JPL. He was not some crank or marginal character. And he was not an ancient or outdated character: he was still writing for PRL as late as 1953. He specialized in the field of electromagnetism, and wrote a famous book on electrostatics. He said, Due to the nature of the laws of electrostatics, the experiment of Cavendish is not conclusive.

Likewise, if we have now entered the realm of forces of 10^-10N, we must be a bit more rigorous with our analyses. Let us first return to Cavendish;s machine. Although he has a force 1000 times greater, he is still lacking the rigor required at his level of precision. We are told that his wooden bar was six feet long, and that his box was ten feet wide. According to my calculations, that puts the smaller balls only two feet from the walls. Those walls were two feet thick. Even though they were made of wood, a wall two feet thick provides a great deal of mass. It may be that those wooden walls of the box were backed up by brick walls of the shed, adding much more mass. How much mass does a wall 2 feet thick, ten feet tall and ten feet wide, provide? Without knowing the wood type and the construction type, it is impossible to say, but we are in the thousands of pounds. A brick wall one foot wide would double that mass, at least, although the brick wall
 would obviously be two or three feet farther away from our small lead balls. At any rate, we have absolutely huge masses at no great distances from our machine, a machine that is claiming to measure tiny gravitational attractions. I find this monumentally strange.

Here is another one on Cavendish:

In the original experiment of Cavendish there seems to have been an irregularity in the position of rest of one-tenth of the deflection obtained, while the period showed discrepancies of five to fifteen seconds in seven minutes.

Those are two separate margins of error, so they have to multiply. Ten percent times 3 percent. That's a thirty percent error. We don't hear much about that from Wikipedia.

Basically, Cavendish said that because he showed a motion, and because there was no other known explanation for it, it must be gravity. Newer variations on Cavendish do the same. They show a motion, tell us it is not wind (showing us the metal and glass casing to prove it), tell us there is no other explanation for it, so that it must be gravity. They therefore apply the gravitational equation to it, and spit all the old numbers out as supposed proof of something.

But it is proof of nothing. Cavendish didn't even bother to include the weight of his walls. He had a 348 lb ball 9 away, and a multi-thousand pound wall 24 away. Sure, only one point on the wall is 24 away; other parts are varying distances, but the wall is not negligible however you look at it. Cavendish assumes an inverse square law but then doesn't apply it to the greatest masses in the vicinity, even though they are quite near. According to the equation and theory he is trying to use, and that he has been used to prove, he should apply the equation to all the walls, determine force differentials, and go from there. Instead, he just ignores all these things. The fact that he is able to get good results despite ignoring all these things does not imply that his assumptions are all correct, or that it was OK to ignore all these masses. It implies that the motion is not caused in the way he assumes. In an experiment about mass, you should not be able to ignore most mass in the vicinity and still get the same answer. If your set-up doesn't matter, your set-up is probably wrong.



Those walls were two feet thick. Even though they were made of wood, a wall two feet thick provides a great deal of mass. It may be that those wooden walls of the box were backed up by brick walls of the shed, adding much more mass. How much mass does a wall 2 feet thick, ten feet tall and ten feet wide, provide? Without knowing the wood type and the construction type, it is impossible to say, but we are in the thousands of pounds. A brick wall one foot wide would double that mass, at least, although the brick wall would obviously be two or three feet farther away from our small lead balls. At any rate, we have absolutely huge masses at no great distances from our machine, a machine that is claiming to measure tiny gravitational attractions. I find this monumentally strange.

 It is even more strange now that we have apples weighing only ounces standing as proof of gravitational theory, the weight and density of the earth, and the accepted value of an important constant. That is to say, we now accept apples as having easily measurable and verifiable gravitational attractions, but we ignore the gravitational attractions of walls weighing thousands of pounds. I can only imagine that we do this because walls are not made of metal, or walls are not spherical, or something. I can’t really fathom it.

At first glance, it must be clear that the walls of Cavendish’s box and shed cannot be ignored. Even if we look at them only from a gravitational perspective, there is simply no way they can be ignored.


This means that the four walls must be taken into account, not only as blockers of wind, but as suppliers of mass and any possible E/M interaction.

This is clear, I think, with Cavendish, and it is equally clear with Walker and all modern machines and environs. Walker is in his basement, surrounded by tons of earth. And yet he completely ignores this. He thinks that because he has gone to the center of his room, he has exhausted the boundaries of rigor. Other experiments are done in massive modern buildings that weigh thousands of tons, and that may have any number of different E/M fields, some created by the earth, some created by the iron beams in the buildings, some created by electrical networks in the building. None of this is considered. It is claimed that these considerations are probably negligible, since the forces would be so small. But if we are using one of these tiny modern machines, our forces are already so small they are barely able to override residual air resistance (if in fact they can). We shouldn’t just assume that these things are or are not happening, we should have to prove it.


“As Cavendish proved…[there were] enormous effects of air currents set up by temperature differences inside the box.” We don’t hear much of that anymore. We are supposed to assume that Cavendish solved his wind problems by building the box.

Next he says this:

With such small beams as I am now using it is much more convenient to replace the long thin box generally employed to protect the beam from disturbance by a vertical tube of circular section, in which the beam with its mirror can revolve freely. This has the further advantage that if the beam is hung centrally, the attraction of the tube produces no effect, and the troublesome and approximate calculations which have been necessary to find the effect of the box are no longer required.

See that he admits that he has not done any “troublesome calculations” on his box, just assuming it produces no effect.


Basically, Cavendish said that because he showed a motion, and because there was no other known explanation for it, it must be gravity. Newer variations on Cavendish do the same. They show a motion, tell us it is not wind (showing us the metal and glass casing to prove it), tell us there is no other explanation for it, so that it must be gravity. They therefore apply the gravitational equation to it, and spit all the old numbers out as supposed proof of something.

But it is proof of nothing. Cavendish didn’t even bother to include the weight of his walls.

The same applies to Walker and the new experiments. They are incredibly sloppy about mass in an experiment that concerns mass, and yet they always seem to get reliable results. Does no one else find this the least bit strange? All they have to do is block the wind and the experiment provides all the right motions. They can switch it from clockwise to counterclockwise without concern: they still get attraction. They don’t have to worry if one wall is bigger than the other, or if there are magnetic fields in the area, or if they have cameras or ladders in the way, or if they are not square to the wall, or if they are nearer the floor or the ceiling. All these things that you would think might matter in an experiment concerning mass don’t seem to matter. Very curious.

You should find it very mystifying that all these scientists not only ignore huge masses only two feet away, masses that may or not be balanced, they also ignore the need to say why they can ignore these masses. In other words, they ignore these facts, then ignore their own ignorance of these facts, and none of it seems to matter. We are such blessed creatures, apparently, that we can stumble on the correct answer every time, without even being fully conscious.


THEN THE AUTHOR PROCEEDS TO CALCULATE THE INFLUENCE OF THE E/M FIELDS SURROUNING THE EXPERIMENT AND FINDS OUT THAT THEY GREATLY AFFECT THE FINAL RESULT.


But I have just claimed that the E/M field is the dominant field by far at this level of size and that this field is always repulsive. How do I explain this contradiction? The explanation is that we are not seeing or measuring a force between the balls, as has always been assumed. We are not measuring or seeing gravity, in the main. The larger ball or object is mainly a blocker. It is a masking agent. We are not seeing an attraction; we are seeing the blocking of a repulsion.


Our large ball simply gets in the way of photons being emitted by the walls. Since the smaller ball is no longer being repulsed from that direction, it moves it that direction, appearing to be attracted by the larger ball. It is that simple.


This means that Cavendish succeeded by a compensation of errors. The big ball is blocking almost exactly the amount that is missing from the equations, due to the loss of its own gravitational acceleration. Any Cavendish-like machine with large balls that are fixed would be expected to have the same compensation of errors.


This probably explains the variation in all contemporary measurements of gravity, too, including the most recent. Because the researchers are ignorant of the fields present, and the actual actions of their machines, all of their conclusions are skewed.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 17, 2009, 05:19:26 AM
STATIONARY ATMOSPHERE

The velocity should exponentially increase with altitude at the equator from 0 to 1054 mph.

From Galileo Was Wrong:

"If we are on a rotating Earth with air subject only to gravity (i.e., the atmosphere is not coupled or bound by any forces to turn with the Earth), then we would experience tremendous wind problems, in which the spinning Earth encounters the full weight of the atmosphere. (NB: The atmosphere weighs more than 4 million billion tons.)

Conversely, if we are on a rotating Earth and somehow this atmosphere is turning with us, what is the coupling mechanism that enables it to do so? It must have some link to provide the torque to continue the coordinated rotation of the Earth with its wrapper of air. Would not a co-turning atmosphere and Earth mean nothing else could move the air? Otherwise, is not the air was acting as a solid, not a gas? No one has proposed a mechanism for this connection of the supposedly spinning Earth to the supposedly spinning air that is so strong that the atmosphere is forced to spin along with Earth, though otherwise it is free to move anywhere that gravity permits! We easily demonstrate the air’s freedom every time we walk through it or breathe it. Yet, we are told, the air obediently follows the Earth as it twirls through the heavens."


No scientist has been able to explain, so far, how friction would work even for the first hundred meters of the supposed rotating atmosphere.

Remember, that the strength of friction lessens as the altitude increases, that is, FRICTION IS INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL TO ALTITUDE.

For the atmosphere to rotate along with the Earth, at the same speed, we need A NEW FORCE, a lateral gravitational force, which must be DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL TO ALTITUDE, in order for the upper layers to rotate along also.

In the RE model, from the very start, the Earth would be turning in a free roaming gaseous envelope (the atmosphere).

Friction would work only very near the surface, where the "pull" would be strongest; further away from the Earth this force would logically become weaker and weaker, as would the movement of the gaseous envelope surrounding the Earth.

Inversely proportional: the higher the altitude, the weaker the friction.


Now, the proof that friction cannot possibly be responsible for moving the rotating layers of the atmosphere, at the same speed as that of a rotating Earth.

http://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/(Gh)/guides/mtr/fw/bndy.rxml (University of Illinois, Physics of the Atmosphere)

Friction's effects on air motion decrease as the altitude increases -- to a point (usually 1-2 km) where it has no effect at all. The depth of the atmosphere that friction does play a role in atmospheric motion is referred to as the boundary layer.


Complete and absolute proof that what I have been saying is true: friction is inversely proportional to altitude, and that moreover, it will have no effect at all (starting from say an altitude of 1 km).



Some quotes about the Earth's supposed rotation...

"Briefly, everything occurs as if the Earth were at rest..."

- Lorentz’s 1886 paper, “On the Influence of the Earth’s Motion on Luminiferous Phenomena,” in Arthur Miller’s Albert Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity, p. 20.


"A great deal of research has been carried out concerning the influence of the Earth's movement. The results were always negative (...) We do not have any means of discovering whether or not we are carried along in a uniform motion of translation..."

- Henri Poincaré , From Poincaré’s lecture titled: “L’état actuel et l’avenir de la physique mathematique,” St.Louis, Sept 24, 1904, Scientific Monthly, April, 1956.


"There was just one alternative; the earth's true velocity through space might happen to have been nil."

- Arthur Eddington, The Nature of the Physical World, 1929, pp. 11, 8


"The failure of the many attempts to measure terrestrially any effects of the earth's motion on physical phenomena allows us to...[Pauli gives up looking for experimental evidence and moves on to the abstract 'escape hatch' theories of Einstein]"

- Wolfgang Pauli, The Theory of Relativity, 1958, p. 4.


"No physical experiment ever proved that the Earth actually is in motion."

- Lincoln Barnett, The Universe and Dr. Einstein, 2nd rev. edition, 1957, p. 73.


"This conclusion directly contradicts the explanation... which presupposes that the Earth moves."

- Albert Michelson (Albert A. Michelson, “The Relative Motion of the Earth and the Luminiferous Ether,” American Journal of Science, Vol. 22, August 1881, p. 125)


And now, to turn the table against the heliocentrists.


http://www.oupcanada.com/higher_education/companion/geography/9780195425451/student_resources/study_guide/unit_09.html

Friction decreases with an increase in altitude, and friction reduces the velocity of wind.

HERE IS A REFERENCE WHICH SAYS THAT THE HEIGHT OF THE BOUNDARY LAYER IS ACTUALLY JUST A FEW HUNDREDS OF METERS THICK.

http://eesc.columbia.edu/courses/ees/climate/lectures/atm_dyn.html

Air is not very viscous ("sticky"), so "real" friction (the one that comes from molecular motion) is only important in a very thin layer of atmosphere next to the surface. However, air is very turbulent. This turbulence generates small-scale up and down motion, which mixes slow air from the friction layer with fast air from above, thereby spreading the effect of molecular friction over a layer a few hundred meters thick (turbulence is the reason for wind gusts). This interaction with the surface slows down atmospheric motion.



"The law of conservation of angular momentum applies to rigid bodies. Not to liquids and not to gases. The reason for this necessity is that imparting a torque to a molecule in a rigid body affects the whole body, which is not the case with the other two states.

Consider the World, without an atmosphere, spinning in a vacuum. If we then wrap a non-moving atmosphere around it, that atmosphere will serve to damp the spin of the World."

The supposed frictional force, inversely proportional to altitude, would have dampened the very rotation of the Earth, from the very start.

The Earth-Atmosphere-Sun system is NOT a closed system, therefore it has not has reached some sort of equilibrium in terms of its angular momentum.

"The World would constantly be losing the energy that it possessed as a result of its rotation, to an atmosphere which would heat up due to this friction and dissipate this extra energy by radiating most of it out into space.

Hence, the interaction of a rotating World with an atmosphere is always going to be a case of losing angular momentum (i.e., angular velocity, since the mass of the World does not change) to the atmosphere, because of friction. Friction generates heat. Heat gets dissipated.
Some of this dissipated heat will leave the World/atmosphere system in the form of radiated energy. The World will slow down and stop."

Let us go to the textbook on atmospheric science.

Conservation of momentum in the atmosphere is a complex process, but basically the earth/ocean/atmosphere system must conserve angular momentum. Angular momentum is transferred from the earth to the atmosphere by the tropical easterlies, where air is rotating faster than the earth and transferred from the atmosphere back to the earth by the westerlies in the mid-latitudes, where the wind is rotating slower than the earth.

"Now, the 'conventional' treatment of our atmosphere is that these molecules interact with one another, such that the angular momentum of the whole is conserved. This is wrong for at least two reasons: There are thermal convection currents within the atmosphere which have a great effect on the air molecules. These convection currents have absolutely nothing to do with angular momentum (these are perhaps the greatest reason why the so-called 'closed system' is invalid). They are due to the incoming heat from the Sun, heating up different  components of the World and its atmosphere at different rates, depending upon composition. These convection currents will act so as to disrupt any alleged angular momentum of our considered molecule. Their effect upon our molecule will be totally overwhelming, compared with any possible transference of angular momentum. ANY 'ANGULAR MOMENTUM' THAT OUR MOLECULE MAY HAVE HAD WILL BE CHANGED BY THE ACTION OF SOMETHING ORIGINATING OUTSIDE OF THE WORLD/ATMOSPHERE SYSTEM.

Once changed, the total angular momentum of the whole atmosphere (if such a thing existed) would be changed. If it has changed, then it is not conserved. I hope that you will all see that there is no way that total angular momentum can be conserved and that we are not talking of any form of theoretical 'closed system.' The second reason is closely tied to the first. As I have said many times now, angular momentum is an attribute of rigid bodies. That is how it is DEFINED. Note that ALL the particles within a rigid body have the SAME angular frequency about a COMMON axis of rotation, irrespective of how far each of them is from that axis. Angular momentum does not apply to gases, nor, in general, to fluids."


No scientist has been able to explain, so far, how friction would work even for the first hundred meters of the supposed rotating atmosphere.

Remember, that the strength of friction lessens as the altitude increases, that is, FRICTION IS INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL TO ALTITUDE.

For the atmosphere to rotate along with the Earth, at the same speed, we need A NEW FORCE, a lateral gravitational force, which must be DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL TO ALTITUDE, in order for the upper layers to rotate along also.

http://web.archive.org/web/20140903074446/http://www.realityreviewed.com/Restoring%20forces.htm

"This implies the existence of a vector field, whose strength determines |v| by being directly proportional to latitude and longitude. Whether this field rotates or not is immaterial. It must exert a force on our air molecule that produces an acceleration solely in the direction of the World's alleged rotation, and of a magnitude which varies according to position within the atmosphere (just as the gravitational field exerts a force whose effect is to cause acceleration toward the centre of the World). This is not the force of gravity, for that always acts towards the centre of the earth mass, and not in the direction of alleged rotation.

Clearly such a field does not exist, for if it did we would find it exceedingly difficult to travel in any direction other than around our particular parallel of latitude in an eastwardly direction. A field that is constantly acting to push air molecules into line will act likewise on all molecules in the atmosphere, whether they be part of aeroplanes, cars or ourselves.

This is also true if we accept for a moment the conventional physics explanation, that the atmosphere is governed by the 'law' of conservation of angular momentum. This would still produce the same effect, namely the tendency to drag everyone and everything in an easterly direction.

 

Geostatic (non-moving World) Model

Here the World does not move, so our molecule does not go from s1 to s2 but rather stays at s1. In order to achieve this objective we explicitly require there to be no force in this case.

Since there would be no field acting upon the air molecule, there would likewise be no force acting on us. This agrees with everyday experience.

Necessary characteristics of any Restoring Force

A comparison with the force of gravity is perhaps helpful.

The field of gravity is such that its strength at a point, s1, within the atmosphere is inversely proportional to (R + h)^2. Such rapid decrease in field strength with altitude helps to ensure that our atmosphere is not compacted into a thin layer at sea level. In contrast, the strength of the supposed new field would be directly proportional to (R + h) and thus increase with altitude.

The existence of a gravitational field is undeniable, since we all do work against its strength every day. Walking, running, jumping and so on all involve our muscles doing work against gravity (a force that pushes or pulls us back down onto the surface of the World). Our muscles pushing against a restoring field would experience resistence which would vary with the direction of motion, with latitude and with altitude. Experimental determination of the field strength of the hypothetical restoring force would enable the associated constant of proportionality to be found (just as the gravitational constant, G, was worked out).

 

Conclusion

The World either rotates or it doesn't.

If the World rotates, then its atmosphere must rotate, because we do not experience lethal windspeeds as a function of latitude. In this case, a restoring force is necessary to explain periods of local atmospheric calm. This field would have an effect on all material objects and would seriously restrict our daily motion in all but an eastwardly direction.

If the World does not rotate, then its atmosphere cannot rotate, and successive periods of local calm are caused in this case simply by decreasing kinetic energy (and linear momentum) of the air molecules as the magnitudes of their velocities are reduced by collisions. This requires the absence of any rotational field and also the absence of even a non-rotating vector field (which would make itself apparent via atmospheric damping).

Unlike the field of gravity, there exists no evidence to support the idea of a restoring vector field.

Since there is no restoring field, the World and its associated atmosphere cannot be rotating about an axis."
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 12, 2009, 06:43:34 AM
In my opinion the biggest and most extraordinary conspiracy of all (which actually runs in parallel with the flat earth debate as Joseph Scaliger was a best friend of Johannes Kepler) is the modification and alteration of world history, that is, of the actual chronology of the events that took place in the past.

Although many exceptional books have been published in the last 200 years pertaining to this subject, the modern development of the study starts with the intriguing paper by R. Newton (1970, 'Ancient Astronomical Observations and the Accelerations of the Earth and Moon', Baltimore, Md., Johns Hopkins Press), in which the author shows that, based on the ancient records of eclipses, the values of the parameter D" (lunar elongation, second derivative) calculated for the  period 1200 BC - 1200 AD, cannot be explained in view of current geophysical theories (especially the law of gravity). This paper created quite a stir in the scientific community, and several leading astrophysicists started to actually research how the law of gravity could be modified to account for such incredible figures.

(http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/fomenko/dsec1.gif)

In 1980, the well known russian mathematician Anatoly Fomenko realized that a different, and correct, approach, would be to realize that the data for the eclipses during that period were falsified and written down much later, he says in the 15-16th centuries AD. As such, the correct graph would look like this:

(http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/fomenko/dsec2.gif)

The original paper by A. Fomenko: http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/fomenko/dsec.htm

Encouraged by these results, Fomenko demonstrated that the eclipse described by Thucydides (History of the Peloponesian Wars), allegedly having occured in 431 BC, actually happened in the XIth century AD; and he gave other examples, the eclipse in Titus Livy' History which must have taken place at least 1000 years later ( http://books.google.com/books?id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=fomenko&cd=2#v=onepage&q=&f=false pg. 100 - 110).

Fomenko believes, and certainly does prove, that our history is at most 1000 years old; he started to be criticized by some new chronologists (Gunnar Heinsohn and Christoph Pfister) that he did not go far enough.

The use of tin metallurgy (very complex)  in antiquity is another example of current historical chronology mistakes; bronze is an alloy of copper and tin, but the large scale production of tin actually began in the XV-XVIth centuries AD; therefore, the Bronze Age must be dated much closer to our era.

The destruction of Pompeii by the eruption of Vesuvius actually happened in the 18th century, and not in the year 79 AD.

(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/pom-grazien2.jpg)(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/pom-grazien1.jpg)

The Pompeian fresco, the Three Graces resemble perfectly Raphael's Three Graces, and later paintings (del Cossa, Rubens). Raphael did not have a time machine available to take him to the year 78 AD, therefore the logical conclusion is that the actual eruption took place either in the XVI century (the conventional chronology) or even in the late 18th century (radical revised new chronology).

"The use of Renaissance artists of identical details, same colors decisions, motives, general composition plans, the presence in the Pompeian frescoes of the things that emerged in the 15 to 17 century, the presence in Pompeian paintings of genre painting, which is found only in the epoch of the Renaissance, and the presence of some Christian motifs on some frescoes and mosaics suggest that Pompeian frescoes and the works of artists of the Renaissance come from the same people who have lived in the epoch. "Vitas Narvidas," Pompeian Frescoes and the Renaissance: a comparison, "Electronic Almanac" Art & Fact 1 (5), 2007.

I fully believe that the actual duration of our world history is not more than 500 years old (100 years for the antediluvian period, and 400 years for our history); the followers of Akhenaten and the cult of Osiris (that is, Misraim), the later Jesuits and Templars, wrote the Torah and New Testament, introducing the completely false chronologies of Genesis chapters 10 and 11, and much more.

Another extraordinary reference is Ghost empires of the past: did the Sumerians really ever exist? by Gunnar Heinsohn.

Iesous Christos (the Messiah) was born in Thrace, around 1680 AD (80 years after the Flood), and was the grandson of Pelasg (the actual first-born of Noah); the historical figure of Abraham is actually Iesous. The conspirators changed the location of his birth (Abraham's) from Thrace to Sumer and invented the chapters 12-25 in Genesis. Iesous was crucified in Constantinopole (the actual Troy) in 1710-1715 AD; the whole story having been moved by the Jesuit priests to Jerusalem. The actual Solomon temple is the Hagia Sophia, built by Nimrod around 1700 AD; in Jerusalem (Ur-Shulim) there was no such temple, with the exception of the temple of Shulim (Salem) dedicated to the lunar gods.

As we can see from the book of Jubilees (chapter 8: http://www.pseudepigrapha.com/jubilees/8.htm, verse 19 has been introduced later as a forgery), the center of the world is not Jerusalem (I have been led to believe in this thing, by the misleading world map of the Templars, which of course, would place their object of pagan worship in the center), but the western portion of Anatolia (ancient Bithynia/Mysia); that is there is a territory of about 40 km in diameter next to the sea of Marmara (sea of Miot/Me'at in the book of Jubilees, river Tina is the Megistus/Simav river which runs next to lake Artynia, and mount Rafa/Rafu is actually the Olympus and Temnus mountains of western Anatolia; Riphath lived in Paphlagonia and Bithynia, that is where the name Rafa/Rafu comes from) which is the actual Garden of Eden and is blocked aetherically, veiled from our view. In the book of Enoch, the actual term sea of Atil (Black Sea; in Enoch's time, the Black Sea covered the sea of Marmara and the sea of Azov too, being called the sea of Thetys) was modified to read Erythraean sea, which is wrong.

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 13, 2009, 06:12:09 AM
A. Fomenko (see www.scribd.com and www.books.google.com for History: Science or Fiction? vol. 1 and 2) was the first serious researcher to find out that Christ was crucified in Constantinopole; he dates this event in the period 1153-1186 AD.

In my opinion, given the new revised chronology, these events took place in the late 17th century (1680-1710/1715) to early 18th century; the temple of Solomon was actually the Hagia Sophia, built by Nimrod in Troy, that is, Constantinopole. Nimrod had at his disposal the full details of the book of Enoch which did include geometry, advanced mathematics, and many other subjects, readily available. The first crusade occurred around 1720 against Troy (Constantinopole); this war become the subject of the Iliad and the Odyssey, invented some years later by the Jesuits.

The Great Wall of China was built in the second half of the 20th century, see http://www.ihaal.com/articles/A%20chronological%20revolution%20made%20by%20historical%20analytics.pdf for an introduction to this subject.

Tenochtitlan (city of Tenoch, son of Cain) was built some 50 years after Cain was banished to present day Mexico; Tiahuanaco, the Pyramid of Gizeh (and the Sphinx) were built also before the Flood, in the period 1550-1600 AD.

Ancient Rome, Greece, Egypt, India, Sumer, Babylon, were all invented in the 18th century by Joseph Scaliger and the Jesuit priests, see Fomenko's books for details. Thales, Pythagoras, Plato, Socrates, Cezar, Archimedes were invented also, as were the ancient wars and historical events. Galilei and Koppernigk also never existed; J. Kepler and T. Brahe lived in the period 1770-1820, as did I. Newton; they were contemporaries with Da Vinci, Michelangelo and Raphael (see my previous message).

Akhenaten was the son of Nimrod, and tried to introduce in Egypt the cult of the planet Mars, to replace the worship of the Sun which was performed by the sons of Misraim; he was forced to go into exile in Canaan around 1720 AD, this story having been transformed into the Exodus of Moses.

Hampton Palace, the Escorial, the Hermitage, St. Peter dome in Rome were built in the period 1780-1820.

See also: http://www.revisedhistory.org/ and http://www.revisedhistory.org/Book%20of%20Civilization.pdf



Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 15, 2009, 02:01:25 AM
Here is the Triumph of Venus by F. del Cossa, allegedly painted in 1470:

http://www2.moneymuseum.com/frontend/images/images/hires/41312_4_en.jpg

Exactly the same images as in the frescoes unearthed at Pompeii:

http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/pom-grazien2.jpg

Or, the painting with the same name, Three Graces, by Raphael (allegedly 1504):

http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/pom-grazien1.jpg

Here is an article which takes a very close look at the correct historical dating of the Vesuvius eruption which destroyed the city of Pompeii (translation from German):

http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ilya.it%2Fchrono%2Fpages%2Fpompejidt.htm&sl=de&tl=en


The sites at Pompeii were excavated during the 19th century; and Raphael lived during the early 16th century (conventional chronology), and during the late 18th century (revised new chronology).

Some researchers have even suggested that the construction of the Versailles by Louis "XVI" (and not by "XIV", and these numbers were invented later on) was the cause of the so-called French Revolution (whose events were later greatly exaggerated; see the book Myth of the French Revolution by A. Cobban); there were even early observers (19th century) who made a strong case for the fact that Napoleon Bonaparte did not actually exist (but was a mythological composite of earlier and later French kings/heroes): http://everything2.com/title/Proof+that+Napoleon+Bonaparte+never+existed and http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Historic_Doubts_Relative_to_Napoleon_Buonaparte.

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: James on December 15, 2009, 01:04:02 PM
I am interested to know, to the best of your reckoning, when Monteverdi composed the opera Il ritorno d'Ulisse in patria, given that the sacking of Troy occured in the early 18th Century.

Since the main events of the Odyssey's last books (the subject of Il ritorno) occured two decades after the sacking of Troy, and you place the sacking of Troy somewhere in the immediate aftermath of the year 1720, conventional chronology places the composition of Monteverdi's masterpiece exactly one century prior to the events it claims to imitate.

Do you believe that Monteverdi successfully prophesised the events of exactly one century in the future, or do you believe that he existed in a later century?

If the latter, which century? If the former, I should like to further question you with regard to his alleged career as a Roman Catholic Priest, given that the Crucifixion of Christ occured shortly before the sacking of Troy, approximately 80 years after Monteverdi's death.

In short, what is the status of this opera? Is it prophetic, or is it Georgian?
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 16, 2009, 09:39:03 AM
As we have seen, the Pompeii frescoes do certainly prove that a period of at least 1450 years has been fraudulently included in the official chronology. Now more proofs.

Here is the Pompeii mosaic, Battle of Alexander and Darius:

(http://mlahanas.de/Greeks/Arts/Mosaics/BattleOfIssusMosaic.jpg)

Now, the Raphael painting, Battle of Constantine and Maxentius:

(http://www.worldofstock.com/slides/TEI2455.jpg)

See History Fiction or Science, volume 1, for the comparison between the two works of art, and many more details about ancient (allegedly) art and its relation to the XVII century.

The details about Monteverdi's career need to be moved forward in time about two centuries; as a Jesuit priest he certainly knew very well about the real chronology, he simply copied the Odyssey written in the period 1715-1730 (along with all the other ancient documents). Here is a site with all the major contributors to the new chronology subject: http://www.ilya.it/chrono/enpages/weristwer.html





Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: James on December 16, 2009, 01:03:16 PM
I see, that does make sense, but I must still ask you, did Monteverdi's life, in your opinion, pro- or precede that of Amadeus Mozart? By your reckoning (moved two centuries forward), Il ritorno was composed in roughly 1840, almost a half-century after the death of Mozart. Is this correct, or did Mozart also live two centuries later (i.e. 1956-1991)?
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: James on December 16, 2009, 01:04:24 PM
P. S., if so, why was his death not more widely publicised?
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 18, 2009, 12:55:30 AM
James, you did not read more carefully what I wrote; I appreciate very much your historical insights, and I think that you will research this subject to convince yourself that at least 5000 years of history have been fraudulently included in the official chronology. It is my opinion that Bach, Vivaldi, Monteverdi, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven lived in the period 1760-1840, most probably Monteverdi having lived in the earlier phase of that interval of time (we move Monteverdi about two centuries ahead in time, to the period 1760 -, we leave Mozart in the period listed officially (although we could move a few decades within that chronology, perhaps 1780 - 1815). I also believe that their approximate years of birth and death (Bach - Haydn) were made up to suit the chronology invented by J. Scaliger (who actually lived at the end of the 18th century).

I also believe that the great architect Andrea Palladio lived in the middle of the 18th century; his treatise on architecture belongs to that period (the mathematics and the drawings) and not at all to a 16th century era. Also, it becomes very clear that Rembrandt and Rubens lived in the latter period of the 18th century and not earlier.

I urge you to read History: Fiction or Science?, vol. 1 and 2, I think you will find them fascinating:

http://books.google.com/books?id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=history+science+or+fiction&cd=3#v=onepage&q=&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=fSvlaZYbcwUC&printsec=frontcover&dq=history+science+or+fiction&cd=2#v=onepage&q=&f=false

Here is the exceptional analysis by Garri Kasparov concerning the invention of ancient Greece and Rome by J. Scaliger:

http://www.revisedhistory.org/Book%20of%20Civilization.pdf

You will find in this last link, the Book of Civilization, another proof that the Iliad could not possibly have been written in the period 1200-1100 BC, pg. 398, an analysis of the term Theo Hwana used by "Homer".

And James, the second derivative of the moon elongation, the D" parameter, shows clearly that our history is at most 1000 years old, see the first volume of History: Science or Fiction? by Fomenko, and my first message here. I believe that Fomenko stopped much too early during his research, and did not see that even the period 1200-1750 has been invented by later historians.



Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 19, 2009, 05:25:11 AM
The best researcher in the field of the radical new chronology (and this will answer your question further) is, in my opinion, Christoph Pfister; he investigated all major "medieval" monuments/buildings and all ancient/medieval documents in Switzerland, and found out that they were built/written well after 1720; in fact he discovered that before 1700 AD nothing whatsoever is known about the history of Switzerland. Here is his best work, Matrix of Ancient History:

http://books.google.com/books?id=Gk5T6bt1fA4C&printsec=frontcover&dq=pfister+die+matrix&cd=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false

And here, his site, one of the very best available today:

http://www.dillum.ch/html/inhalt.html (also includes fantastic information about the Nasa missions, in one of the links)

He discovered also that the gothic style of architecture was developed after 1750, and lasted only 20 years, and not 300 years. What Pfister was not able to determine, is what happened before 1700 AD, and this is just what we have been doing here.

Bach, Monteverdi, Vivaldi, were born in the period 1740-1745, and their style of classical music (1760-1780) was followed immediately by a short transition, to be replaced by the music composed by Mozart (I believe he lived in the period 1780 - 1816). There was no 80 year pause or period between Bach and Mozart.

Pfister came across the fact that the Vesuvius eruption which destroyed Pompeii (many proofs gathered over the years) occurred after 1750, thus Raphael must have lived in the period 1770-1790, when the Three Graces was painted (I believe the eruption took place around 1800).

The knowledge to extract metals (gold, silver, iron, copper, tin) was passed to Noah's sons (especially Khem) from the information that was available before the Flood (see the book of Enoch; the first six chapters, the Apocalypse of the Animals, the Ten Week Apocalypse were added later on however); much more technical information was also transmitted about masonry and how to build large structures, Khem's descendants inherited this knowledge, which led to the organization of the first freemasonry lodges in Troy (they built the Hagia Sophia, the Chartres cathedral, and much more).

Japhet's sons and descendants were the Slavs, and formed further (by mixing with Pelasg's heirs) the tribes of the Goths and Aryans.

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: James on December 22, 2009, 06:29:08 PM
I think I know what books will be going on my Christmas list this year. This could be the start of an illuminating voyage into the annals of history, fake and real.

Thanks for your clarification on the lives of the composers. Perhaps I shall never again listen to Il ritorno with quite the same ear! I assume of course that I will discover the answers to many of my questions when I examine these materials in greater depth, however, in the mean time, I do have some further queries of you if you wouldn't mind.

In the last part of the 15th Century, and for most of the 16th Century according to the old-school version of history, the Spanish Conquistadors sailed to the New World, dismantling the Incan Empire as they went, and introducing Spanish, Smallpox and Christianity to the South American continent. Once again, I am having difficulty reconciling the 18th Century crucifixion of Christ with the zealous evangelism of 15th Century Christians, so I would like to know when the events of the Spanish Conquest actually occurred (presumably it was after events at Troy/Constantinople).

I notice also that you have mentioned a strong case for the non-existence of Napoleon Bonaparte. This is a fascinating assessment, but neccesitates some substantial revisions. I am interested as to whether you (1) explicitly accept this thesis, (2) if so, do you still consider the Battle of Waterloo to have occured? (3) If not, do you believe in the Duke of Wellington, and (4) how about George IV?

A final query, your characterisation of Nimrod is an interesting one. I notice that you've dismissed Genesis 11 as invented, does this mean that Nimrod did not in fact construct the legendary Tower of Babel? Is the tower entirely made-up, or was it in fact built at Constantinople.

By the way, I was very impressed with your analysis of Akenhaten and his followers as the originators of the the Exodus myth of Moses. I have read Freud's Moses and Monothesism, which also argues that the so-called Israelites were in fact Atenist heretics on the run. On this point I am utterly convinced. Elements of Freud's assessment closely match your own (in this one highly specific regard), to such an extent that I think you must have read it already, although if you have not I would thoroughly recommend it. An excellent stocking filler!!

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v499/dogplatter/m_and_m.jpg)

Merry Christmas Levee, and keep up the good work. I will look forward to hearing your answers.

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v499/dogplatter/bell.gif)(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v499/dogplatter/boy_on_sled.gif)(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v499/dogplatter/ho_ho_ho.jpg)(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v499/dogplatter/merry_christmas_santa.gif)(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v499/dogplatter/ho_ho_hoII.jpg)(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v499/dogplatter/boy_on_sled.gif)(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v499/dogplatter/bell.gif)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 24, 2009, 01:28:21 AM
The discovery of the Americas occurred first in the period 1690-1700, by Nimrod, who was called Xelhua (the giant with beard and horns); the descendants of Noah, especially Khem/Kush, had detailed maps of the continents, and on that ark they also had with them boats to take them directly and precisely to their territories (the ones they had inherited).

A few incas did escape the Flood, by hiding in a cave (the Flood lasted for only 7 days and nights), having been warned of what was to follow. Nimrod brought to the Americas the Olmecs, a tribe of kushites, which mixed with the descendants of the incas (some of them travelled to present day Guatemala/Mexico, becoming the mayas and the aztecs).

There was no journey by Columbus, who never existed; slavery went on from about 1750 to the latter part of the 19th century. There was no Jamestown, no Pilgrims; I believe the American "Revolution" took place some decades later than what we have been told; 1776 is a magical number with connections to 666, 1110, and much more. The architectural styles of Monticello, the Capitol, and White House, belong to early 19th century.

The Americas were first colonized, officially, well after the fall of Troy; maybe in the 1740s. We know now that Akhenaten (Freud does make a point in his book for the case that Moses was actually Akhenaten) and his descendants left for France after Nebuchadnezzar (a worshipper of the Sun, follower of Horus, the enemies of Akhenaten and Kush) attacked Canaan, after the death of Nimrod, then his descendants left for the New World, to establish the US. I believe the spaniards and the portuguese arrived in Central/South America after 1750, as the architectural style of the buildings in Santo Domingo (the ones we are told were built in Columbus' time) belongs clearly to the late 18th century.

Let us now put a more precise date on the eruption of Vezuvius which destroyed Pompeii.

http://www.ilya.it/chrono/pages/pompejidt.htm
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ilya.it%2Fchrono%2Fpages%2Fpompejidt.htm&sl=de&tl=en

(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/pom-instrum.jpg)

Steel alloys for tools/instruments used in surgery dates, according to the official chronology, to 1666 (Fabritius); bronze instruments were used much later.

(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/pom-torn.jpg)

(from the Naples national archaeological museum)

(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/pom-grifo.jpg)
(faucet from Pompeii)

(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/pom-vaso1.jpg)(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/pom-vaso2.jpg)

Translation from German to English:

In the window of the museum you can see many products made of glass, including bottles, bottles for perfumes, a lot of colored glass with different shades. Particularly noteworthy are absolutely transparent thin-walled glass vases. The same glass vases are also presented on Pompeian frescoes.

Therefore, it should be noted that the first transparent glass from the mid-15th Century in Venice and is produced on the island of glassblowers of Murano, Angelo Barovir. His secret has been kept strictly secret for a long time thereafter before the competitors.

In Herculaneum, the window glasses were allegedly even a standard size of 45x44 cm and found 80х80 сm (Fig. 15.16). About the way the production of flat glass is not known. In Europe, the first window glass of murky, were called "crown glass" for the stained glass windows around 1330 in the north-west of France, produced in the spinning process. Louis Lucas de Memorial Center, lodge manager at Saint-Gobain has developed from 1688 a new process for the manufacture of flat glass. In this so-called Tischwalzverfahren the molten glass is poured onto flat Gie?tischen, then smoothly rolled with heavy rollers, and finally polished with sand. Previously, flat glass has been obtained mostly by heating, cutting and flat rolling of cylindrical glass.

The window glass from Herculaneum fact is cloudy. The turbidity is probably caused by the effect of the high temperature of the pyroclastic tower. The thickness of the window glass is absolutely evenly! As if it had come from the table, rolls of Saint-Gobain.



At Pompeii, we know now, there existed a large Colosseum; since the destruction of Pompeii must have taken place well after 1688 (official chronology), or after 1780 (radical revised new chronology), the technology for building the Rome Colosseum does belong to the same interval of time. Then, the official chronology which tells of Vespasian, Titus, the siege of Jerusalem, never took place, as the Colosseum was built in the 17th century (official chronology), and as we see here, actually in the end of the 18th century.

Nimrod tried to built (using the plans/drawings saved by Khem on the ark) an UFO; the term SHEM should be used instead of NAME, in the account of the tower of Babel; this tower was a launching pad for the UFO; how could a tribe of some few thousands of people (Nimrod's followers, and we can substract from that number, down to a few hundred) build a tower to reach the Heavenly Dome (at least 15 km in height)? That tower meant a ziggurat, the top of which would be used to launch the UFO (the ziggurat was used as a battery or an antenna to start the process of the mercury gyro which powered the UFO).

 
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 24, 2009, 02:47:14 AM
You wrote also about Napoleon/Wellington/George IV.

http://everything2.com/title/Proof+that+Napoleon+Bonaparte+never+existed and http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Historic_Doubts_Relative_to_Napoleon_Buonaparte will show that the historical figure of Napoleon, as described in our books, is a far cry from what actually happened at the end of the 18th century. Yes, there was a Wellington, I believe, and a battle of Waterloo, but the actual dating of these events could be modified, maybe they took place some years later perhaps. And the identity of Napoleon must be brought into question, was he actually Louis XVIII?

The French king in 1819, King Louis XVIII, is a Bourbon king and claims to have been king of France for 23 years. During this time France and England have fought many battles. This makes it quite probable that the figure "Napoleon" is actually a mythological composite of many different French heroes from many different contemporary battles between England and France.

Let us take a closer look at the alleged reigns of Louis XIV and Louis XV. We are taught that Louis XIV reigned for no less than 72 years (!), 1643-1715, and Louis XV reigned for almost 60 years, 59 to be precise, 1715-1774. It is obvious that these dates were added much later, perhaps at the end of the 18th century, to account for the fact that all official documents were falsified after 1750 (see Pfister's site, www.dillum.ch, presented here earlier).

Very strange is also the reign of George III, 1760-1820; sixty years is a bit too much to be king of England, in my opinion this chronology was made up sometime after the 1840s.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 24, 2009, 03:49:24 AM
(Il ritorno by Monteverdi, one of the most accomplished composers, now we know, of the 18th century)

I think this was written sometimes after 1760 (but before 1780), and that this musical style was replaced by that of Haydn, and later by Mozart (after 1790). As Pfister discovered in Switzerland, the baroque style of architecture lasted for only about 20 years (instead of the 300 years taken into consideration by the official chronology).

As we have seen, the destruction of Pompeii did take place at least after 1688, and that Raphael must have lived, in this official chronology, in that period; the inhabitants of Pompeii would not have painted frescoes of the works of someone who lived some 170 years earlier (the Three Graces, 1504), as we can see from the artefacts, they liked everything to be modern...

Other works by Monteverdi which are very nice:
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 30, 2009, 09:01:25 AM
FAKE SPECIAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY EXPERIMENTS

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1964PhRv..133.1221J
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1973PhRvD...8.3321T
http://www.exphy.uni-duesseldorf.de/Publikationen/2009/Eisele%20et%20al%20Laboratory%20Test%20of%20the%20Isotropy%20of%20Light%20Propagation%20at%20the%2010-17%20Level%202009.pdf
https://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.80.105011
https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.060402
https://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0305117.pdf
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005PhRvL..95d0404S
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006PhRvD..74h1101S

In the first paper, Test of Special Relativity or of the Isotropy of Space by Use of Infrared Masers, the authors of the paper committed a grave omission, failing to take into account the stability of lasers inside the magnetic field of the Earth:

https://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Relativity%20Theory/Download/7149

In the second paper, signed Trimmer and Baierlein, the authors made a horrendous error, subsequently having to withdraw their article.

(https://image.ibb.co/ibmsQd/ref1.jpg)

The third paper included another huge error: the omission of the Cahill criterion.

"So as better and better vacuum interferometers were developed over the last 70 years the rotation-induced fringe shift signature of absolute motion became smaller and smaller. But what went unnoticed until 2002 was that the gas in the interferometer was a key component of this instrument when used as an “absolute motion detector”, and over time the experimental physicists were using instruments with less and less sensitivity; and in recent years they had finally perfected a totally dud instrument. [Conclusions] from such experiments claim that absolute motion is not observable."

Here is more technical proof that an ether drift experiment performed in vacuum will nullify the final results: an effect altspace had no knowledge of.

In vacuum ONE HAS TO use either torsion, pressure, sound or electricity to detect ether.

(https://image.ibb.co/g9y0BJ/mm1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/jOxtWJ/mm2.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/nhTiWJ/mm3.jpg)

Not even if they go to 10^-30, nothing will be detected for the reasons explained above.

Fake Hafele-Keating experiment:


http://www.cartesio-episteme.net/h%26kpaper.htm

Dr. A.G. Kelly requested the actual test results that "gave figures that were radically altered from the published results. These altered results gave the impression that they were consistent with the theory. The original test results are reproduced for the first time in this paper; these do not confirm the theory. The corrections made by H & K to the raw data, are shown to be totally unjustified."


Kennedy[14]   Pasadena/Mt. Wilson   1926   2.0   0.07   ≤ 0.002   35   ∼ 5 km/s   0.002   yes
Illingworth[15]   Pasadena   1927   2.0   0.07   ≤ 0.0004   175   ∼ 2 km/s   0.0004   yes
Piccard & Stahel[19]   with a Balloon   1926   2.8   0.13   ≤ 0.006   20   ∼ 7 km/s   0.006   yes
Piccard & Stahel[20]   Brussels   1927   2.8   0.13   ≤ 0.0002   185   ∼ 2.5 km/s   0.0007   yes
Piccard & Stahel[21]   Rigi   1927   2.8   0.13   ≤ 0.0003   185   ∼ 2.5 km/s   0.0007   yes
Michelson et al.[22]   Mt. Wilson   1929   25.9   0.9   ≤ 0.01   90   ∼ 3 km/s   0.01   yes
Joos[16]   Jena   1930   21.0   0.75   ≤ 0.002   375   ∼ 1.5 km/s   0.002   yes

But these were VERY POORLY PERFORMED experiments which used metallic chambers to detect ether drift, which led to the discovery of the Atsukovsky effect.

Dr. Dayton Miller specified quite clearly:


"Massive non-transparent shields available are undesirable
while exploring the problem of ether capturing. The
experiment should be made in such a way that there
were no shields between free ether and light way in the
interferometer".

Performing ether drift experiments within a metallic chamber will produce the ATSUKOVSKY EFFECT (discovered for the first time by the Russian scientist V. Atsukovsky): the electrons in the metal covering create a Fermi surface and thus partially shield the apparatus from the ether’s movement.

“It is the same as making the attempt to measure the wind, which blows outdoors, looking at the anemometer in a closed room” V. Atsukovsky (Yuri Galaev, “Ethereal Wind in Experience of Millimetric Radiowave Propagation,” The Institute of Radiophysics and Electronics of NSA in Ukraine, Aug. 26, 2001, p. 212


https://arxiv.org/abs/0904.3992

But the team of Kopeikin and Fomalont committed a huge error in a similar study.

And that study also used VLBA.

A scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) says the announcement by two scientists, widely reported this past January, about the speed of gravity was wrong.

Stuart Samuel, a participating scientist with the Theory Group of Berkeley Lab’s Physics Division, in a paper published in Physical Review Letters, has demonstrated that an “ill-advised” assumption made in the earlier claim led to an unwarranted conclusion.

“In effect, the experiment was measuring effects associated with the propagation of light, not the speed of gravity.”

According to Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity, light and gravity travel at the same speed, about 186,000 miles (300,000 kilometers) per second. Most scientists believe this is true, but the assumption was that it could only be proven through the detection of gravity waves. Sergei Kopeikin, a University of Missouri physicist, and Edward Fomalont, an astronomer at the National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO), believed there was an alternative.

On September 8, 2002, the planet Jupiter passed almost directly in front of the radio waves coming from a quasar, a star-like object in the center of a galaxy billions of light-years away. When this happened, Jupiter's gravity bent the quasar’s radio waves, causing a slight delay in their arrival on Earth. Kopeikin believed the length of time that the radio waves would be delayed would depend upon the speed at which gravity propagates from Jupiter.

To measure the delay, Fomalont set up an interferometry system using the NRAO’s Very Long Baseline Array, a group of ten 25-meter radio telescopes distributed across the continental United States, Hawaii, and the Virgin Islands, plus the 100-meter Effelsberg radio telescope in Germany. Kopeikin then took the data and calculated velocity-dependent effects. His calculations appeared to show that the speed at which gravity was being propagated from Jupiter matched the speed of light to within 20 percent. The scientists announced their findings in January at the annual meeting of the American Astronomical Society.

Samuel argues that Kopeikin erred when he based his calculations on Jupiter’s position at the time the quasar’s radio waves reached Earth rather than the position of Jupiter when the radio waves passed by that planet.

Samuel was able to simplify the calculations of the velocity-dependent effects by shifting from a reference frame in which Jupiter is moving, as was used by Kopeikin, to a reference frame in which Jupiter is stationary and Earth is moving. When he did this, Samuel found a formula that differed from the one used by Kopeikin to analyze the data. Under this new formula, the velocity-dependent effects were considerably smaller. Even though Fomalont was able to measure a time delay of about 5 trillionths of a second, this was not nearly sensitive enough to measure the actual gravitational influence of Jupiter.

“With the correct formula, the effects of the motion of Jupiter on the quasar-signal time-delay are at least 100 times and perhaps even a thousand times smaller than could have been measured by the array of radio telescopes that Fomalont used,” Samuel says. “There’s a reasonable chance that such measurements might one day be used to define the speed of gravity, but they just aren’t doable with our current technology.”


GALAEV ETHER DRIFT EXPERIMENTS: TOTAL PROOF OF THE EXISTENCE OF ETHER

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1722791#msg1722791

Yuri Galaev, Ph.D.; Senior research officer of the Institute for Radiophysics & Electronics National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, and corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences (RANS)

THE MEASURING OF ETHER-DRIFT VELOCITY AND KINEMATIC ETHER VISCOSITY WITHIN OPTICAL WAVES BAND Yu.M. Galaev The Institute of Radiophysics and Electronics of NSA in Ukraine

Dr. Galaev remarks:

Orbital component of the ether drift velocity, stipulated by the Earth movement around the Sun with the velocity 30 km/sec, was not detected [during the Dayton Miller experiments].

Dr. Galaev also concludes:

The method action is based on the development regularities of viscous liquid or gas streams in the directing systems. The significant measurement results have been obtained statistically. The development of the ether drift required effects has been shown. The measured value of the ether kinematic viscosity on the value order has coincided with its calculated value.

The most precise experiments ever undertaken in ether-drift detection thus prove that the Earth does not orbit the Sun at a speed of 30km/s.



http://www.revisedhistory.org/investigation-historical-dating.htm
http://www.revisedhistory.org/view-garry-kasparov.htm
http://www.revisedhistory.org/civilevents.htm
http://www.revisedhistory.org/dante.htm
http://www.revisedhistory.org/classical.htm
http://www.revisedhistory.org/Book%20of%20Civilization.pdf

Easier access for History: Science or Fiction (1&2):

http://www.scribd.com/doc/9647635/History-Fiction-or-Science-1
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9647726/History-Fiction-or-Science-2


Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 03, 2010, 08:38:00 AM
http://www.specialtyinterests.net/heinsohn.html (one of the best works by G. Heinsohn)

Fomenko quotes:

http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=28896#28896
http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1081&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=180
http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=27617#27617
http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=27879#27879 (not so ancient egypt)
http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=27888#27888 (not so ancient india)
http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=27892#27892 (not so ancient china 1)
http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=27945#27945 (not so ancient china 2)
http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=27981#27981 (not so ancient china 3)
http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1081&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=120&sid=0a81b9a31c348e3a7a7375fd89e97a78

Dead Sea Scrolls forgeries:

http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=30145#30145

A Mysterious Metal

One of the best-kept secrets of the Dead Sea Scrolls has been the discovery of metals in the black ink. That finding was buried in unpublished results, and wasn't unearthed until 1996. The presence of metals further points to the scrolls being of medieval origin.
Scientific testing of the scrolls in the early 1950s found silver, manganese, iron and other metals in the black ink used on the scrolls. Scholars tried to downplay the discovery of these metals by saying that some of them, like copper and lead, were byproducts of leaching from a bronze inkwell. Yet silver, manganese and iron are not components in the making of bronze. The 1990s tests also detected the presence of strontium and titanium but could not tell if they were pure. (In its purest form, neither element was isolated until the 1800s.)

Edwin Johnson, who proved that the pauline epistles were written at least after 1533 BC:

http://www.radikalkritik.de/antiqua_mater.htm
http://www.radikalkritik.de/pauline_epistles.htm
http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm

C. Pfister: ancient/medieval documents written after 1730, Trajan's column built in the same era as the columns of the Charles Cathedral in Viena, the Bern Cathedral built after 1730:

http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dillum.ch%2Fhtml%2Finhalt.html&sl=de&tl=en

(follow the links in the main page for the St. Charles Cathedral, Bern Cathedral, Abbey Library)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 05, 2010, 12:48:22 AM
http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/fomenko/dsec.htm

It is important for some computational astronomical problems to know the behaviour of D'' -- the second derivative of the Moon's elongation - as a function of the time, on a rather long segment of the time line [1]. This problem, particularly, was talked about during the discussion organized in 1972 by the London Royal Society and British Academy of Sciences [1]. The scheme of the calculation of D'' is as follows: we are to fix the totality of ancient observations of eclipses, then calculate. on the basis of the modern theory, when these observations were made, and then compare the results of the calculations with the observed parameters to evaluate the Moon's acceleration ([4], [6]).

While calculating the date of an observation, the parameter D'' may be ignored. The dependence of D'' on t has been obtained by Newton ([4], [6]), who received 12 values (evaluations) for D'', based on 370 observations of ancient and medieval eclipses preserved in ancient documents ([4], p. 113). These eclipses were supplied with the dates contained in [2], [3] [gorm].

References

[1] 'The Place of Astronomy in the Ancient World', A discussion organized jointly for the Royal Society
and the British Academy. 1972, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London. Ser. A, Math. and Phys. Sci. 276(1976), 1-276.
[2]. Ginzel, F. K.: 1899, Specieller Canon der Sonner und Mondfinsternisse, Berlin, Mayer-Muller.
[3] Oppolzer, Th.: 1887, Canon der Sonner und Mondfinsternisse, Denkschriften, Wien, 52.
[4] Newton, R. R. : 1974, 'Two Uses of Ancient Astronomy', Phil. Trans. Roy. Sic. London, Ser. A. Math. and Phys. Sci. 276,99-115.
[5] Newton. R. R. : 'Astronomical Evidence Concerning Non-gravitational Forces in the Earth-Moon
System', Astrophys. Space Sci. 16, 179-200.
[6] Newton, R. R.: 1970, 'Ancient Astronomical Observations and the Accelerations of the Earth and Moon', Baltimore, Md., Johns Hopkins Press.


(http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/fomenko/dsec1.gif)

Newton: "The most striking feature of Figure 1 is the rapid decline in D'' from about 700 to about 1300 ... . This decline means (Newton, 1972b) that there was a 'square wave' in the osculating value of D''... . Such changes in D'', and such values, unexplainable by present geophysical theories ... , show that D'' has had surprisingly large values and that it has undergone large and sudden changes within the past 2000 yrs" ([4], p.114-115).

R.R. Newton:

I shall not treat the famous question of how Ptolemy obtained his star table. Instead, I shall mention briefly his solar data, which, it seems to me, are unquestionably a hoax. Ptolemy (ca. 152, chap. m.2) gives, to the hour, the times of two autumnal equinoxes, one vernal equinox, and one summer solstice. He says that these times were measured with great care. However, the errors in them are more than a day, whereas Hipparchus three centuries before him had made such measurements with errors of only 2 or 3 h. On the other hand, the data agree exactly, to every numerical digit written down, with what we would calculate from Hipparchus's data and the value for the mean motion of the Sun. It is almost impossible that such errors and such agreement could happen by chance.

(http://hbar.phys.msu.ru/gorm/atext/nnt2p1.gif)

The most striking feature of figure 1 is the rapid decline in D" from about 700 to about 1300. When we remember that the values plotted in figure 1 represent the average between any epoch and 1900, this decline means that there was a 'square wave' in the osculating value of D", and that the osculating D" during the period 700-1300 had a value around 40"/century2 or more. Such changes in D", and such values, are incapable of explanation by present geophysical theories.

The small value of D" during the period of classical antiquity (before about 500) should also be noted. From -700 ro +500, the mean D" was probably smaller in magnitude than it has been at any time during the past 1000 years.

Ancient and medieval astronomical data allow us to form 25 independent estimates of the important acceleration parameter D", at various epochs from about -700 to +1300. These estimates, combined with modern data, show that D" has had surprisingly large values and that it has undergone large and sudden changes within the past 2000 years.

In two recent studies (Newton, 1970 and 1972), I have analyzed about 600 observations, with dates ranging from June 15, 763 BCE to April 2, 1288 CE, for the purpose of studying the accelerations of the Earth and Moon. This is many times the number of observations that had been used before for this purpose. Further, except for one oversight, I believe that I have analyzed every ancient astronomical record that has been used by any earlier worker for the purpose of studying the accelerations.

Newton, R. R.: 1970, Ancient Astronomical Observations and the Accelerations of the Earth and Moon, The Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore.
Newton, R.R.: 1972, Medieval Chronicles and the Rotation of the Earth, Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, in press.

I have found about 375 records that seem to be independent and reliable, which we can date accurately, and for which we know the place of observation with useful accuracy (Newton. 1972).

I divided the medieval records chronologically into twelve sets and formed an estimate of D" for each set. The results are shown in Figure 3, which is reproduced from the reference. The straight lines in the figure are those from Figure 2, without the refinement of the curved section. The twelve points and error bars are the estimates of D" formed from the twelve sets of data. The figure provides almost overwhelming confirmation of the hypothesis that D" is far from constant and that its behavior changed suddenly near the year 700, if the analysis has been done correctly.

(http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/atext/nnt1p3.gif)

The parameter D", which is a linear combination of the accelerations of the Earth and Moon, can be followed as a function of time with high confidence from about 700 BCE to the present. From its behavior, we are apparently forced to conclude that there was something like a 'square wave' in the non-gravitational forces that began about 700 CE and that lasted until about 1300 CE. During the time of this square wave, the accelerations apparently changed by factors of around 5.


HERCULANEUM WINDOW GLASS:

http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&sl=de&tl=en&u=http://www.ilya.it/chrono/pages/pompejigallerydt.htm&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&usg=ALkJrhiTvOymZiRyKVsDGRQBrehOYDKiyQ#15

google translate http://www.ilya.it/chrono/pages/pompejigallerydt.htm#15


(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/gallery/pom15.jpg)
(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/gallery/pom16.jpg)

Translation from German to English:

In the window of the museum you can see many products made of glass, including bottles, bottles for perfumes, a lot of colored glass with different shades. Particularly noteworthy are absolutely transparent thin-walled glass vases. The same glass vases are also presented on Pompeian frescoes.

Therefore, it should be noted that the first transparent glass from the mid-15th Century in Venice and is produced on the island of glassblowers of Murano, Angelo Barovir. His secret has been kept strictly secret for a long time thereafter before the competitors.

In Herculaneum, the window glasses were allegedly even a standard size of 45x44 cm and found 80х80 сm (Fig. 15.16). About the way the production of flat glass is not known. In Europe, the first window glass of murky, were called "crown glass" for the stained glass windows around 1330 in the north-west of France, produced in the spinning process. Louis Lucas de Memorial Center, lodge manager at Saint-Gobain has developed from 1688 a new process for the manufacture of flat glass. In this so-called Tischwalzverfahren the molten glass is poured onto flat Gietischen, then smoothly rolled with heavy rollers, and finally polished with sand. Previously, flat glass has been obtained mostly by heating, cutting and flat rolling of cylindrical glass.

The window glass from Herculaneum fact is cloudy. The turbidity is probably caused by the effect of the high temperature of the pyroclastic tower. The thickness of the window glass is absolutely evenly! As if it had come from the table, rolls of Saint-Gobain.


THE TECHNOLOGY FOR MANUFACTURING THIS KIND OF WINDOW GLASS WAS INVENTED, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL CHRONOLOGY IN 1688 AT ST. GOBAIN:

http://www.vetrotech.com/us/eng/SAINT__1580.asp

THEREFORE THE ERUPTION OF THE VESUVIUS TOOK PLACE AT LEAST AFTER 1700 AD, WHICH MEANS THAT BOTH SCALIGER AND PETAVIUS MUST HAVE LIVED SOME 100 YEARS LATER THAN IS CURRENTLY ACCEPTED.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 06, 2010, 03:57:04 AM
It is easier to show and to prove that the official chronology of world history has been drastically altered, this being the work of the same conspirators who invented the round earth scenario.

As we have seen here, the actual eruption which destroyed Pompeii and Herculaneum took place at least after 1700 AD, and NOT in the year 79 AD.

Here is the Mystery of the Egyptian Zodiacs:

http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/freebooks/history/Zodiacs.html (http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/freebooks/history/Zodiacs.html)
http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/freebooks/history/timeline.html (http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/freebooks/history/timeline.html)



Let us summarize the dates obtained for the Egyptian
zodiacs:

1. Round Denderah Zodiac (DR): the morning of March
20, 1185 A.D.
2. Long Denderah Zodiac (DL): April 22-26, 1168 A.D.
3. Big Esna Zodiac (EB): March 31-April 3, 1394 A.D.
4. Small Esna Zodiac (EM): May 6-8, 1404 A.D.
5. Athribis Zodiacs of Flinders Petrie:
 Upper Athribis Zodiac (AV): May 15-16, 1230
A.D.
 Lower Athribis Zodiac (AN): February 9-10, 1268
A.D.
6. Brugsch's Zodiac (BR) containing three main horoscopes,
each of them showing different date:
 Demotic Horoscope: November 18, 1861 A.D.
 Horoscope withoutWalking Sticks: October 6-7,
1841 A.D.
 Horoscope in Boats: February 15, 1853 A.D.
7. Thebes zodiac of Ramses VII (OU): September 5-8,
1182 A.D.
8. Petosiris Zodiacs (P1) and (P2):
 First Solution:
Outer Petosiris Zodiac (P1): August 5, 1227 A.D.
Inner Petosiris Zodiac (P2): March 24-25, 1240
A.D.
 Second Solution (conditional for (P2)):
Outer Petosiris Zodiac (P1): August 10, 1430 A.D.
Inner Petosiris Zodiac (P2): April 17, 1477 A.D.
 Third Solution:
Outer Petosiris Zodiac (P1): August 2, 1667 A.D.
Inner Petosiris Zodiac (P2): April 2, 1714 A.D.
9. Ramses VI Zodiac (RS):
 First Solution: February 4-5, 1289 A.D.
 Second Solution: February 20-21, 1586 A.D.
Notice that, although there are three final solutions possible
dates for the Petosiris zodiacs, all of them are late medieval
dates.

It is estimated by Egyptologists that the burial tradition
in the Valleys of the Kings lasted for about 400-500 years.

Based on our astronomical dating of the zodiacs from the
tombs, this period should be shorten to about 250-300 years.

On the other hand, the epoch these burials should be shifted
in time much closer to the present times.

Conclusion: We can claim with high probability that the
events of the pharaohs epoch described in ancient history of
Egypt took place not many thousand years before the Christian
era, but during the epoch from the 11th to 15th centuries
A.D.

That means 400-1000 years ago. However, in the
case of the great Egyptian temples, the dates encoded in the
zodiacs indicate the epoch from the end of the 12th century
till beginning of the 15th century A.D.

There was no ancient Greece, Rome or Egypt (see also the Book of Civilization, posted earlier).

JERUSALEM, ACTUALLY TROY/CONSTANTINOPOLE, WITH THE HAGIA SOPHIA IN THE BACKGROUND:

SEE PAGE 12

THE ORIGINAL QUOTE FROM THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS, WHO ACTUALLY WITNESSED THE CRUCIFIXION, WHICH TOOK PLACE IN 1715 AD, AT CONSTANTINOPOLE:

SEE PAGE 12

Here, these conspirators have committed a grave error, and forgot to change the actual wording used. See also the Pauline Epistles classic, by E. Johnson posted earlier here...

ENTRANCE OF CHRIST IN TROY:

SEE PAGE 12

PILATE THE TROJAN:

SEE PAGE 12


This is how our official world history (this chronology was largely manufactured by Joseph Justus Scaliger in Opus Novum de emendatione temporum (1583) and Thesaurum temporum (1606), and represents a vast array of dates produced without any justification whatsoever, containing the repeating sequences of dates with shifts equal to multiples of the major cabbalistic numbers 333 and 360) has been changed so that we would believe in an ancient world which never existed; this conspiracy goes even beyond that of the shape of the earth, and it is easier to show how it happened.



Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 07, 2010, 02:47:07 AM
In every direct debate, so far, none of the detractors have been able to prove anything pertaining to the existence of the round earth hypothesis; the flat earth debate is pretty much over, as we have shown here very easily that there is no curvature at the surface of the earth, and that gravity is not attractive (on the contrary).

Here is the Black Sun in all its splendour, the heavenly body which ACTUALLY DOES cause the solar eclipse:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=36686.msg913473#msg913473
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=36686.msg910271#msg910271


More facts on the new chronology of history:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg854193#msg854193 (the Three Graces by Raphael completely identical to the fresco unearthed at Pompeii)

http://www.revisedhistory.org/Book%20of%20Civilization.pdf

History: Fiction or Science?, vol. 1 and 2:

http://books.google.com/books?id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=history+science+or+fiction&cd=3#v=onepage&q=&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=fSvlaZYbcwUC&printsec=frontcover&dq=history+science+or+fiction&cd=2#v=onepage&q=&f=false


More artifacts from Pompeii:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg861961#msg861961

Edwin Johnson, who proved that the pauline epistles were written at least after 1533 BC:

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm

We have shown here that both Scaliger and Petavius lived at least at the beginning of the 18th century; before 1720 there were no cathedrals, no new/old testaments, everything was made up after this date, and the events of the crucifixion of Christ (who was thracian and NOT hebrew) were moved back in time and the place itself was changed to Jerusalem.

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 09, 2010, 02:30:16 AM
FOUCAULT'S PENDULUM

Heliocentrism (or the more commonly referred to Acentrism) has never been proven, despite having been taught as fact for the last four-hundred years. Even supposed proofs like Foucault's Pendulum do not prove the rotation of the world either, because firstly on a very basic level this phenomenon could be explained in a geocentric model via the gravitational pull caused by the rotation of the entire universe rotating diurnally about a fixed Earth.

The true answer is that all of the serous three story high pendulums that are located in museums around the world (like the one in Paris for example), have there own problems which are not usually talked about.

For instance, not many know that at the very top of the pendulum next to the cable mounting there is a small motorized pin that always stays horizontally opposed to the cable. This pin rotates very slowly, once daily, so as to always ensure the pendulums reliability when hitting the radial teeth once every hour as it swings to and fro. Finally, the pendulum is always cranked up every morning by the caretaker.

From Galileo was wrong:

One can imagine why many who were looking for proof of a rotating Earth would appeal to the Foucault pendulum. It seems logical to posit that the reason the plane of the pendulum appears to be moving in a circle is that the Earth beneath it is rotating. In other words, the heliocentrist insists that the pendulum's circular motion is an illusion. The pendulum is actually moving back-and-forth in the same plane and the Earth is turning beneath it. Since the Earth is too big for us to sense its rotation, we instead observe the plane of the pendulum rotate. All one need do to prove the Earth is rotating, he insists, is to reverse the roles, that is, imagine the plane of the pendulum is stationary and the Earth beneath it is moving. This particular logic, however, doesn't prove that the Earth is rotating. One can begin the critique by asking this simple question: if the pendulum is constantly swinging in the same plane (while the Earth is rotating beneath it), what force is holding the pendulum in that stationary position? In other words, if the plane of the pendulum is stationary, with respect to what is it stationary? This is understood as an 'unresolved' force in physics. The only possible answer is: it is stationary with respect to the rest of the universe, since it is certainly not stationary with respect to the Earth. With a little insight one can see that this brings us right back to the problem that Einstein and the rest of modern physics faced with the advent of Relativity theory: is it the Earth that is rotating under fixed stars, or do the stars revolve around a fixed Earth? As Einstein said: 'The two sentences: the sun is at rest and the Earth moves, or the sun moves and the Earth is at rest, would simply mean two different conventions concerning two different coordinate systems.'

As such, it would be just as logical, not to mention scientifically consistent, to posit that the combined forces of the universe which rotate around the Earth are causing the plane of the pendulum to rotate around an immobile Earth. In other words, in the geocentric model the movement of the pendulum is not an illusion' it really moves. According to Einstein, there is no difference between the two models. Ernst Mach, from whom Einstein developed many of his insights, stated much the same. He writes: 'Obviously, it doesn't matter if we think of the Earth as turning round on its axis, or at rest while the fixed stars revolve round it. Geometrically these are exactly the same case of a relative rotation of the Earth and the fixed stars with respect to one another. But if we think of the Earth at rest and the fixed stars revolving round it, there is no flattening of the Earth, no Foucault's experiment, and so on..'.

Barbour and Bertotti proved that a large hollow sphere (representing the distant star fields) rotating around a small solid sphere inside (modeling the Earth) produced exactly the same pattern of Coriolis and centrifugal forces that are claimed as proof of Earth's spinning in space. If the hollow shell of matter accelerates or rotates, any object inside the shell will tend to be carried along with the acceleration or rotation to some extent. But they note this all-important fact: An object at the center of the hollow sphere will not be affected by the inertial forces. The space around the Earth will exhibit the inertial effects of the distant sphere, but not the Earth itself, if it is centrally located.

From Mach's principle we can conclude that inertia is a universal property, like gravity. But in Mach's principle the conventional interpretation of distant masses as causing inertial effects around the Earth is too restrictive. The cause of inertia could also logically be the properties of the space around each object, modified by the presence of the mass in or around that space. In other words the ether/firmament may be the source of inertia, which causes the gravity and inertial effects on bodies embedded in the ether. The ether's properties are changed by the masses (via feedback), but it is the ether that is the primary or first cause. Linear inertia is the resistance to motion of objects moving linearly caused by the ether drag.

Einstein was intrigued by, but ambiguous about, Mach's principle. This is strange, because Mach's principle states a principle of relativity for rotation, similar to Special Relativity's assertion concerning relative linear motion. An inconsistency with relativity would arise if rotational effects were not reciprocal. Distant masses would be discounted as a potent source of inertia.

No measurement of absolute or preferred rotation has been made to test whether the Earth is rotating or its surroundings. Until such a test is performed, Mach's principle is a valid statement; it has not been disproven experimentally. It is only a hurdle in the minds of those who wish it were not so.

By maintaining the relativity of all motion, especially rotational motion, Mach denied the existence of absolute motion and of absolute space. Accordingly, he maintained the equivalence of the Ptolemaic and the Copernican systems and the equivalence of rotating-system/fixed-universe and universe-rotating/fixed-system situations.

The Foucault Pendulum

By 1851, despite Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler no proof existed of the rotation of the earth.

At that time Leon Foucault 'invented' a contrivance that supposedly PROVED the rotation of the earth. 

Foucault was a failure until Napoleon III became his patron!!

Foucault was a failure at everything he did until Louis Napoleon became his patron. Louis was the nephew of the emperor Napoleon Bonaparte and became president of France in 1848. In 1851, he abolished civil liberties and declared himself dictator of France.

Foucault's pendulum in the church of the Pantheon in Paris. The pendulum had a specially rigged device on top to make it sway a certain way. Of course it was not visible from the floor. Notice also that the pendulum was not swinging in a VACUUM where air currents could not influence its sway.

In front of this display was a big sign which read: COME SEE THE PROOF THAT THE EARTH IS TURNING!!

The French scientific community were not amused by Foucault's folly and refused to make him a member of the French Academy.

Pressure from the emperor finally caused them to relent and 2 years before his death, Foucault was finally made a member of that august body.


Ernst Mach proposed that it is the weight of the stars circling the Earth that drags Foucault pendulums around, creates Coriolis forces in the air that give the cyclones to our weather etc. Barbour and Bertotti (Il Nuovo Cimento 32B(1):1-27, 11 March 1977) proved that a hollow sphere (the universe) rotating around a solid sphere inside (the Earth) produced exactly the same results of Coriolis forces, dragging of Foucault pendulums etc. that are put forward as 'proofs' of heliocentricity!

Richard Elmendorf has done a tremendous amount of research on the Foucault Pendulum and has published it in an illustrated 84-page monograph entitled Heliocentric Humbug! A critical investigation of the Foucault Pendulum.

It may be ordered for $5 from the Pittsburgh Creation Society, P.O. Box 267, Bairdford, PA 15006, U.S.A. Please add appropriate postage (about $2.50 should cover postage, and shipping envelope, I think). 

One personal note about Elmendorf's work. He writes that most Foucault pendulums are not free-swinging, that they are damped and are constrained to swing in a plane. Without such damping the bob tends to start tracing out an ellipse which makes it hard to see the precession.




There are eloquent FE theory proponents here, which however must rely upon a FAQ which is immediately taken advantage of by the round earth proponents; as you can see on the main boards, the debate centers always around the supporting theory (size/diameter of the sun, origin of satellites), which the RE believers have shown to be wrong.


Since we are told that J. Kepler was a best friend of J. Scaliger, we can see that Kepler actually lived in the 18th century (mid-18th century); both R. Newton and A. Fomenko have shown that Kepler was the author of the Almagest and wrote all the books ascribed to Ptolemy, Hipparchus and other "greek" astronomers; there were no Koppernigk, Galilei or Brahe; the conspirators cleverly invented a controversy which never existed, in order to justify the introduction of the disastrous round earth theory.


More details re: the jump of the second derivative of the moon elongation, in History: Science or Fiction, vol.1, pg. 93-94 and here:

http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/atext/newton1.htm
http://hbar.phys.msu.ru/gorm/atext/newton2.htm

All ancient astronomical records, between 700 BC - 1300 AD, have been completely falsified, this having been done in the 18th century.

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Lord Wilmore on April 09, 2010, 04:51:35 AM
I think you've made the link between The Conspiracy and your ideas on the falsification of history much clearer in your last couple of posts. Also, do you think there's any chance we could make a new thread containing the actual content posted on the .net site, instead of just links? I'd be happy to help out in putting it together.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Lord Wilmore on April 09, 2010, 05:18:20 PM
What spurred me to ask is that when .net went down, the vast majority of his content (linked earlier in this thread) was no longer accessible. It would be a real shame to lose any of it, so I'd like to see it here as well.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Ichimaru Gin :] on April 09, 2010, 05:21:47 PM
Dante was actually part of the Knight's Templar affair?
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 10, 2010, 02:20:29 AM
There were no Knights Templar before 1700 AD; as for Dante...

http://www.revisedhistory.org/dante.htm

"WE ARE GLUTTONS FOR FALSE FACTS; OUR CRAVING FOR FRAUD REJECTS ALL TRUTH BUT THE LOOK OF IT. We bring to the most improbable past an 'immense assumption of veracities and sanctities, of the general soundness of the legend', notes Henry James; we accept the 'extraneous, preposterous stuffing' of its empty reliquary ["repository or receptacle for relics"] shell. GLORYING IN FRAUD HELPS TO EXORCISE THE ANCIENT TERROR THAT A PAST NOT PERFECTLY TRANSMITTED WILL REVENGE ITSELF ON US. WE NEED FAKES TO SHIELD US FROM TOO SHARP A KNOWLEDGE. THE FALSE PAST COEXISTS ALONGSIDE THE TRUTH THAT EXPOSES IT, TO CUSHION THE EROSION OF SUSTAINING MYTH."

Also read the book by Edwin Johnson, The Pauline Epistles...and the Book of Civilization (with an introduction by Garry Kasparov).

http://www.revisedhistory.org/classical.htm

(http://www.world-mysteries.com/mpl_5bk.jpg)

Baalbek stones, 1200 tons

The descendants of Misraim (Osiris) and Kush (Seth) used levitation to move the huge blocks of stone seen at Stonehenge, the temples of Egypt (as we have seen, the zodiacs were created in the last few hundred years; H. Carter KNEW EXACTLY where to dig to find Tutankhamon's burial chamber, as the tomb was prepared for such a discovery in the 19th century).

Levitation can be accomplished by applying a very high electrical tension or by sound:

http://montalk.net/science/84/the-biefeld-brown-effect

How I Control Gravity de Dr. Townsend Brown:

http://www.rexresearch.com/gravitor/gravitor.htm

In 1910, professor Francis Nipher showed that the weight of an object can be modified by applying electricity:

http://www.rexresearch.com/nipher/nipher1.htm

Nipher's conclusion was that sheilded electrostatic fields directly influence the action of gravitation. He further concluded that gravitation and electrical fields are absolutely linked.

The biography of F. Nipher:

http://www.accessgenealogy.com/scripts/data/database.cgi?ArticleID=0000301&file=Data&report=SingleArticle


http://www.labyrinthina.com/coral.htm (Coral Temple; levitation)

Tibetan Stone levitation:

http://www.rense.com/general42/soundlev.htm

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/antigravityworldgrid/ciencia_antigravityworldgrid08.htm (exceptionally documented)

http://theunexplainedmysteries.com/levitation-secrets.html


Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Username on April 10, 2010, 05:06:03 AM
What spurred me to ask is that when .net went down, the vast majority of his content (linked earlier in this thread) was no longer accessible. It would be a real shame to lose any of it, so I'd like to see it here as well.
I keep daily local backup sof all .net data.  It will never be gone for good.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Lord Wilmore on April 10, 2010, 07:34:02 AM
What spurred me to ask is that when .net went down, the vast majority of his content (linked earlier in this thread) was no longer accessible. It would be a real shame to lose any of it, so I'd like to see it here as well.
I keep daily local backup sof all .net data.  It will never be gone for good.


Oh, well that's good. Still, it would make things easier to navigate if it was all here. I'll talk to levee about this and other organisational issues via PM. I'd like to see his material presented in the best possible manner.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Ichimaru Gin :] on April 10, 2010, 03:16:09 PM
So do you think levitation is something commonly preformed [currently]?
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 11, 2010, 09:13:11 AM
Yes, it is performed by using the Biefeld-Brown effect, which unifies "gravity" and electricity; levitation can be achieved by sound also, as you have the account re: tibetan stone levitation.

Sound is the highest quality of the fourth state of matter (ether or akasha). The first state of ether arises due to high vibrations of sound. It says that matter has a sound aspect, and when a vibration is caused it generates an acoustical wave which travels through the air working with it concurrently and resulting in oscillations of paticles in the air and this causes the intermolecular space of the air to rise in vibrations and causes the atoms to eventually work into the first state of the ether.

The german UFO used a different strategy, as they needed much more power to achieve their flight performances; they used mercury gyros. To power up the torsion field generator, they used a modification of the Hans Coler tachyon device:

http://www.rexresearch.com/coler/colerb.htm

(http://kendalastronomer.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/anu.jpg)

This is what a tachyon looks like (subquark/omegan/preon). The bubbles of light which make up the strings are the Higgs bosons (akasha in vedic physics terminology); magnetism is a flow of astral atoms (strings of bubbles of light) which come out of the tachyon.

Implosion of the atom means that the mercury dissolves into positive and negative subquarks, which then are used to create a powerful aetheric shield around the UFO.

http://www.alliancesforhumanity.com/matter/matter.htm


For every claim re: the flat earth theory and the radical new chronology I make in my messages, I bring copious proofs, as you all know well by now; what I am saying is that the official FAQ needs to be changed given the fact that the transit videos show clearly that the diameter of the sun cannot be 1,4 million km or 32 miles (50 km), and the earth-sun distance could not possibly measure 149 million km or 3000 miles (4800 km); the matter of the Dome must be taken into account also, I have shown that gravity is not attractive, therefore we are left with just two choices: a rotational type of gravity, and gravity caused by pressure. It is obvious that the force which is currently thought to be attractive gravity, is actually of a pressure type; but the force which keeps the planets/stars on their orbit is rotational, therefore there must a screen/dome between the earth and the planets (a large scale version of the Tesla Shield).

None of the users who say that there are mistakes or ridiculous passages in my messages, have been able to prove this once I got into a direct debate with them, on the contrary.

Here is the most detailed FAQ possible, taking all aspects into account, each and every one of them accompanied by PROOFS and sound arguments:

http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewforum.php?f=7&sid=b9adab5d2e057ad672036df7d4a830b6

I believe that my work can and should be used by the FES, as it provides the proofs needed to combat any and all round earth claims/arguments.

Now, to get back to the new radical chronology matter.

The same people who thought up the round earth fairy tale ARE THE SAME conspirators who invented a fictional history, prior to 1720 AD. For those who think that this is ridiculous, here are the facts re: the eruption which destroyed Pompeii and Herculaneum, again.

The Three Graces, Pompeii fresco, official chronology 79 AD:

(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/pom-grazien2.jpg)

The Three Graces, Raphael painting, official chronology 1504 AD:

(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/pom-grazien1.jpg)

As the official excavations began after 1750 AD, and Raphael did not have a time machine to take him back 14 centuries, it is obvious that the Pompeii fresco IS A COPY MADE AFTER THE ORIGINAL BY RAPHAEL.

Here are the Three Graces by F. del Cossa, 1474 AD (official chronology):

http://www2.moneymuseum.com/frontend/images/images/hires/41312_4_en.jpg

"The use of Renaissance artists of identical details, same colors decisions, motives, general composition plans, the presence in the Pompeian frescoes of the things that emerged in the 15 to 17 century, the presence in Pompeian paintings of genre painting, which is found only in the epoch of the Renaissance, and the presence of some Christian motifs on some frescoes and mosaics suggest that Pompeian frescoes and the works of artists of the Renaissance come from the same people who have lived in the epoch. "Vitas Narvidas," Pompeian Frescoes and the Renaissance: a comparison, "Electronic Almanac" Art & Fact 1 (5), 2007.

The Renaissance occurred during the period 1720-1750 AD, and not two to three centuries earlier.

Here are the artifacts from Pompeii:

(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/pom-instrum.jpg)

Surgical instruments which, according to the official chronology were used only after 1666 (the treatise of Fabritius Hildanus).

(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/pom-vaso2.jpg)

Translation from german to english:

In the window of the museum you can see many products made of glass, including bottles, bottles for perfumes, a lot of colored glass with different shades. Particularly noteworthy are absolutely transparent thin-walled glass vases. The same glass vases are also presented on Pompeian frescoes.

Therefore, it should be noted that the first transparent glass from the mid-15th Century in Venice and is produced on the island of glassblowers of Murano, Angelo Barovir. His secret has been kept strictly secret for a long time thereafter before the competitors.

In Herculaneum, the window glasses were allegedly even a standard size of 45x44 cm and found 80х80 сm (Fig. 15.16). About the way the production of flat glass is not known. In Europe, the first window glass of murky, were called "crown glass" for the stained glass windows around 1330 in the north-west of France, produced in the spinning process. Louis Lucas de Memorial Center, lodge manager at Saint-Gobain has developed from 1688 a new process for the manufacture of flat glass. In this so-called Tischwalzverfahren the molten glass is poured onto flat Gie?tischen, then smoothly rolled with heavy rollers, and finally polished with sand. Previously, flat glass has been obtained mostly by heating, cutting and flat rolling of cylindrical glass.

The window glass from Herculaneum fact is cloudy. The turbidity is probably caused by the effect of the high temperature of the pyroclastic tower. The thickness of the window glass is absolutely even! As if it had come off from the table rolls of Saint-Gobain.

The window glass from Herculaneum:

(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/gallery/pom15.jpg)(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/gallery/pom16.jpg)

This window glass, according to official chronology, could have been manufactured ONLY AFTER 1688 AD: http://www.vetrotech.com/us/eng/SAINT__1580.asp

I have just proven to you that the eruption which destroyed Pompeii and Herculaneum took place at least AFTER 1700 AD: there were no Plinius the Elder, Dio Cassius, Vespasian.

The Colosseum was built around 1725-1730 (see the smaller version unearthed at Pompeii), as was the Pantheon.

The Romans could not have built ANYTHING, not even a single brick, because of the number system they used, according to official chronology:

But let us return to mathematics and to ancient Rome. The Roman numeral system discouraged serious calculations. How could the ancient Romans build elaborate structures such as temples, bridges, and aqueducts without precise and elaborate calculations? The most important deficiency of Roman numerals is that they are completely unsuitable even for performing a simple operation like addition, not to mention multiplication, which presents substantial difficulties (see Figure 2). In early European universities, algorithms for multiplication and division using Roman numerals were doctoral research topics. It is absolutely impossible to use clumsy Roman numbers in multi-stage calculations. The Roman system had no numeral "zero." Even the simplest decimal operations with numbers cannot be expressed in Roman numerals.

Just try to add Roman numerals:

MCDXXV
+
MCMLXV


or multiply :

DCLIII and
CXCIX

Try to write a multiplication table in Roman numerals. What about fractions and operations with fractions?

(http://www.revisedhistory.org/images/mtable.jpg)

Christoph Pfister, one of the best researchers of the new radical chronology, discovered that there were NO HUMAN SETTLEMENTS PRIOR TO 1700 AD IN SWITZERLAND, and that all major gothic buildings (including the Bern cathedral) were built after 1730, and that all "medieval" documents kept at the Abbey Library were in fact forgeries belonging to the 18th century (see his site, I posted the address earlier).

I always use the very best proofs, here is the Jump of the Second Derivative of the Moon Elongation (proving clearly that all astronomical records between 700 BC - 1300 AD are later forgeries):

(http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/9299/moon1v.jpg)

(http://img718.imageshack.us/img718/135/moon2i.jpg)
(http://img260.imageshack.us/img260/6551/moon3l.jpg)

Are you going to call R. Newton's work as "ridiculous"? R. Newton is one of the most prestigious astrophysicists of the 20th century, here is the impecable analysis of the ancient astronomical records:

http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/atext/newton1.htm
http://hbar.phys.msu.ru/gorm/atext/newton2.htm








Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 11, 2010, 10:00:21 AM
DAYTON MILLER ETHER DRIFT EXPERIMENTS II

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg751624#msg751624 (part I)

And there is more...

Dear Tom Roberts,

If I could summarize again:

1) You analyzed an apparently unpublished set of data from one of
Miller's tests in Cleveland, when the most serious data which requires
attention is from his Mt. Wilson experiments. I'm sure one could find
unpublished data from Michelson as well, or from Einstein's work -- it
may have historical significance, but is not the point of discussion if
you wish to refute what provides a foundation for much of new interest
in ether and ether-drift. I have no idea why Glen Deen gave you this
data set, instead of something from the Mt. Wilson experiments. Maybe
he can clarify this.

2) The tests in Cleveland would very likely have produced a signal far
below that of the Mt. Wilson experiments, given the effect of altitude
-- higher altitudes produce higher ether-drift velocities, as
documented by Galaev. Therefore, whatever your critique of the
Cleveland 1927 experiments were, they would not apply, or apply only
less-so to the Mt. Wilson experiments of 1925-26. You cannot presume
to assert the "signal to noise" levels were the same for both sets of
experiments. That's an unproven assumption.

3) Even if we assume, the variance within the measurements for any one
of the four seasonal epochs at Mt. Wilson was large, to rest upon that
observation and go no farther is to miss the forest for the trees.
Larger patterns in data sets often are not apparent or ammenable to
analysis via statistical methodology, but rather require dynamical
methods of analysis, or sometimes graphical or
geographical-astrocartographical methods. For example:

4) I did not mean to imply that low-altitude ether-drift experiments
would yield "no signal" at all. They do, but apparently of a reduced
intensity. Consequently, we might ask if the August 1927 data which
you analyzed yielded a variation over sidereal-clock coordinates? And
if so, is this variation along the same sidereal hour axis as what
Miller noted for the Mt. Wilson experiments, even if the velocity
determination would be at a lower level? If so, that would be in
keeping with his overall theory and findings. Miller's pre-Mt.Wilson
tests in Cleveland DID occasionally show similar vectors, as did the
Morley-Miller and even the Michelson-Morley experiment. Yes, he did a
lot of testing and control experiments, as Einstein was at the time
proclaiming (without evidence) that Miller's work was the consequence
of "thermal artifacts". So he did a lot of work to show, exactly, how
the interferometer would react to both small and large external heating
effects, and precautions were undertaken, such as shielding the
interferometer arms with insulation, and so on. NONE of those
experiments -- Michelson-Morley, Morley-Miller, or Miller in Cleveland
ever produced a fully "null" or "zero" result, which by itself is
significant. But the data was best at Mt. Wilson, and likewise
Michelson-Pease-Pearson also got their best result at Mt. Wilson.
Miller addressed this consideration in the 1933 paper, and
Michelson-Morley were also aware of their own slight positive result,
stating in the 1887 paper the need to perform the experiment over other
seasonal periods -- which they never did. Only Miller did so. The
fact that all four seasonal epochs of the Mt. Wilson experiments
yielded similar sidereal-hour vectors for the axis of drift, and that
this also was the same (though reduced) axis which could be extracted
from the original Michelson-Morley experiment, is THE significant
consideration, even if the velocity determinations were slightly
variable. This is what we call a highly-structured pattern in the
data. The fact that Galaev later found a similar axis of drift in his
work, and the seasonal variations in "dark matter wind" also show a
similar pattern, is "icing on the cake" so to speak.

5) High "signal to noise" ratios plague other data sets from natural
phenomena, such as climate patterns. Daily precipitation is a function
of solar heating and shifting of wind and pressure patterns. But if we
look for variations in precipitation as an indicator of solar heating,
it requires a lot of years of data before we get a climatic curve which
approximates the smooth latitudinal shifting of the sun's location, and
hence, solar heating of the lower atmosphere. Over shorter periods,
rainfall quantities may be extremely variable with large quantities one
day or week, nothing the next day or week, and so on over the years,
with some years very wet, others in drought. If we presume ignorance
of how solar heating works to stimulate rains, we would be hard pressed
to find this pattern in all the "noise" of daily precipitation
variation. We would in fact only find the pattern by recording
precipitation over the year, and then averaging the data by week or
month. Only then, you get a pattern which is valuable, and allows some
degree of confidence and prediction of when a "rainy season" or "dry
season" will occur. Likewise also, I would imagine, with the
determinations of anisotropy in 3-deg.K. in open space -- a lot of
variation, no way to make "statistical analysis" but when it is plotted
on a map -- or along a simple graphical ordination representing
sidereal hour -- it makes a pattern which is important to consider.

Unfortunately, I have no computer-readable data files for Miller. My
role was mostly historical, basically finished after the data sets were
finally obtained, and others set out on that task. I cannot speak to
what Glen Deen and others are doing with the data. My larger interest
today is in the work of Galaev, who developed an elegant and very
simple interferometer using parallel light beams, and seems
potentially easier to use, less afflicted by vibrations, and possibly
could be rendered far more sensitive given current technology. My push
has been, for more experiments to be undertaken, rather than merely to
analyze Miller over and over. I must disagree that your DSP method
will ever critically undermine Miller's findings, if only because my
points above cannot be overcome by purely statistical arguments. If
Miller's four different seasonal epochs had yielded four different
points in the heavens, four different axes of ether-drift, then surely
a rejection of his work would be fully in order and legitimate. But I
encourage you to look again at Figure 2 in my Miller paper.
http://www.orgonelab.org/miller.htm
This shows Miller's data organized firstly by sidereal hour, and
secondly by civil clock time. By sidereal hour, there is a distinct
pattern in the data, one which appears to be robust enough even to
survive your argument about the need for error-bars. However, when the
same data is organized by civil clock time, the pattern vanishes. This
is the issue which you need to address, and it will not be defeated
with DSP methods.

As noted, I do have copies of all of Miller's data sheets, being the
guy who stimilated their re-discovery from dusty storage rooms. You
mention only the one data sheet of Figure 8 from his 1933 paper, which
showed the results of 19 turns of the interferometer over about a
15-minute period. This is like, extracting rainfall records for one
month of one year, exclaiming there is "no solar-related pattern" and
ignoring all the rainfall data from many other months and years. Sure,
look at only one data sheet, and clear determinations may be
insufficient. But really, your DSP analysis was not of that data
sheet, nor of the hundreds of other data sheets from Mt. Wilson.

I have no interests to second-guess Miller's methods, and your claims
really don't suggest any serious reason why one should be concerned.
Nobody including Michelson had any problem with Miller's methods or
findings at the time when he was doing his work, other than Einstein,
who was no expert in the ether-drift methods. In fact Miller was the
student of Morley, and learned the methods as handed down from
Michelson and Michelson-Morley. You presume to have us believe you
know more about it than they did, even though you haven't undertaken an
analysis of the very same published data from which Miller's
conclusions were derived. And all the other validating experiments,
you simply ignore. Sorry to say, this is simply insufficient.

Regards,

James DeMeo

"But we must pause at this juncture to critique Miller’s thinking process, for
he, being a Copernican, is basing his interpretation of data on his belief that
the Earth is moving at least 30 km/sec through space. Interestingly enough, it
is precisely because of this presupposition that Miller runs into some
unexplained difficulty, since his observations begin to conflict with his
mathematical calculations. The one anomaly in all past interferometer
experiments that Miller discovered was the experimenters assumed they knew the
precise velocity of the Earth through the ether in combination with the solar
system’s supposed motion toward the constellation of Hercules, but did they
really know? The geocentrist, of course, would answer that they did not know.
In any case, Miller’s 1925 experiment took into account this “anomaly” and he
made his calculations accordingly. Since he assumed the Earth was moving 30
km/sec, he combined this with the four positions (February, April, August,
September) that he examined of the Earth’s orbit around the sun and then used
Pythagorean geometry to determine the speed of the Earth toward the
constellation Draco, which came to 208 km/sec.[2] In other words, 208 km/sec is
what Miller believed to be the Earth’s absolute speed through the ether. Of
course, being a heliocentrist, Miller is assuming that the ether is motionless
and that the Earth is moving through it. In any case, Miller’s 1933 paper
reveals that his Pythagorean calculations do not match what he observed in the
fringe shifts. As we will recall, his experimental fringe shifts showed a
maximum of 10 km/sec, but this figure is less than his computed value by a
factor of twenty! Miller did not have an answer for this problem, and it is
left as an open-ended question in his 1933 paper. The answer, of course, is
that Miller’s Pythagorean calculations were based on a faulty premise (i.e.,
that the Earth was moving). If that factor were eliminated, his calculations
would be in accord with his observations. The same can be said of recent
experiments performed by Stefan Marinov, in the late 1970s, using
coupled-mirror interferometry.

Miller configured the four interferometer readings in the form of a
parallelogram (February, April, August, September), which assumes the Earth is
in orbit around the sun. The diagonal of each of the four parallelogram points
represents the apex of that period, while the long side represents the motion,
which is coincident with the center of orbit; the short side of the
parallelogram represents Earth velocity of 30 km/sec. Hence, knowing the
direction of the three sides of the triangle, and the magnitude of one side,
allows one to calculate the magnitude of the other sides, which for Miller was
208 km/sec toward Dorado."


Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 21, 2010, 04:05:53 AM
Mach's Principle/Geocentric Coriolis Effect

"The effect of the Coriolis force is an apparent deflection of the path of an object that moves within a rotating coordinate system. The object does not actually deviate from its path, but it appears to do so because of the motion of the coordinate system. On the Earth an object that moves along a north-south path, or longitudinal line, will undergo apparent deflection to the right in the Northern Hemisphere and to the left in the Southern Hemisphere."

(http://www.dyarstraights.com/msgundam/CORIOLIS.GIF)

By maintaining the relativity of all motion, especially rotational motion, E. Mach denied the existence of absolute motion and of absolute space. Accordingly, Mach maintained the equivalence of the Ptolemaic and the Copernican systems and the equivalence of rotating-system/fixed-universe and universe-rotating/fixed-system situations.

Mach's Principle: A body experiences no inertial forces when it is at rest or in uniform motion with respect to the center of mass of the entire universe. When its motion is nonuniform (accelerated) with respect to the total mass of the universe, it experiences forces such as centrifugal force and the Coriolis effect. Hence, the "local" behavior of matter is influenced by the "global" properties of the universe, i.e., those properties that describe the universe as a whole, which are studied in cosmology.

More details, concerning the application of Mach's Principle to Foucault's Pendulum can be found here:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg944125#msg944125

The Lense-Thirring effect as a consequence of Mach's Principle:

http://www.answers.com/topic/mach-s-principle

H. Thirring observed that the complete equivalence between the reference frames, explaining such phenomena as the Foucault pendulum equally well in a geocentric reference frame, is secured by definition by Einstein's 1915 work: "the required equivalence appears to be guaranteed by the general co-variance of the field equations." That is, Einstein's field equations are structured to supply the necessary upward force on the geosynchronous satellite in a geocentric as well as a heliocentric framework. Thus, H. Thirring notes that: "...in an Einsteinian gravitational field, caused by distant rotating masses, forces appear which are analogous to the centrifugal and Coriolis forces."

Max Born in his famous book,"Einstein's Theory of Relativity", Dover Publications,1962, pgs. 344 & 345 says:

"...Thus we may return to Ptolemy's point of view of a 'motionless earth'...One has to show that the transformed metric can be regarded as produced according to Einstein's field equations, by distant rotating masses. This has been done by Thirring. He calculated a field due to a rotating, hollow, thick-walled sphere and proved that inside the cavity it behaved as though there were centrifugal and other inertial forces usually attributed to absolute space.

Thus from Einstein's point of view, Ptolemy and Corpenicus are equally right."

Einstein himself also says:

"The struggle, so violent in the early days of science, between the views of Ptolemy and Copernicus would then be quite meaningless. Either CS could be used with equal justification. The two sentences, 'the sun is at rest and the earth moves,' or 'the sun moves and the earth is at rest,' would simply mean two different conventions concerning two different CS. -- Einstein and Infeld, The Evolution of Physics, p.212 (p.248 in original 1938 ed.)"


Therefore, distant rotary masses can cause local inertial forces, like the Coriolis and centrifugal forces, which perfectly mimic the inertial effects of a spinning Earth . This implies that there are two possible explanations for the inertial forces whenever objects are in relative rotational motion.

Mach's principle has been confirmed in theory by Hans Thirring and no experimental test has ever disproved this principle of relative motion.

The experiment performed by J. Barbour and B. Bertotti proved that a large hollow sphere (representing the distant star fields) rotating around a small solid sphere inside (modeling the Earth) produced exactly the same pattern of Coriolis and centrifugal forces that are claimed as proof of Earth's spinning in space. If the hollow shell of matter accelerates or rotates, any object inside the shell will tend to be carried along with the acceleration or rotation to some extent. There have arisen some questions re: the Lagrangian used by Barbour and Bertotti and also about the coordinate transformations discussed in their article, but the main experiment showed, quite clearly that Mach's Principle is correct.

http://www.freelists.org/post/geocentrism/Overview-Barbour-Bertotti

Ernst Mach proposed that it is the weight of the stars circling the Earth that drags Foucault pendulums around, creates Coriolis forces in the air that give the cyclones to our weather etc. Barbour and Bertotti (Il Nuovo Cimento 32B(1):1-27, 11 March 1977) proved that a hollow sphere (the universe) rotating around a solid sphere inside (the Earth) produced exactly the same results of Coriolis forces, dragging of Foucault pendulums etc. that are put forward as 'proofs' of heliocentricity!



Round earth supporters, therefore, cannot use the Coriolis effect as a "proof" that the Earth is rotating around its own axis, on the contrary.

For us, for the flat earth theory, Mach's Principle is a great scientific tool to be used whenever an argument arises which might include the concept of the Coriolis force/effect; in flat earth theory variable winds are caused by thermal and pressure gradients caused by the gates/openings in the first dome (that is why, to present flat earth theory without the concept of the dome, complicates things very much).

Heavenly Dome:
http://www.infidelguy.com/heaven_sky.htm
http://www.peterwallace.org/essays/flatearth.htm
http://web.archive.org/web/20070927011927/http://sol.sci.uop.edu/~jfalward/ThreeTieredUniverse.htm

Since there is no attractive gravity, there must be a shield or screen between the orbits of the planets/sun/moon (whose motions can only be explained by a rotational kind of gravity caused by aether) and the pressure type of gravity which is caused by the cosmic rays (aether, tachyons) as they act upon the receptive vortices of the subquarks which make up the atoms.




Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 24, 2010, 02:22:59 AM
In order to avoid situations like this ( http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=38120.0 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=38120.0) ) the FAQ must be modified to include the latest and best proofs provided in the alternative FAQ, re: flat earth maps, orbit/size of the sun, movements of the satellites, and much more.

As I have mentioned before, S. Rowbotham made several mistakes when discussing the secondary (supporting) flat earth theory (earth-sun distance, solar eclipse, circumpolar constellations), that is why it is very important to present the facts from an awesome and powerful position, one which will silence immediately any and all round earth arguments.

Here is the correct map for the flat earth, which should replace immediately the map used in the official FAQ (based on Rowbotham's northern circumpolar constellations; the center of the Earth is located next to the sea of Marmara, and there are three kinds of stellar orbits: southern/northern circumpolar and regular, more details below):

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=36686.msg910260#msg910260 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=36686.msg910260#msg910260)

(http://web.archive.org/web/20061224004927/http://geocities.com/levelwater/africabrazil.gif)
(http://gal.neogen.ro/galleries/socialro/68/ca/072ba965_0020000201752_00_600.jpg)

Now, the Piri Reis map is not the most complete map possible: I believe that the real shapes of North/South America (especially USA, Canada, and Brazil) and that of Africa and Australia are somewhat different from what we have been led to believe, but it answers immediately and completely any and all questions re: airplance flights (Santiago - Sydney, Santiago - Juneau, London - Sydney, Tokyo - Los Angeles, London - Tokyo, Shanghai - Los Angeles) and much more.

Why argue endlessly using the wrong map, when I have given you a much better map, which silences immediately any round earth proponents' concerns.

There are three kinds of stellar orbits, here is the photograph to prove it:

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0903/5hOHPsanterne900.jpg (http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0903/5hOHPsanterne900.jpg)

See the following links for complete explanations:

http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?p=33520#p34143 (http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?p=33520#p34143)
http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?p=33520#p33509 (http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?p=33520#p33509)
http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?p=33520#p33520 (http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?p=33520#p33520)

The size (diameter) of the Sun, and the Earth - Sun distance in the FAQ must be modified to read: diameter of the Sun - 600 meters (to be elegant, we use 1000/PHI ~618 meters), Earth - Sun distance 10 - 12 km. HERE ARE THE PROOFS, real time videos of the ISS/Mercury Sun transits, also the ISS Moon transit.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=36686.msg910271#msg910271 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=36686.msg910271#msg910271)
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=36686.msg913547#msg913547 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=36686.msg913547#msg913547)

These links include the photographs of the Black Sun which, as you can see, has the same diameter as that of the visible Sun.

For the best information re: the Sun, see the alternative FAQ:

http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1183 (http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1183) (page 1)
http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1183&start=15 (http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1183&start=15) (page 2)


The debate flat earth vs. round earth reduces, really, to one issue: is there any curvature at the surface of the Earth?


The Barbarians, here are the details, where we can see very clearly that there is no ascending slope, no midpoint curvature:

The Barbarians, hosted by Terry Jones

(http://)

Between 38:28 - 38:35, we can see clearly ABSOLUTELY NO CURVATURE ALL THE WAY TO MOROCCO...the surface of the strait is completely flat...


Multiple photographs taken from Port Credit, Etobicoke, Grimsby, Hamilton over the lake Ontario, no curvature whatsoever:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=32641.msg805747#msg805747 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=32641.msg805747#msg805747)
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=32641.msg806466#msg806466 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=32641.msg806466#msg806466)


We do not even need to debate in terms of photographs or videos; all we really need is to show that there is no attractive gravity:

http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1183&start=15#p35541 (http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1183&start=15#p35541)
http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1183&start=15#p35542 (http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1183&start=15#p35542)

Complete and immediate proofs of the fact that there is no attractive gravity; without this concept, the round earth theory falls flat on its nose.


Cosmis aether wave background:

http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?p=31011#p31011 (http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?p=31011#p31011)

The movement of the heliocentric solar system towards the star Vega is incompatible with the first law of Kepler:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=36732.msg914126#msg914126 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=36732.msg914126#msg914126)

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 25, 2010, 07:48:44 AM
SEISMIC WAVES PROVE THE EARTH IS FLAT

In fact, seismic waves turn out to be one of the most ingenious proofs that the surface of the Earth is actually flat.

The discontinuities of the seismic waves assumed by modern science to occur at the crust mantle boundary are actually a network of huge caverns and large underground bodies of water and that they would match perfectly the seismic data.

Great masses of water are interpreted as molten rock.

Seismic waves travel faster north-south than east-west for a full four seconds.

"The S-wave shadow zone is larger than the P-wave shadow zones; direct S waves are not recorded in the entire region more than 103° away from the epicentre. It therefore seems that S waves do not travel through the core at all, and this is interpreted to mean that it is liquid, or at least acts like a liquid. The way P waves are refracted in the core is believed to indicate that there is a solid inner core. Although most of the earth's iron is supposed to be concentrated in the core, it is interesting to note that in the outer zones of the earth, iron levels decrease with depth.

Seismologists sometimes draw contradictory conclusions from the same seismic data. For instance, two groups of geophysicists produced completely different pictures of the core-mantle boundary, where there are believed to be 'mountains' and 'valleys' as high or deep as 10 km. The two groups used virtually the same data but used different equations to process them. Seismologists also disagree on the rate of rotation of the inner core: some say it is rotating faster than the rest of the planet, others that it is rotating more slowly, and yet others that it rotates at the same speed!

    It is becoming increasingly evident that the earth model presented by the reigning theory of plate tectonics is seriously flawed. The rigid lithosphere, comprising the crust and uppermost mantle, is said to be fractured into several 'plates' of varying sizes, which move over a relatively plastic layer of partly molten rock known as the asthenosphere (or low-velocity zone). The lithosphere is said to average about 70 km thick beneath oceans and to be 100 to 250 km thick beneath continents. A powerful challenge to this model is posed by seismic tomography, which shows that the oldest parts of the continents have deep roots extending to depths of 400 to 600 km, and that the asthenosphere is essentially absent beneath them. Seismic research shows that even under the oceans there is no continuous asthenosphere, only disconnected asthenospheric lenses.

    The more we learn about the crust and uppermost mantle, the more the models presented in geological textbooks are exposed as simplistic and unrealistic. The outermost layers of the earth have a highly complex, irregular, inhomogeneous structure; they are divided by faults into a mosaic of separate, jostling blocks of different shapes and sizes, generally a few hundred kilometres across, and of varying internal structure and strength. This fact, in conjunction with the existence of deep continental roots and the absence of a global asthenosphere, means that the notion of huge rigid plates moving thousands of kilometres across the earth is simply untenable. Continents are about as mobile as a brick in a wall!

    The plate-tectonic hypothesis that the present oceans have formed by seafloor spreading since the early Mesozoic (within the last 200 million years) is also becoming increasingly implausible. Numerous far older continental rocks have been discovered in the oceans, along with 'anomalous' crustal types intermediate between standard 'continental' and 'oceanic' crust (e.g. plateaus, ridges, and rises), and the evidence for large (now submerged) continental landmasses in the present oceans continues to mount.

At the Kola hole, scientists expected to find 4.7 km of metamorphosed sedimentary and volcanic rock, then a granitic layer to a depth of 7 km (the 'Conrad discontinuity'), with a basaltic layer below it. The granite, however, appeared at 6.8 km and extends to more than 12 km; no basaltic layer was ever found! Seismic-reflection surveys, in which sound waves sent into the crust bounce back off contrasting rock types, have detected the Conrad discontinuity beneath all the continents, but the standard interpretation that it represents a change from granitic to basaltic rocks is clearly wrong. Metamorphic changes brought about by heat and pressure are now thought to be the most likely explanation.

The superdeep borehole at Oberpfälz, Germany, was expected to pass through a 3-to-5-km-thick nappe complex into a suture zone formed by a supposed continental collision. The borehole reached a final depth of 9101 m in 1994, but no evidence supporting the nappe concept was found. What the scientists did find was a series of nearly vertical folds that had failed to show up on seismic-reflection profiles.

 Rock density is generally expected to increase with depth, as pressures rise. Results from the Kola hole indicated that densities did increase with depth initially, but at 4.5 km the drill encountered a sudden decrease in density, presumably due to increased porosity. The results also showed that increases in seismic velocity do not have to be caused by an increase in rock basicity. The Soviet Minister of Geology reported that 'with increasing depth in the Kola hole, the expected increase in rock densities was therefore not recorded. Neither was any increase in the speed of seismic waves nor any other changes in the physical properties of the rocks detected. Thus the traditional idea that geological data obtained from the surface can be directly correlated with geological materials in the deep crust must be reexamined.'

    The results of superdeep drilling show that seismic surveys of continental crust are being systematically misinterpreted. Much of the modelling of the earth's interior depends on the interpretation of seismic records. If these interpretations are wrong at depths of only a few kilometres, how much reliance can be placed on interpretations of the earth's structure at depths of hundreds or thousands of kilometres beneath the surface?!

    Contrary to expectations, signs of rock alteration and mineralization were found as deep as 7 km in the Kola well. The hole intercepted a copper-nickel ore body almost 2 km below the level at which ore bodies were thought to disappear. In addition, hydrogen, helium, methane, and other gases, together with strongly mineralized waters were found circulating throughout the Kola hole. The presence of fractures open to fluid circulation at pressures of more than 3000 bars was entirely unexpected. The drillers at Oberpfälz discovered hot fluids in open fractures at 3.4 km. The brine was rich in potassium and twice as salty as ocean water, and its origin is a mystery.

Another surprise at the Kola hole was that lifeforms and fossils were discovered several kilometres down. Microscopic fossils were found at depths of 6.7 km. 24 species were identified among these microfossils, representing the envelopes or coverings of single-cell marine plants known as plankton. Unlike conventional shells of limestone or silica, these coverings were found to consist of carbon and nitrogen and had remained remarkably unaltered despite the high pressures and temperatures to which they had been subjected.

The oceanic crust is commonly divided into three main layers: layer 1 consists of ocean-floor sediments and averages 0.5 km in thickness; layer 2 consists largely of basalt and is 1.0 to 2.5 km thick; and layer 3 is assumed to consist of gabbro and is about 5 km thick. A drillhole in the eastern Pacific Ocean has been reoccupied four times in a 12-year span, and has now reached a total depth of 2000 m below the seafloor. Seismic evidence suggested that the boundary between layers 2 and 3 would be found at a depth of about 1700 m, but the drill went well past that depth without finding the contact between the dikes of layer 2 and the expected gabbro of layer 3. Either the seismic interpretation or the model of layer 3's composition must be wrong.

If the earth's interior were homogeneous, consisting of materials with the same properties throughout, seismic waves would travel in a straight line at a constant velocity. In reality, waves reach distant seismometers sooner than they would if the earth were homogeneous, and the greater the distance, the greater the acceleration. This implies that the waves arriving at the more distant stations have been travelling faster. Since seismic waves travel not only along the surface but also through the body of the earth, the earth's curvature will clearly result in stations more distant from an earthquake focus receiving waves that have passed through greater depths in the earth. From this it is inferred that the velocity of seismic waves increases with depth, due to changes in the properties of the earth's matter.

    Seismic velocity in different media depends not just on the substance's density but also on its elastic properties (i.e. rigidity and incompressibility). In the case of solids and liquids, for instance, there is no correlation between sound-wave velocity and density. Here are some examples involving metals:

Substance      Density (g/cm³)         Velocity of longitudinal waves (km/s)
       aluminium         2.7      6.42
       zinc      7.1      4.21
       iron      7.9      5.95
       copper      8.9      4.76
       nickel      8.9      6.04
       gold      19.7      3.24
There is a correlation between density and seismic velocity in the case of gases: velocity decreases with increasing density due to the increased number of collisions.

    According to the relevant equations, the velocity of seismic waves will become slower, the denser the rocks through which they pass, if the rocks' elastic properties change in the same proportion as density. Since seismic waves accelerate with depth, this would imply that density decreases. However, scientists are convinced that the density of the rocks composing the earth's interior increases with depth. To get round this problem, they simply assume that the elastic properties change at a rate that more than compensates for the increase in density. As one textbook puts it:

Since the density of the Earth increases with depth you would expect the waves to slow down with increasing depth. Why, then, do both P- and S-waves speed up as they go deeper? This can only happen because the incompressibility and rigidity of the Earth increase faster with depth than density increases.

Thus geophysicists simply adjust the values for rigidity and incompressibility to fit in with their preconceptions regarding density and velocity distribution within the earth! In other words, their arguments are circular.

Drilling results at the Kola borehole revealed significant heterogeneity in rock composition and density, seismic velocities, and other properties. Overall, rock porosity and pressure increased with depth, while density decreased, and seismic velocities showed no distinct trend. In the Oberpfälz pilot hole, too, density and seismic velocity showed no distinct trend with increasing depth. Many scientists believe that at greater depths, the presumed increase in pressures and temperatures will lead to greater homogeneity and that reality will approximate more closely to current models. But this is no more than a declaration of faith.

    Scientists' conviction that density increases with depth is based on their belief that, due to the accumulating weight of the overlying rock, pressure must increase all the way to the earth's centre where it is believed to reach 3.5 million atmospheres (on the earth's surface the pressure is one atmosphere). They also believe that they know by how much rock density increases towards the earth's centre. This is because they think they have accurately determined the earth's mass (5.98 x 1024 kg) and therefore its average density (5.52 g/cm³). Since the outermost crustal rocks -- the only ones that can be sampled directly -- have a density of only 2.75 g/cm³, it follows that deeper layers of rock must be much denser. At the centre of the earth, density allegedly reaches 13.5 g/cm³.

Pari Spolter casts doubt on this model:

About 71% of the earth's surface is covered by oceans at an average depth of 3795 m and mean density of 1.02 g cm-3. The average thickness of the crust is 19 km and the mean crustal density is 2.75 g cm-3. From studies of seismic wave travel time, geophysicists have outlined a layered structure in the interior of the earth. There is no accurate way currently known of estimating the density distribution from seismic data alone. To come up with a mean density of 5.5, earth models assuming progressively higher density values for the inner zones of the earth have been devised. . . .
    Except for the ocean and the crust, direct measurements of the density of the inner layers of the earth are not available. This currently accepted Earth Model is inconsistent with the law of sedimentation in a centrifuge. The earth has been rotating for some 4.5 billion years. When it was first formed, the earth was in a molten state and was rotating faster than today. The highest density of matter should have migrated to the outer layers. Except for the inner core, . . . the density of the other layers of the earth should be less than 3 g cm-3.
    Also, heavy elements are rare in the universe. How could so much of materials with such low stellar abundances have concentrated in the earth's interior?

The seismic radiation of deep earthquakes is similar to that of shallow earthquakes. It used to be said that deep-focus earthquakes were followed by fewer aftershocks than shallow ones, but there are indications that many of the aftershocks are simply difficult to detect, and that there is much more activity at such depths than is currently believed. The fact that deep earthquakes share many characteristics with shallow earthquakes suggests that they may be caused by similar mechanisms. However, most earth scientists are incapable of entertaining the notion that the earth could be rigid at such depths. One exception is E.A. Skobelin, who draws the logical conclusion that since deep-focus earthquakes cannot originate in plastic material but must be linked to some kind of stress in solid rock, the solid, rigid lithosphere must extend to depths of up to 700 km.

On 8 June 1994, one of the largest deep earthquakes of the 20th century, with a magnitude of 8.3 on the Richter scale, exploded 640 km beneath Bolivia. It caused the whole earth to ring like a bell for months on end; every 20 minutes or so, the entire planet expanded and contracted by a minute amount. A significant feature of the Bolivian earthquake was that it extended horizontally across a 30- by 50-km plane within the 'subducting slab'. This undermines the hypothesis that such quakes are caused by olivine within the 'cold' centre of a slab suddenly being transformed into spinel in a runaway reaction when the temperature rises above 600°C. It also undermines the theory that gravity increases with depth; if this were true, the motion of earthquakes at such depths should be nearly vertical. There appears to be something very wrong with scientific theories about what exists and what is happening deep within the earth.

    The acceleration due to gravity is 9.8 m/s² at the earth's surface and the prevailing view is that it rises to a maximum of 10.4 m/s² at the core-mantle boundary (2900 km), before falling to zero at the earth's centre. But not all earth scientists agree. Skobelin argues that the normal, downwardly-directed gravitational force may be replaced by a reversed, upwardly-directed force at depths of 2700 to 4980 km, and that the widely-accepted figure of 3500 kilobars for the pressure at the earth's centre, may be an order of magnitude too high."

David Pratt

see also: http://davidpratt.info/inner1.htm#s5


As we have seen, none of the assumptions made by geologists are true about the composition of inner earth, therefore no one at the present time has any idea how actually seismic waves propagate at very large depths.

In order to make claims about the shape of the Earth based on seismic waves, you must know exactly the composition of inner earth: I have given you plenty of examples which do show that this composition is very different than what was assumed to be true.

Please read:

The oceanic crust is commonly divided into three main layers: layer 1 consists of ocean-floor sediments and averages 0.5 km in thickness; layer 2 consists largely of basalt and is 1.0 to 2.5 km thick; and layer 3 is assumed to consist of gabbro and is about 5 km thick. A drillhole in the eastern Pacific Ocean has been reoccupied four times in a 12-year span, and has now reached a total depth of 2000 m below the seafloor. Seismic evidence suggested that the boundary between layers 2 and 3 would be found at a depth of about 1700 m, but the drill went well past that depth without finding the contact between the dikes of layer 2 and the expected gabbro of layer 3. Either the seismic interpretation or the model of layer 3's composition must be wrong.

If the earth's interior were homogeneous, consisting of materials with the same properties throughout, seismic waves would travel in a straight line at a constant velocity. In reality, waves reach distant seismometers sooner than they would if the earth were homogeneous, and the greater the distance, the greater the acceleration. This implies that the waves arriving at the more distant stations have been travelling faster. Since seismic waves travel not only along the surface but also through the body of the earth, the earth's curvature will clearly result in stations more distant from an earthquake focus receiving waves that have passed through greater depths in the earth. From this it is inferred that the velocity of seismic waves increases with depth, due to changes in the properties of the earth's matter.

There is a correlation between density and seismic velocity in the case of gases: velocity decreases with increasing density due to the increased number of collisions.

NOW, IT CAN BE PROVEN THAT THE SURFACE OF THE EARTH IS FLAT BASED STRICTLY ON SEISMIC WAVES.

SINCE THE EARTH'S INTERIOR STRUCTURE IS MARKEDLY DIFFERENT THAN WAS ASSUMED, THE CALCULATIONS INVOLVING CURVATURE AND VELOCITY ARE SIMPLY WRONG.

THAT IS, THE CALCULATIONS INVOLVING MORE DISTANT STATIONS NO LONGER HAVE TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT CURVATURE: THE VELOCITY INCREASES DUE TO THE CHANGES IN THE PROPERTIES OF THE EARTH'S MATTER, AND NOT DUE TO CURVATURE.

Since the interior structure is completely different, the assumed calculations made taking curvature into consideration are wrong.

Once we exclude the curvature, we can simply explain the velocity of the seismic wave strictly based on the newly discovered properties of earth's matter, on A FLAT SURFACE OF THE EARTH.


There was a question re: stellar parallax/stellar aberration. Here is the very best information on the geocentric theory of these subjects:

https://web.archive.org/web/20070327033252/https://www.paradox-paradigm.nl/van_der_Togt_stellarab-final.pdf
http://www.freelists.org/post/geocentrism/Stellar-Parallax
http://www.geocentricity.com/ba1/no115/par-ab-rev.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20130305124931/http://www.realityreviewed.com/Negative%20parallax.htm

Airy's experiment (1871) in the previous link on the inexistence of attractive gravity...



Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 27, 2010, 02:41:13 AM
All heavenly bodies are flat disks, here is the best proof for all of you:


Here is Nibiru/Black Sun (the planet, formerly a star - Sirius C, which actually does cause the solar eclipse), photographs taken in Antarctica by the world renowned photographer, Fred Bruenjes:

http://www.moonglow.net/eclipse/2003nov23/index.html

(http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0805/antarcticeclipse_bruenjes_big.jpg)

(http://www.moonglow.net/eclipse/2003nov23/CRW_4623.jpg)(http://www.moonglow.net/eclipse/2003nov23/composite2.jpg)

(http://www.moonglow.net/eclipse/2003nov23/CRW_4632a.jpg)(http://www.moonglow.net/eclipse/2003nov23/3rdcontact_vidcap.jpg)

Here is the altitude of the Schirmacher Hills, the place in Antarctica mentioned by the author of the photographs:

http://www.trulyremote.com/antarctica/schirmacher-oasis.html

Just 228 meters.

distance: 4000 km (look this up on any map, and I am being v. conservative with the 4000 km, I could use about 5000 km)

So, the visual obstacle will be:

1451,33 KILOMETERS, over 1450 kilometers of a visual obstacle., which, as we can see in these photographs, does not exist at all.


The Sun/ISS/Mercury transit videos show clearly the real dimensions of the Sun: not 1.4 million km in diameter (or for that matter, 50 km/32 mi), but just 1000/PHI ~= 618 meters:








The Moon/ISS transits show the same diameter as that of the Sun:




There is no need to debate or argue about the shape of the Moon, it is clearly a flat disk, and furthermore, the Moon does not cause the solar eclipse.

EDIT

A spherically shaped star/planet would have been impossible to attain from the start.

Now, a gaseous nebula approaching the form of a disk involves several things. Because of the rotating motion of the whole nebula, a centrifugal force was in action, and we are told that parts of matter more on the periphery broke up into rings. Matter must have been concentrated in just a tiny sector of those rings, given the distance (the diameter) of the rings themselves (in our case, about 150 million kilometers).

Given the fact that there is no such thing as an attractive kind of gravitation, to get from a disk to a sphere, a tangential force of compression which would produce circumferential shortening/radial shrinkage (on the equatorial plane) would have been needed. To get from a disk (transversal cross section in the shape of an ellipse, with the eccentricity very close to unity, about 0.9995) to a sphere (eccentricity of about 0.314), given the centrifugal force of rotation, would have been impossible.

A rotating nebula could not produce satellites revolving in two directions (moons of Uranus, three of the satellites of Jupiter, 1 of Saturn, and one of Neptune). Venus rotates retrogradely, completely unexplained by modern science.

Being smaller than the Earth, the moon completed earlier the process of cooling and shrinkage and a has a lighter specific weight than the Earth. The moon was produced, it is assumed, from the superificial layers of the earth's body; this assumption means that the origin of the moon was not simultaneous with that of the earth; that is, the earth had to undergo a process of leveling (cooling) before the moon parted from the earth. Therefore, we are told that a stupendous collision took place between a heavenly body and the earth, but this collision MUST HAVE TAKEN PLACE AFTER THE EARTH COOLED DOWN, that is 3.9 billion years ago (4.6 billion years - gaseous nebula, 4.5 billion years - incandescent conglomerate of matter and elements). Such a collision would have melted completely the surface of the earth; this in sharp contrast with the facts we are told: 3.85 billion years ago, DNA appeared out of nowhere. Also, in the official storyline, this collision would have been responsible for the 23.5 degree tilt, but such a collision would have disrupted completely any axial rotation, not to mention the orbital motion.




Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 03, 2010, 03:10:40 AM
Book of Jubilees, chapter 8:

"And for Ham came out as the second portion, beyond the Gejon (Nile), toward the south, to the right of the garden, and it proceeds to all the fire mountains, and goes toward the west to the sea of Atil and goes west until it reaches the sea of Mauk  the one of which everything descends that is destroyed. And it proceeds to the north to the shore of Gadil and goes to the west of the water of the sea until it approaches the river Gejon, and the river Gejon goes until it approaches to the right of the Garden of Eden, and this land is the land which came forth for Ham as the portion he shall retain for himself and the children of his generations forever."

"And there came out of the lot for Shem the middle of the earth, which he and his children should have as an inheritance for the generations unto eternity, from the middle of the Mountain Rafu from the exit of the water of the river Tina, and his portion goes toward the west through the midst of this river, and they go until they approach to the abyss of the waters out of which comes this river, and this river empties and pours its waters into the sea Miot, and this river goes into the great sea: all that is toward the north of this is Japhet's, and all that is to the direction of the south is Shem's."

"And his (Ham/Khem's) portion reaches unto the great sea, and reaches straight until it approaches the west of the tongue which looks toward the south; for the sea is called the tongue of the Egyptian Sea (Red Sea). And it turns from there toward the south, toward the mouth of the great sea in the shore of the waters and proceeds toward Arabia and Ophra, and it proceeds until it reaches to the water of the River Gejon (Nile), along the shore of this same river. And it proceeds toward the north until it approaches the Garden of Eden, and toward the south thereof to the south, and from the east of the whole land of Eden, and toward the whole east , and it turns to the east, and proceeds until it approaches toward the east of the hills whose name is Rafa, and it descends toward the border of the outlet of the water of the river Tina."

Notice that the Garden of Eden is described as being located to the WEST of the Nile river and NORTH of Egypt, and the land of Ham as being located to the right of the Garden, thus contradicting clearly the version served by the conspirators in the Genesis chapters.

If we can find out the exact location of the Riphath/Rafu mountains, the river Tina, the sea of Miot, and especially the sea of Atil, we immediately have at our disposal the exact place of the Garden of Eden (which IS NOT located anywhere near the Middle East).

Mountain Riphath/Rafu is easily seen to be the mountain range in the northern portion of Anatolia (ancient Paphlagonia/Mysia/Bithynia), namely the Temnus and the Olympus ranges/mountains (Riphath was given the portion of Anatolia, NORTH of river Tina and EAST of the land given to the first son of Noah).

Location of the sea of Atil:

His head [Ro-AT-SH] was at Roxolania/Rus, south of Belarus. Its name changed to the Ukraine (Gk kranion = cranium, not Slavic ukraina to/at the border). His throat [GaRGeret] is Georgia. His left shoulder [KaSaF] is the Caspian sea. His right shoulder [-AT-aTZiL] was Euxinus, now the Black Sea. His right arm/hand is being washed [NaTiLat] at Anatolia.

Therefore, the sea of Atil IS actually the Black Sea, or Pontus Euxinus. And the sea of Miot is the Sea of Marmara, which goes into the Great Sea (Mediterranean Sea).

River Tina is related to lake Arthynia (which discharges its waters into the Macestus River, which separates Asia from Bithynia), located next to the Sea of Marmara.

http://www.bostontoistanbul.com/maps/MarmaraRegionMap.jpg

THE GARDEN OF EDEN IS LOCATED RIGHT NEXT TO THE SEA OF MARMARA (sea of Propontis) (SEA OF MIOT), IN THE WESTERN PORTION OF ANATOLIA; there must a region with about 40 km in diameter which cannot be accessed by land or sea (we have the same situation at the North/South Poles, which have never been actually discovered or located precisely, see The Hollow Earth by R. Bernard, http://www.scribd.com/doc/35124/Raymond-Benard-The-Hollow-Earth ).


Now, let us make the connection between the BOOK OF ENOCH, BOOK OF JUBILEES and the BOOK OF NOAH:

Book of Enoch:
And they took  me to the living waters, and to the fire (Volcano) of the west, which receives every setting of the sun. And I came to a river of fire (river of lava) in which the fire flows like water and discharges itself into the great sea towards the west .

Book of Jubilees:  
...to the right of the garden, and it proceeds to all the fire mountains, and goes toward the west to the sea of Atil.

Book of Noah:
And they will shut up those Angels, who showed iniquity, in that burning valley, (Eden Valley) which my great-grandfather Enoch had shown to me previously, in the west, near the mountains of gold and silver and iron and soft metal and tin.


http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#31

From there I passed on above the summits of those mountains to some distance eastwards, and went over the Erythraean sea. And when I was advanced far beyond it, I passed along above the angel Zateel, and arrived at the garden of righteousness. In this garden I beheld, among other trees, some which were numerous and large, and which flourished there.

The original term used by Enoch was THE SEA OF ATIL, and NOT the Erythraean Sea (added later by translators who had no idea of the true location of the sea of Atil, the Black Sea).


The conspirators changed the true name of the first son of Noah, PELASG/PELASGOS, to Shem (a name derived from sun worship).

All legends of the Arcadians, Greeks, Thracians point out that the first son of Noah was called Pelasg; and Pelasg never set foot in Mesopotamia (a portion of land given to the descendants of the sons of Khem/Ham; namely, the northern part was given to Misraim and some of his sons, and the southern portion was taken over by Nimrod and his sons).

Iesous Christos, a direct descendant of Pelasg, lived right next to the Sea of Marmara (and not the sea of Galilee); the events described in the Gospels (forged later, in the period 1720-1725, see also the link given above to The Pauline Epistles by E. Johnson) took place in the western portion of Anatolia, Jerusalem was actually Troy/Constantinopole, and the Temple of Solomon (which never existed) was the Hagia Sophia (built by Nimrod).

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg940930#msg940930 (more details here)











Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 13, 2010, 02:29:31 AM
All major discoveries of the 20th Century in quantum mechanics (quark/antimatter/superstring theory), were copied from the most formidable book ever published on this subject:

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/pdfindex.htm

http://www.innerpath.com.au/besant/1Occult%20Chemistry.htm


On the fundamental discoveries from Occult Chemistry:

http://www.esotericscience.org/article5a.htm

www.iiyp.org/The_Amazing_Phenomenon.doc


http://www.alliancesforhumanity.com/matter/matter.htm (one of the best analyses of the Occult Chemistry classic)


P. Tompkins, Secret Life of Nature:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/13399219/P-TompkinsThe-Secret-Life-of-NatureComplete (download in pdf format)

Pages 12, 50, 54, 55; Ch. 7 * pg. 81 ? 94  (92, omegons; 93, expl. for quarks); Ch. 8 *  pg. 95 - 101 (96, koilon bubbles; 100-101, string model); Ch. 9 * pg. 102 ? 111 (106-111, electrons bubbles, lines of force), 126-127 four ethers


http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_09_4_phillips.pdf (ch. 1, Historical Evidence) - the very best account of the work done in Occult Chemistry, a must read

ESP of quarks and superstrings, S. Phillips

http://books.google.ro/books?id=5Qgfx4bXkT4C&dq=esp+quarks+phillips&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=NOJP9RGRxd&sig=7Rzl03GEsazklV9395zcmkGw0Jw&hl=ro&ei=0qqBSq6QApuYnQP-9szoCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3#v=onepage&q&f=false




Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 14, 2010, 03:06:56 AM
"The intelligent layman has long suspected circular reasoning in the use of rocks to date fossils and fossils to date rocks. The geologist has never bothered to think of a good reply, feeling the explanations are not worth the trouble as long as the work brings results" (American Journal of Science, 1976, 276:51).


http://www.gennet.org/facts/metro14.html

http://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/dating.html (must read)

http://www.ridgecrest.ca.us/~do_while/sage/v8i9f.htm (must read)

http://www.worldbydesign.org/research/c14dating/datingdinosaurs.html (must read)

http://itotd.com/articles/349/carbon-dating/

http://evolutionfacts.com/Ev-V1/1evlch07a.htm (must read)

http://evolutionfacts.com/Ev-V1/1evlch07b.htm (must read)

http://evolutionfacts.com/Appendix/a07.htm (must read)

http://www.parentcompany.com/great_dinosaur_mistake/tgdm9.htm

Here is the dean of the faculty of mathematics/mechanics at the Moscow University, A. Fomenko, explaining to you how the radiodating CANNOT be used at all, EVEN FOR ARTIFACTS THOUGHT TO BE JUST 1000 (OR UNDER 1000 YEARS) YEARS OLD:

http://books.google.com/books?id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=history+science+or+fiction&cd=2#v=onepage&q&f=false
CHAPTER I, SECTIONS 14, 15, 16, 17, THEY START ON PAGE 71

DINOSAURS LIVED ONLY 4500-5000 YEARS AGO, IF WE JUST TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE OFFICAL CHRONOLOGY, COMPLETE PROOFS (FOR OUR REVISED CHRONOLOGY, AS I HAVE EXPLAINED BEFORE, THE DINOSAURS LIVED IN THE PERIOD 1520-1600, BEING THE RESULT OF GENETICS EXPERIMENTS, WHICH RESULTED ALSO IN THE CREATION OF GIANTS):

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=29253.msg710424#msg710424

http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=716&p=31837&hilit=dinosaurs#p31276

http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=789 (EPOCH OF THE GIANTS thread, the Smithsonian Institute coverup)


Thermochronology/geochemical analysis errors:

http://www.tasc-creationscience.org/other/plaisted/www.cs.unc.edu/_plaisted/ce/dating2.html (exceptionally documented)

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/aid/v4/n1/false-isochrons



http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg945934#msg945934 (the artifacts found at Pompeii/Herculaneum prove IMMEDIATELY that the eruption of Vesuvius which destroyed these cities, took place AT LEAST AFTER 1700 AD, AND NOT IN THE YEAR 79 AD, while the Jump of the Second Derivative of the Moon Elongation prove that the astronomical records of the period 700 BC - 1200 AD were made up much later in time)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg945952#msg945952 (more proofs for those who accept the official chronology)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg858185#msg858185 (the classics HISTORY: SCIENCE OR FICTION VOL. 1 AND 2, and the BOOK OF CIVILIZATION)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg858706#msg858706 (Christoph Pfister discovered that there was NO HUMAN SETTLEMENT IN SWITZERLAND before 1700 AD)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg861961#msg861961 (more proofs)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg865008#msg865008 (more precise proofs)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg866855#msg866855 (the PAULINE EPISTLES by EDWIN JOHNSON, the extraordinary work which proves that the New Testament was forged at least after 1533 AD + C. Pfister's own site translated in English)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg939935#msg939935 (jump of the second derivative/moon elongation by R. Newton)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg940930#msg940930 (mysteries of the egyptian zodiacs/Christ crucified at Constantinopole/Troy)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg942177#msg942177

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg945204#msg945204 (stone levitation)





Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 16, 2010, 05:52:39 AM
Isotopic dating: science or fiction?

http://www.atenizo.org/evolution-c14-kar.htm (must read)


Ice core dating: science or fiction?

http://www.detectingdesign.com/ancientice.html (must read)


More extraordinary proofs that the eruption of the volcano Vesuvius that destroyed Pompeii/Herculaneum took place in the 17th century AD (new chronology of A. Fomenko; in our radical new chronology, we move this event to approximately 1740-1750, given the analysis of the artifacts studied in my previous messages here):

(https://s24.postimg.org/wisg7auqd/vez1.jpg)
(https://s4.postimg.org/oc3n7gu5p/vez2.jpg)
(https://s18.postimg.org/zdxs2hxmh/vez3.jpg)
(https://s13.postimg.org/9679rbpzb/vez4.jpg)
(https://s17.postimg.org/z6j0ch91b/vez5.jpg)
(https://s13.postimg.org/ii5mvwxlz/vez6.jpg)
(https://s17.postimg.org/9zxff3jvz/vez7.jpg)
(https://s4.postimg.org/sc3grzxq5/vez8.jpg)

Therefore, the proofs are very clear indeed that the official chronology is completely wrong, and that the radical new chronology is correct.


The Fictitious Middle Ages/Did the Early Middle Ages Exist? The work of H. Illig (the least controversial of all new chronologists, he does prove however that the "historical" period 600 - 900 AD was completely made up and invented much later in time):

http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/volatile/Niemitz-1997.pdf

http://www.korthweb.de/PhZT/FAQ_E.html

http://lelarge.de/wamse.html


NEW CHRONOLOGY supersite:

http://freethoughtnation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1751


A chronological revolution made by historical analytics:

http://www.ihaal.com/articles/A%20chronological%20revolution%20made%20by%20historical%20analytics.pdf


EDIT

The article Features of the Domenico Fontana's Water Conduit (the Canal of Count Sarno) and the Date of Pompeii Destruction which proves that the water conduit built by D. Fontana (according to the official chronology during the period 1594-1600 AD) was constructed WHILE POMPEII EXISTED AS A "LIVING" CITY:

http://bloggingpompeii.blogspot.com/search/label/Domenico%20Fontana
http://www.archemail.it/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=456
http://books.google.ro/books?id=E1iLqLmbHVwC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Features+of+the+Domenico&cd=1#v=onepage&q&f=false (limited view of the article by A. Tschurilow)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 18, 2010, 07:17:21 AM
GRAVITY IS CAUSED BY THE NEGATIVE COMPONENT OF PRAKRITI, THE TERRESTRIAL RADIATION, ALSO KNOWN AS INERTIA, AND BY THE CONSTANT PRESSURE OF THE VAYU PARTICLES EMITTED BY NIBIRU/TIAMAT.

ANY AND ALL RADIATION TRAVELS THROUGH VAYU, WHICH MAKES UP THE FOUR KINDS/DENSITIES OF AETHER:

http://www.alliancesforhumanity.com/matter/matter_files/image003.jpg

E1 = VAYU / memory/imagination
E2 = TEJAS/PRANA / senses
E3 = APAS / reproduction
E4 = PRAKRITI / metabolism

The positive component of Prakriti is called Assimilation, the process whereby the different nutritive elements of food are incorporated into the body of plant, animal and man.

N. Tesla used Prakriti to send his electrical currents above the flat earth, and also to cause artificial earthquakes.

The human body functions on three levels called octaves: THE OCTAVE OF IMPRESSIONS/THE DIVINE OCTAVE (we receive ojas/ABL+- , prana and generative force through the pineal gland, which IS NOT the third eye of the occultists; the third eye is actually the thalamus gland), THE OCTAVE OF BREATH, and THE OCTAVE OF FOOD.


When a person is drowning, or falling from a height, or freezing, the vital body (the four ethers) leaves the dense body, the atoms of which become temporarily inert in consequence, but at resuscitation it re-enters the dense body and the "points" are again inserted in the dense atoms. The inertia of the atoms causes them to resist the resumption of vibration and that is the cause of the intense prickly pain and the tingling sensation noted at such times, but not ordinarily, for the same reason that we become conscious of the starting or stopping of a clock, but are oblivious to its tick when it is running.

There are certain cases where the vital body partly leaves the dense body, such as when a hand "goes to sleep." Then the etheric hand of the vital body may be seen hanging below the dense arm like a glove and the points cause the peculiar pricking sensation felt when the etheric hand re-enters the dense hand. Sometimes in hypnosis the head of the vital body divides and hangs outside the dense head, one half over each shoulder, or lies around the neck like the collar of a sweater.


W. Reich, in addition to discovering the biggest secret of the nuclear industry (namely, that there is no nuclear industry to begin with, the nuclear reactors are nothing more than aether accumulators), found that the negative component of Prakriti, inertia, also causes the storms in the atmosphere and causes corrosion/decay.

All major discoveries of the 20th Century in quantum mechanics (quark/antimatter/superstring theory), were copied from the most formidable book ever published on this subject:

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/pdfindex.htm

http://www.innerpath.com.au/besant/1Occult%20Chemistry.htm


On the fundamental discoveries from Occult Chemistry:

http://www.esotericscience.org/article5a.htm

www.iiyp.org/The_Amazing_Phenomenon.doc


This is how the human aura actually looks like:

http://www.weare1.us/Babbitt-Body.jpg

GRAVITY, AGAIN, IS A RESULT OF TWO FORCES: THE NEGATIVE COMPONENT OF PRAKRITI, INERTIA AND THE CONSTANT PRESSURE OF THE VAYU/ANU PARTICLES (WHICH ALSO CAUSE THE OCEAN TIDAL WAVES).

More on telluric currents:

http://johnbedini.net/john34/groundradio.html

More on cosmic rays:

http://netowne.com/technology/important/


The complete demonstration of the fact there is no such thing as a gravitational pull/attractive gravity:

http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1183&start=15#p35541
http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1183&start=15#p35542








Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Ichimaru Gin :] on May 18, 2010, 07:36:01 AM
Does the human aura change at all depending on whether the person in question is a female opposed to a male?

Edit: Thank you very much Levee  :D
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 25, 2010, 05:02:37 AM
The thread opened concerning A. Hitler in another part of this forum does not address the most important issues...not by a long shot...

(http://1.fwcdn.pl/p/04/90/140490/82733.1.jpg)

Rudolf Hess was NOT in the plane headed for Great Britain:

http://www.leninimports.com/rudolf_hess_and_the_royals.html (http://www.leninimports.com/rudolf_hess_and_the_royals.html)
http://www.revilo-oliver.com/rpo/Theory_About_Hess.html (http://www.revilo-oliver.com/rpo/Theory_About_Hess.html)
http://web.archive.org/web/20080224123306/http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Congress/2106/hess/herald02.htm (http://web.archive.org/web/20080224123306/http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Congress/2106/hess/herald02.htm)
http://everything2.com/title/Rudolf+Hess (http://everything2.com/title/Rudolf+Hess)

In his book The Murder of Rudolf Hess, Hugh Thomas casts doubt on the man who was locked up in Berlin's Spandau Prison for so long and offers fairly persuasive evidence that the figure held prisoner there was not the real Hess, but an imposter. Yet if that were the case and the evidence is quite startling why was he not executed at Nuremberg, as so many of his contemporaries were, or simply released as a harmless stooge, before his death there in 1981? Other characters served long prison sentences, such as Albert Speer, a civilian figure who might arguably have had a more heinous war record than Deputy Fuhrer Hess, who, after all absconded to Britain in 1941 before the war had taken a more serious turn for the worse. So why such a long sentence? It has been suggested that Hess was in some way connected to BASE 211 did the real Hess abscond in 1941 to Base 211 itself, simultaneously using a loyal double, with instructions to fly to Scotland and thereafter take the brunt of ridicule and long incarceration? If so, Hess would have effectively disappeared to oversee the development of a fourth Reich in the southern hemisphere.

A. Hitler did not die at all in May 1945, in Germany...on the contrary...

http://tst.greyfalcon.us/Introduction.htm (http://tst.greyfalcon.us/Introduction.htm)

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/antarctica/antartica22.htm (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/antarctica/antartica22.htm)

http://tst.greyfalcon.us/ (http://tst.greyfalcon.us/)

http://myth.greyfalcon.us/hitler.htm (http://myth.greyfalcon.us/hitler.htm)

The escape to Antarctica was well prepared ahead of time...

The most unbelievable plan used by the Thule/Vril secret societies was, by far, THE KRONOS PROJEKT. You will not read anything on this subject in any book which addresses the occult part of the Nazi ideology (UFOs).

The Kronos Projekt = modification of the eighth chakra of the human body, in order to absorb DIRECTLY the positive tachyons (Anu+) into the human aura, to replace at a much faster rate the tachyons which are used up in the vital body in the normal course of everyday life.

Here is the system of nine chakras of the human vital body:

https://40.media.tumblr.com/d0df345eefb088268e49a32bc8e6658e/tumblr_mqo4ot3DYE1s1fgejo1_1280.jpg (https://40.media.tumblr.com/d0df345eefb088268e49a32bc8e6658e/tumblr_mqo4ot3DYE1s1fgejo1_1280.jpg)

https://web.archive.org/web/20041126171715/http://www.unglaublichkeiten.com/unglaublichkeiten/bilder/Avatar_Siddah.jpg (https://web.archive.org/web/20041126171715/http://www.unglaublichkeiten.com/unglaublichkeiten/bilder/Avatar_Siddah.jpg)

https://41.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lat287jjEy1qcrew2o1_540.jpg (https://41.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lat287jjEy1qcrew2o1_540.jpg)





The Great Pyramid of Gizeh was used, before the Great Flood of 1600 AD (1580-1600) to modify in the same way the rate at which positive tachyons are absorbed by the human body, here is how the thalamus gland was modified:

(http://garyosborn.moonfruit.com/communities/2/004/005/471/112/images/4586752656_525x384.jpg)

The thalamus gland WAS NOT part of the original human brain architecture: we only had the pineal gland in the center, without the thalamus/hypothalamus/amygdala glands, which were implanted after Adam and Eve ate from the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge (Desire/Imagination). The thalamus gland is the reptilian third eye of the occultists, here is the extraordinary proof:

https://ideasolar.wordpress.com/2012/10/15/the-gate-of-god-by-gary-osborn/ (https://ideasolar.wordpress.com/2012/10/15/the-gate-of-god-by-gary-osborn/)

The positive tachyons are related to the mental body (imagination);  the modification of the eighth chakra can take place, but at the EXPENSE of the emotional part of the body, which is not needed anymore (the emotional part is related to the negative tachyons, with receptive vortices); the aura is modified without taking into account morality and other such issues, just for the sake of the physical body, that is why Projekt Kronos became the most dangerous undertaking studied by those secret societies during WWII and after.

Only when the physical body is transmuted (much higher vibration) to the vital body, only then can we talk about immortality (fruit of the Tree of Life).

Brotherhood of the Bell (some details of the Kronos Projekt, but which do not address the issues raised above, the modification of the eighth chakra):
http://books.google.com/books?id=ycsmUU0DXhIC&printsec=frontcover&dq=joseph+farrell&hl=ro&cd=1#v=onepage&q&f=false (http://books.google.com/books?id=ycsmUU0DXhIC&printsec=frontcover&dq=joseph+farrell&hl=ro&cd=1#v=onepage&q&f=false)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 29, 2010, 02:16:14 AM
From Holland Michigan, across the Lake Michigan, lights of three different communities were seen (one of them Milwaukee), across a distance of 128 km.

http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_action=keyword&s_search_type=keyword&p_product=HSHH&p_theme=gatehouse (on the archive webpage, May 28, 2003, Oh Say Can You See article)

(http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/7972/mich1i.jpg)
(http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/9995/mich2e.jpg)
(http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/7164/mich3d.jpg)

'As twilight deepened, there were more and more lights.'

Bringing out a pair of binoculars, Kanis said he was able to make out the shape of some buildings.

'With the binoculars we could make out three different communities,' Kanis said.

According to one Coast Guard crewman, it is possible to see city lights across the lake at very specific times.

Currently a Coast Guard crewman stationed in Holland, Todd Reed has worked on the east side of Lake Michigan for 30 years and said he's been able to see lights across the lake at least a dozen times.

THE CURVATURE FOR 128 KM IS 321 METERS.

THE HOUSE OF THOSE RESIDENTS IS LOCATED RIGHT NEXT TO THE LAKE, BUT LET US INVESTIGATE VARIOUS ALTITUDES, FOR THE SAKE OF DISCUSSION.

h = 3 meters BD = 1163 METERS

h = 5 meters BD = 1129 METERS

h = 10 meters BD = 1068 METERS

h = 20 meters BD = 984 METERS

h = 50 meters BD = 827.6 METERS

h = 100 meters BD = 667.6 METERS

The highest building in Milwaukee has a height of 183 meters, the difference from h = 5 meters in altitude being 946 meters, and those residents saw the buildings from THREE DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES, two of which have buildings whose heights measure way under 183 meters.

Therefore, the only way those buildings could be seen, given the 128 km distance, would be if the surface of Lake Michigan is completely flat (you can also use the above formula on atmospheric refraction to see how impossible it is to see shapes of buildings over a 128 km distance).

More details here: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39108.msg979978#msg979978

In the alternative flat earth theory, both the Sun and the Moon DO RISE and SET:

http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1183&start=15#p34701
http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1183&start=15#p35487


History: Science or Fiction? video documentary:










New chronology of English history:

http://www.revisedhistory.org/Investigation-eng-history.htm


V. Suvorov - Icebreaker

Suvorov challenges the widely-accepted view that Adolf Hitler and the Nazi regime attacked an unsuspecting USSR on June 22, 1941 with a much superior and better prepared force. Instead, Suvorov argues that the Soviet Union was poised to invade Nazi-controlled territories in July 1941.

Stalin planned to attack Nazi Germany from the rear in July 1941, only a few weeks after the date on which the Axis invasion of the Soviet Union took place. According to Suvorov, the Red Army had been already redeployed from a defensive to an offensive position. As described in Suvorov's books, Stalin had made no major defensive preparations. On the contrary, the Stalin line fortifications through Belarus-Ukraine were dismantled, and the new Molotov line was all but finished by the time of Nazi invasion.

http://www.amazon.com/Icebreaker-Who-Started-Second-World/dp/0241126223


American Civil War hidden history:

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_rulebysecrecy3.htm


Occult Finances:

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=zeitgeist&emb=0&aq=f#

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1693084887024293324&ei=bgWLScjwNqHS2gLC-tHACw&q=zeitgeist+federal+reserve#

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=zeitgeist+9%2F11&emb=0#


From the famous Red Symphony document (January 1938):

http://web.archive.org/web/20071002143058/http://users.cyberone.com.au/myers/red-symphony.html

Historiographers and the masses, blinded by the shouts and the pomp of the French revolution, the people, intoxicated by the fact that it had succeeded in taking all power from the King and the privileged classes, did not notice how a small group of mysterious, careful and insignificant people had taken possession of the real Royal power, the magical power, almost divine, which it obtained almost without knowing it.

Titles, figures, cheques, promissory notes, endorsements, discount, quotations, figures without end flooded States like a waterfall. What are in comparison with these the metallic and paper moneys? ... Something devoid of influence, some kind of minimum in the face of the growing flood of the all-flooding financial money. They, being the most subtle psychologists, were able to gain even more without trouble, thanks to a lack of understanding. In addition to the immensely varied different forms of financial moneys, they created credit-money with a view to making its volume close to infinite. And to give it the speed of sound ... it is an abstraction, a being of thought, a figure, number, credit, faith ...

Banks, the stock exchanges and the whole world financial system - is a gigantic machine for the purpose of bringing about unnatural scandals, according to Aristotle's expression; to force money to produce money - that is something that if it is a crime in economics, then in relations to finances it is a crime against the criminal code, since it is usury. I do not know by what arguments all this is justified: by the proposition that they receive legal interest ... Even accepting that, and even that admission is more than is necessary, we see that usury still exists, since even if the interest received is legal, then it invents and falsifies the non-existent capital. Banks have always by way of deposits or moneys in productive movement a certain quantity of money which is five or perhaps even a hundred times greater than there are physically coined moneys of metal or paper. I shall say nothing of those cases when the credit-moneys, i.e. false, fabricated ones, are greater than the quantity of moneys paid out as capital. Bearing in mind that lawful interest is fixed not on real capital but on non-existing capital, the interest is illegal by so many times as the fictional capital is greater than the real one.

Bear in mind that this system, which I am describing in detail, is one of the most innocent among those used for the fabrication of false money. Imagine to yourself, if you can, a small number of people, having unlimited power through the possession of real wealth, and you will see that they are the absolute dictators of the stock-exchange; and as a result of this also the dictators of production and distribution and also of work and consumption. If you have enough imagination then multiply this, by the global factor and you will see its anarchical, moral and social influence, i.e. a revolutionary one ... Do you now understand?

Hitler has restored thanks to his natural intuition and even against the technical opinion of Schacht, an economic system of a very dangerous kind. Being illiterate in all economic theories and being guided only by necessity he removed, as we had done it in the USSR, the private and international capital. That means that he took over for himself the privilege of manufacturing money, and not only physical moneys, but also financial ones; he took over the untouched machinery of falsification and put it to work for the benefit of the State. He exceeded us, as we, having abolished it in Russia, replaced it merely by this crude apparatus called State Capitalism; this was a very expensive triumph in view of the necessities of pre-revolutionary demagogy ... Here I give you two real facts for comparison. I shall even say that Hitler had been lucky; he had almost no gold and for that reason he was not tempted to create a gold reserve. Insofar as he only possessed a full monetary guarantee of technical equipment and colossal working capacity of the Germans, his "old reserve" was technical capacity and work ..., something so completely counter-revolutionary that, as you already see, he has by means of magic, as it were, radically eliminated unemployment among more than seven million technicians and workers.
Are you capable of imagining what would have come of this system if it had infected a number of other States and brought about the creation of a period of autarky ... For example the Commonwealth. If you can, then imagine its counter-revolutionary functions ... The danger is not yet inevitable, as we have had luck in that Hitler restored his system not according to some previous theory, but empirically, and he did not make any formulation of a scientific kind. This means that insofar as he did not think in the light of a deductive process based on intelligence, he has no scientific terms or a formulated doctrine; yet there is a hidden danger as at any moment there can appear, as the consequence of deduction, a formula. This is very serious. Much more so that all the external and cruel factors in National-Socialism. We do not attack it in our propaganda as it could happen that through theoretical polemics we would ourselves provoke a formulation and systematization of this so decisive economic doctrine. There is only one solution - war.

http://web.archive.org/web/20080220085911/http://www.akasha.de/~aton/swfqw.html



http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm

Why everyone should read this book on new chronology

This 100-page book from 1894 shows that:

The Paul figure was a literary invention from the 1500's

The purportedly early Church Father writings were literary inventions of the 1500's

 Eusebius' Church History was written in the 1500's.

The Gospels were written in the 1500's.

 No Cathedrals are ancient; they are from the early part of the modern period, such as 1400.


According to our radical new chronology, the Torah/New Testament were written down in the period 1715 - 1725, as we have discussed earlier here...with ample and extraordinary proofs...

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Username on June 06, 2010, 11:25:49 AM

 No Cathedrals are ancient; they are from the early part of the modern period, such as 1400.


I don't know if this is where you would like it discussed, but during my trips to Cathedrals I was surprised by the stone.  Several Cathedrals had no stone wear.  If you go to even recent museums you would notice that the stones are worn on the stairs.  However, other Cathedrals or Libraries did have this wear.  I imagine this could be due to the type of stone used and the amount of traffic the area has gotten or due to repairs, but it is still something that is worth investigating.

I don't personally think that the history of the world is as incorrect as you state (though it is interesting), but this may be an avenue for you to research.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 08, 2010, 02:58:28 AM
The books by A. Fomenko, and G. Kasparov, not to mention the website of C. Pfister offer copious proofs that all the cathedrals were constructed in the 18th century, and not earlier.

If you will read carefully the material I provided here, you will discover eventually that the official chronology has been drastically altered; in my opinion the entire world history has lasted for only 500 years (radical new chronology, different than the 1000-year old new chronology of A. Fomenko).

The best proofs possible that the eruption which destroyed Pompeii and Herculaneum occurred actually at least after 1700 AD:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg967986#msg967986



Who wrote the Bible/Koran?

Independent but nearly simultaneous proposals by H. B. Witter, Jean Astruc, and Johann Gottfried Eichhorn separated the Pentateuch into two original documentary components, both dating from after the time of Moses. Others hypothesized the presence of two additional sources. The four documents were given working titles: J (Jahwist/Yahwist), E (Elohist), P (Priestly), and D (Deuteronomist). Each was discernible by its own characteristic language, and each, when read in isolation, presented a unified, coherent narrative.

The documentary hypothesis has more recently been refined by later scholars such as Martin Noth (who in 1943 provided evidence that Deuteronomy plus the following six books make a unified history from the hand of a single editor), Harold Bloom, Frank Moore Cross and Richard Elliot Friedman.

1 and 2 Samuel were written BEFORE the priestly version was invented (the priestly version was written according to the official chronology at least 600 - 800 years after the Exodus; this version which consists of, among other numerous passages, the whole book of Leviticus, Exodus chapters 25-32, 35-40, Numbers 3-10, 15-20, 27-30, 35-36, Deuteronomy 18, Joshua 22):

http://www.awitness.org/contrabib/torah/latedate.html (one of the very best)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priestly_source

http://islamworld.net/torah.html

http://www.voltairenet.org/article160971.html

In our radical new chronology, the Old/New Testaments were written in the period 1715 - 1720, after the crucifixion of Iesous Christos in 1715, at Troy/Constantinopole.


(1) that the tabernacle never existed except on paper; (2) that it was a pure creation of priestly imagination sketched after or during the exile; (3) that it was meant to be a miniature sanctuary on the model of Solomon's Temple; (4) that it was represented as having been built in the wilderness for the purpose of legitimizing the newly-published Priestly Code (P) or Levitical ritual still preserved in the middle books of the Pentateuch; and (5) that the description of the tabernacle furnished in the Priestly Code (P) (Ex 25 through 31; 36 through 40; Nu 2:2,17; 5:1-4; 14:44) conflicts with that given in the Elohist (E) (Ex 33:7-11), both as to its character and its location.

Also the book of Judges, chapters 13 and 21 contradict directly the laws/regulations written down in the book of Leviticus.

The author of the books of 1 and 2 Samuel and the book of Judges HAD NO KNOWLEDGE of the laws/regulations in the Leviticus/Numbers/Exodus, as these were created well after the (J) and (E) versions.


http://www.talkreason.org/articles/letter1.cfm


http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/biblewho6.htm (tremendous research, one of the very best)

http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/biblewho3.htm

http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/biblewho4.htm

http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/biblewho1.htm


http://www.hindurevolution.org/01/monotheismju03.htm (exceptionally documented)

http://www.hindurevolution.org/01/monotheismju04.htm

http://www.hindurevolution.org/01/monotheismju05.htm

http://www.hindurevolution.org/01/monotheismju01.htm

http://www.hindurevolution.org/01/monotheismju02.htm


http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/biggestsecret/tales_timeloop/tales_timeloop09.htm

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/biggestsecret/biggestsecretbook/biggestsecret04.htm

A third model developed, much more radical in its approach.  The archaeological evidence now was interpreted to demonstrate that the Israelites did not originate outside the land, but were in origin Canaanites who had shifted gears.  Israelite pottery was indistinguishable from Canaanite pottery; Israelite architecture was indistinguishable from Canaanite architecture; Israelite water systems were indistinguishable from Canaanite water systems; and so on. All of this meant that the Israelites were Canaanites. http://arts.mcgill.ca/jewish/30yrs/rendsburg/index.html

No historical David/Solomon

http://prophetess.lstc.edu/~rklein/Doc6/dsmyth.htm

http://www.askwhy.co.uk/judaism/0160Solomon.php

Also, the quote from Jeremiah 7:22 contradicts directly the laws/regulations of the Leviticus. There have been attempts to explain this quote (Jeremiah 7:22 For in the day that I brought your ancestors out of Egypt, I did not speak to them or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices...) within the context of figurative language, an argument which can be contradicted immediately:

http://www.awitness.org/lostmess/fprophet.html
http://www.awitness.org/essays/levjer.html

Bible Unearthed (Finkelstein/Silberman)

The Bible Unearthed begins by considering what it terms the 'preamble' of the bible?the Book of Genesis?and its relationship to archaeological evidence for the context in which its narratives are set. Archaeological discoveries about society and culture in the ancient near east lead the authors to point out a number of anachronisms, suggestive that the narratives were actually set down in the 9th-7th centuries:

    * Aramaeans are frequently mentioned, but no ancient text mentions them until around 1100BCE, and they only begin to dominate Israel's northern borders after the 9th century BCE.
    * The text describes the early origin of the neighbouring kingdom of Edom, but Assyrian records show that Edom only came into existence after the conquest of the region by Assyria; before then it was without functioning kings, wasn't a distinct state, and archaeological evidence shows that the territory was only sparsely populated.
    * The Joseph story refers to camel-based traders carrying gum, balm, and myrrh, an unlikely event for the first millennium, but quite common in the 8th-7th centuries BCE, when Assyrian hegemony enabled this Arabian trade to flourish into a major industry.
    * The land of Goshen has a name that comes from an Arabic group who only dominated the Nile Delta in the 6th and 5th centuries.
    * The Egyptian Pharaoh is portrayed as fearing invasion from the east, even though Egypt's territory stretched to the northern parts of Canaan, with its main threat consequently being from the north, until the 7th century

The book comments that this corresponds with the documentary hypothesis, in which textual scholarship argues for the majority of the first five biblical books being written between the 8th and 6th centuries.

Finkelstein and Silberman argue that instead of the Israelites conquering Canaan after the Exodus (as suggested by the book of Joshua), most of them had in fact always been there; the Israelites were simply Canaanites who developed into a distinct culture.Recent surveys of long-term settlement patterns in the Israelite heartlands show no sign of violent invasion or even peaceful infiltration, but rather a sudden demographic transformation about 1200 BCE in which villages appear in the previously unpopulated highlands;these settlements have a similar appearance to modern Bedouin camps, suggesting that the inhabitants were once pastoral nomads, driven to take up farming by the Late Bronze Age collapse of the Canaanite city-culture.

http://www.skeptically.org/oldtestament/id7.html


First, the numbers in Genesis don't appear to be random. Each number in Genesis 5 (except Methuselah's 969 years) ends in either a 0, 5, 2, or 7, which can be thought of as a factor of 5 (0 or 5) and at times adding 7 (e.g. 5 + 7 = 12). The implication is that the chance of this happening without deliberate alteration is essentially impossible.

When Moses returned from his mountaintop experience, he carried with him tablets of stone. Once again there is a question of translation. Since all this occurred prior to the advent of the written Hebrew language, authors Knight and Lomas explained,

"These tablets could only have been written in Egyptian hieroglyphics as Moses would not have understood any other script [as Hebrew did not become a written language for another 1,000 years]. The idea of messages materializing out of marks on stone amazed ordinary people and the scribes who could make stone talk were considered to be holders of great magic. This is easily appreciated when one realizes that the Egyptians called hieroglyphics the Words of the God, a term that would often be repeated throughout the Bible."

In ancient Kemet, there were "42 Negative Confessions", " 42 Admonitions of Ma'at" or "42 Declarations of Innocence" under this spiritual system, a system that Moses knew as High priest. Moses just collapsed the "42 Negative Confessions" into the Ten Commandments as the bedrock of religious Christianity. What is more it makes the whole Exodus a very improbable event, since the Hebrews would not have accepted to go back to the same laws/regulations present in the Egyptian system of worship (and which were well known to them during the stay in Egypt).

http://www.trinicenter.com/kwame/2009/1812.htm

http://te-in.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=55972934687&topic=6955


What were the conspirators trying to hide? The events described in the original book of Enoch:

The absence in 1 Enoch of formal parallels to the specific laws and commandment found in the Mosaic Torah and of references to issues like Shabbat observance or the rite of circumcision. The Sinaitic covenant and Torah are not of central importance in the Book of Enoch.


Heavenly Palace/Garden of Eden description:

http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#14
http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#70


What really happened in the Garden of Eden:

http://www.piney.com/ApocMoses.html

http://classiclit.about.com/library/bl-etexts/lginzberg/bl-lginzberg-legends-1-2o.htm



John 13:1 contradicts directly the quotes from Mark 14:12, Luke 22:7 and Matthew 26:17.

It is very clear that the events described in John 13: 1-12 could not have taken place AT ALL given the laws and regulations in Leviticus:

Numbers 28:18

In the first day shall be an holy convocation; ye shall do no manner of servile work therein

Moreover, leavened bread was used in direct violation of the laws and regulations writeen in Numbers/Exodus:

While there are several uses of the word Azumos (unleavened Bread) in the NT none of them refer to the bread used in the Lord's Supper, but rather they are either references to the feast of unleavened bread (Matthew 26:17, Mark 14:1, Mark 14:12, Luke 22:1, Luke 22:7, Acts 12:3, Acts 20:6) or an analogy for a congregation purging out sin from their midst and walking in holiness (1 Corinthians 5:8 ).
In all other places that the word bread occurs in the NT, it is the Greek word Artos meaning a loaf of common leavened bread.

Nothing leavened may you eat; wherever you dwell you may eat only unleavened bread.
Exodus 12:20

http://www.nabion.org/html/gospel_of_john.html


http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm (the BEST book EVER written on conspirative issues, tremendous research)

Why everyone should read this book

This 100-page book from 1894 shows that:

The Paul figure was a literary invention from the 1500's

The purportedly early Church Father writings were literary inventions of the 1500's

Eusebius' Church History was written in the 1500's.

The Gospels were written in the 1500's.

No Cathedrals are ancient; they are from the early part of the modern period, such as 1400.



http://www.thegodabovegod.com/index_files/Jim%20West%20Articles/Lucifer%20the%20Lightbringer.htm (occult apocalypse)


canaanite tribes of arabia/origin of koran

http://www.montfort.org.br/index.php?secao=cadernos&subsecao=religiao&artigo=maome&lang=eng

The Palestinians were known as the Phalestinoi/Phalestinos tribe which originated in Greece/Thrace; after the exile of most of the Canaanite tribe to the Caucasian mountains (after the attack by Nabu/Nebuchadnezzar, the son of Horus, and ruler of northern Mesopotamia), the inhabitants around mount Seir (also Canaanites) thought up the islam religion in order to trick the Phalestinoi tribe into believing in a false religion, especially after 1750 AD.


black buddha (from the kushite tribe of sakka/isaac/sakya, which travelled from the exile in the Caucasian mtns. to India after 1730 AD)

http://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-68677.0.html

















Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 09, 2010, 02:35:44 AM
Stability of the heliocentric solar system

It is only at the highest level of academic circles specialized in bifurcation theory (thus, well-hidden from public view) where we find the truth about the original H. Poincare quotes, which do show that a differential equation (initial value d.e.) approach to celestial mechanics IS IMPOSSIBLE.

As Poincare experimented, he was relieved to discover that in most of
the situations, the possible orbits varied only slightly from the initial
2-body orbit, and were still stable, but what occurred during further
experimentation was a shock. Poincare discovered that even in some of the
smallest approximations some orbits behaved in an erratic unstable manner. His
calculations showed that even a minute gravitational pull from a third body
might cause a planet to wobble and fly out of orbit all together.

Here is Poincare describing his findings:

While Poincare did not succeed in giving a complete solution, his work was so impressive that he was awarded the prize anyway. The distinguished Weierstrass, who was one of the judges, said, 'this work cannot indeed be considered as furnishing the complete solution of the question proposed, but that it is nevertheless of such importance that its publication will inaugurate a new era in the history of celestial mechanics.' A lively account of this event is given in Newton's Clock: Chaos in the Solar System. To show how visionary Poincare was, it is perhaps best if he described the Hallmark of Chaos - sensitive dependence on initial conditions - in his own words:

'If we knew exactly the laws of nature and the situation of the universe at the initial moment, we could predict exactly the situation of that same universe at a succeeding moment. but even if it were the case that the natural laws had no longer any secret for us, we could still only know the initial situation approximately. If that enabled us to predict the succeeding situation with the same approximation, that is all we require, and we should say that the phenomenon had been predicted, that it is governed by laws. But it is not always so; it may happen that small differences in the initial conditions produce very great ones in the final phenomena. A small error in the former will produce an enormous error in the latter. Prediction becomes impossible, and we have the fortuitous phenomenon.' - in a 1903 essay 'Science and Method'

That is why the conspirators had to invent a very complicated new theory, called chaos theory, with the help of G.D. Birkhoff and N. Levinson; their work was the inspiration for S. Smale's horseshoe map, a very clever way to describe Poincare's original findings as "workable" and "manageable". The formidable implications are, of course, that chaotical motion of the planets predicted by the differential equation approach of the London Royal Society is a thing that could happen ANYTIME, and not just some millions of years in the future, not to mention the sensitive dependence on initial conditions phenomenon.

Even measuring initial conditions of the system to an arbitrarily high, but finite accuracy, we will not be able to describe the system dynamics "at any time in the past or future". To predict the future of a chaotic system for arbitrarily long times, one would need to know the initial conditions with infinite accuracy, and this is by no means possible.


http://essay.studyarea.com/old_essay/science/chaos_theory_explained.htm (exceptional analysis of the differential equation approach and the implications thereof)

http://ptrow.com/articles/ChaosandSolarSystem5.htm

(superb analyses of the long term stability of the solar system)


Smale Horseshoe concept:

http://www.its.caltech.edu/~mcc/Chaos_Course/Lesson23/Predicting.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_map


KAM theory:

http://www.math.rug.nl/~broer/pdf/kolmo100.pdf


Stability of the Solar System:

http://chaos.if.uj.edu.pl/~karol/pdf/solar.pdf (if it cannot be accessed directly, list the link on google search and use the quick view option)


Velikovsky stability theory:

http://www.ralph-abraham.org/interviews/abraham-ebert.html


Butterfly effect:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorenz_attractor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butterfly_effect

E. Lorenz did not realize that a system of three nonlinear differential equations could not approximate at all such a complicated natural phenomenon; there is no butterfly effect, the weather in Asia will not change due to the movement of a butterfly's wings in North America (sensitive dependece on initial conditions).

http://www.physicsforums.com/archive/index.php/t-196680.html
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0QZX/is_68/ai_n9507766/pg_52/

http://homepages.ulb.ac.be/~gaspard/G.Acad.00.pdf

Homoclinic orbits:

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/nlin/pdf/0702/0702044v2.pdf


Poincare chaos:

http://web.archive.org/web/20061208155727/http://pims.math.ca/pi/current/page25-29.pdf

Dynamics and Bifurcations, J. Hale and H. Kocak (pages 248, 477, 486-490)
Introduction to Applied Nonlinear Dynamical Systems and Chaos, S. Wiggins (pages 286, 384, 420-443, 550, 612), both edited by Springer-Verlag; the information in these pages actually show the mathematical and physical implications of chaos theory.


The Duffing oscillator (prototype for nonlinear oscillations), the driven Morse oscillator, Poincare's three body problem equations, the librational motion of a satellite equations, the Ginzburg-Landau equation (nonlinear Schrodinger eq.) which reduces to the Duffing oscillator, all will have parameter values for which the stable/unstable manifolds of a saddle point will come into contact tangentially - homoclinic tangency.

Differential equations can be used on a very limited base (classical mechanics, quality-control, electronics/electrical engr., thermodynamics, and even here with certain assumptions/simplifications) and not at all in order to describe/predict biological processes and cosmological theories, where the aether theory comes into play to explain all the details.

Moreover, the system parameters will be varying functions of time, not to mention that the coefficients of the forcing/damping functions will not be "sufficiently small" in actual practice.

The assumptions actually made in describing various phenomena in several branches of physics are very well described in the classic Mathematics applied to deterministic problems in natural sciences by C.C. Lin and L. Segel (chapters 1, 4, 6, 8 ); page 43 exemplifies the extraordinary philosophical implications of the differential equation approach in modern physics:

http://www.ec-securehost.com/SIAM/CL01.html


An analysis of the calculus approach errors:

http://milesmathis.com/are.html
http://milesmathis.com/calcsimp.html
http://milesmathis.com/flaw.html
http://milesmathis.com/lemma.html
http://milesmathis.com/avr.html


Now we know that Pythagoras never existed actually, as there were no ancient Greece/Rome/Egypt in our radical new chronology, and that the conspirators invented the irrational number concept in order to deceive the public regarding the Pythagorean comma (instead of a circle of fifths, we would have a spiral of fifths); they also invented, through J.S. Bach, the equal temperament scale in order to hide the real scale they used to produce levitation of large blocks of stone.


D. Hempel on Pythagoras' irrational numbers:

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10283
http://www.breakingopenthehead.com/forum/showpost.php?s=b7d281def62a68bb3f0971352e1ed848&p=30829&postcount=5


From http://essay.studyarea.com/old_essay/science/chaos_theory_explained.htm


Scientists used to, before the chaos theory, believe in the
theory of reductionism, many still do. Reductionism imagines nature as equally
capable of being assembled and disassembled. Reductionists think that when
everything is broken down a universal theory will become evident that will
explain all things. Reductionism implied the rather simple view of chaos
evident in Laplace's dream of a universal formula: Chaos was merely complexity
so great that in practice scientists couldn't track it, but in principle they
might one day be able to. When that day came there would be no chaos,
everything in existence would be perfectly predictable, no surprises, the
world would be safely mutable. The universe would be completely controlled by
Newton's laws.

Chaos touches all things in existence, and all sciences,
mathematics, physics, biology, anthropology, entomology, astronomy, even the
Ivory Tower science of Newtonian physics. In the last years of the 19th
century French mathematician, physicist and philosopher Henri Poincare
stumbled headlong into chaos with a realization that the reductionism method
may be illusory in nature. He was studying his chosen field at the time; a
field he called the mathematics of closed systems, the epitome of Newtonian
physics. A Closed system is one made up of just a few interacting bodies
sealed off from outside contamination. According to classical physics, such
systems are perfectly orderly and predictable. A simple pendulum in a vacuum,
free of friction and air resistance will conserve its energy. The pendulum
will swing back and forth for all eternity. It will not be subject to the
dissipation of entropy, which eats its way into systems by causing them to
give up their energy to the surrounding environment. Classical scientists were
convinced that any randomness and chaos disturbing a system such as a pendulum
in a vacuum or the revolving planets could only come from outside chance
contingencies. Barring those, pendulum and planets must continue forever,
unvarying in their courses.

It was this comfortable picture of nature that
Poincare blew apart when he attempted to determine the stability of our solar
system. For a system containing only two bodies, such as the sun and earth or
earth and moon, Newton's equations can be solved exactly: The orbit of the
moon around the earth can be precisely determined. For any idealized two-body
system the orbits are stable. Thus if we neglect the dragging effects of the
tides on the moon's motion, we can assume that the moon will continue to wind
around the earth until the end of time. But we also have to ignore the effect
of the sun and other planets on this idealized two-body system. Poincare's
problem was that when an additional body was added to the situation, like the
influence of the sun, Newton's equations became unsolvable. What must be done
in this situation is use a series of approximations to close in on an answer.
In order to solve such an equation, physicists were forced to use a theory
called Perturbation. Which basically works in a third body by a series of
successive approximations. Each approximation is smaller than the one before
it, and by adding up a potentially infinite amount of these numbers,
theoretical physicists hoped to arrive a working equation. Poincare knew that
the approximation theory appeared to work well for the first couple of
approximations, but what about further down the line, what effect would the
infinity of smaller approximations have? The multi-bodied equation Poincare?
was attempting was essentially a Non-linear equation. As opposed to a
differential or linear equation. For science, a phenomenon is orderly if its
movements can be explained in the kind of cause-and-effect scheme represented
by a differential equation. Newton first introduced the differential idea
throughout his famous laws of motion, which related rates of change to various
forces. Quickly scientists came to rely on linear differential equations.
Phenomena as diverse as the flight of a cannonball, the growth of a plant, the
burning of coal, and the performance of a machine can be described by such
equations. In which small changes produce small effects and large effects are
obtained by summing up many small changes. A non-linear equation is quite
different. In a non-linear equation a small change in one variable can have a
disproportional, even catastrophic impact on other variables. Behaviors can
drastically change at any time. In linear equations the solution of one
equation allows the solver to generalize to other solutions; in non-linear
equations solutions tend to be consistently individual and unrelated to the
same equation with different variables. In Poincare's multi-bodied equation,
he added a term that added nonlinear complexity to the system (feedback) that
corresponded to the small effect produced by the movement of the third body in
the system. As he experimented, he was relieved to discover that in most of
the situations, the possible orbits varied only slightly from the initial
2-body orbit, and were still stable but what occurred during further
experimentation was a shock. Poincare discovered that even in some of the
smallest approximations some orbits behaved in an erratic unstable manner. His
calculations showed that even a minute gravitational pull from a third body
might cause a planet to wobble and fly out of orbit all together.

Poincare's discovery was not fully understood until 1953 by Russian physicist A. N. Kolmogorov. Initially
scientists believed that in theory they could break up a complicated system
into its components before experimentation because any changes in patterns
would be small and not effect an established construct such as an orbit.
Kolmogorov was not prepared to accept that the whole universe is a fraction of
a decimal point away from self-destruction. Unfortunately his research didn't
help. Kolmgorov concluded, from his own calculations, that the solar system
won't break up under its own motion provided that the influence of an
additional gravitational source was no bigger than a fly approximately 7000
miles away, and the cycles per planetary year did not occur in a simple
ratio like 1:2 1:3 or 2:3 and so on.

But, what happens when the planet's years form a simple ratio? Well, that would mean that with each orbit, the
disturbance is amplified due to a steady input of gravitational energy. It
creates a resonance feedback effect much like a normal microphone amplifier.
Say you lie an amplifiers input mic directly in front of its output speaker.
Any sound that enters the microphone will be played back through the speaker
louder, that playback will be picked up by the mic and amplified once again,
eventually the volume will reach its critical point and the speaker will blow
out. Well, if this were so, is there proof? Does this really happen in space?
Could this occur in our solar system? The answer is yes.








Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Username on June 14, 2010, 11:19:22 PM
Thanks for the follow up Levee, I'll definitely give those a closer look.  I may have some follow up questions on aether, but I want to give your work another good reading first.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 21, 2010, 03:26:12 AM
Christoph Pfister archive

C. Pfister, one of the very best european historians, has discovered that there was no human settlement prior to 1700 AD in Switzerland, and that all gothic/medieval buildings and all ancients documents pertaining to the period 500 AD - 1600 AD were actually created in the 18th Century AD. He also found out that the printing press was invented around 1730 AD, and wrote the exceptional book Matrix of Ancient History: http://www.dillum.ch/html/matrix_werbeblatt.htm

albrecht kauw, actually lived in the 18th century AD
http://www.dillum.ch/html/kauw_bern_1700.htm
http://www.dillum.ch/html/frienisberg_namenlandschaft.htm

city of bern founded in the 18th century
http://www.dillum.ch/html/gurten_burgberg_bern.htm
http://www.dillum.ch/html/ankh_von_bern.htm
http://www.dillum.ch/html/berns_goldene_zeit_kritik.htm

bern cathedral constructed in the 18th century
http://www.dillum.ch/html/bern_muenster_baugeschichte_neu.htm

radical new chronology
http://www.dillum.ch/html/geschichtskritik_chronologiekritik_09.htm
http://www.dillum.ch/html/plurs_campanile_legende1.htm

abbey library of st. gallen constructed in the 18th century
http://www.dillum.ch/html/sankt_gallen_stiftsbibliothek_kritik.htm (exceptional analysis)

vesuvius/troy: the origin of the names of places in Switzerland
http://www.dillum.ch/html/vesuv_ortsnamen_werbeblatt.htm

celtic history hoax
http://www.dillum.ch/html/beltaine_verein_neu.htm
http://www.dillum.ch/html/nebra_sangerhausen_kalenderscheibe_faelschung.htm

Main Archive:

archeology of switzerland
http://www.dillum.ch/html/inhalt_7.html
http://www.dillum.ch/html/keltenschanzen_schweiz.htm
http://www.dillum.ch/html/bolligen_bantiger_neapel_vesuv.htm
http://www.dillum.ch/html/guggershorn_guggersh%C3%B6rnli.htm
http://www.dillum.ch/html/wallis_valais_vesuv.htm

fake marcus aurelius sculpture
http://www.dillum.ch/html/mark_aurel_avenches.htm

city of aventicum: 18th century
http://www.dillum.ch/html/avenches_aventicum_wiflisburg_neapolis.htm

gothic architecture of 18th century/new chronology (superb analysis)
http://www.dillum.ch/html/bern_mutige_zeit.htm
http://www.dillum.ch/html/bernbiet_heilige_berge.htm
http://www.dillum.ch/html/lausanne_sion_bellinzona_k%C3%BCssnacht.htm
http://www.dillum.ch/html/harz_heiliges_land.htm
http://www.dillum.ch/html/bern_troja.htm
http://www.dillum.ch/html/bern_ausgrabung_richtstuhl.htm

wilhelm tell hoax
http://www.dillum.ch/html/wilhelm_tell.htm

radical new chronology analysis
http://www.dillum.ch/html/anti_illig.htm
http://www.dillum.ch/html/burg_neu_bubenberg.htm
http://www.dillum.ch/html/1291_fiktives_gruendungsdatum_schweiz.htm

C. Pfister on A. Fomenko's History: Science or Fiction?
http://www.dillum.ch/html/fomenko_history.htm

"The biggest fake in the history of mankind is the history of mankind"
http://www.dillum.ch/html/gabo_altertum_renaissance.htm
http://www.dillum.ch/html/rezension_serrade.htm

ancient olympics hoax
http://www.dillum.ch/html/olympia_vesuv_neapel.htm

gothic/medieval architecture, best analysis
http://www.dillum.ch/html/barock_kunst_chronologie_09.htm
http://www.dillum.ch/html/dillum_bilder_varia.htm

amazing related events in the history of the reigns of Napoleon III/I
http://www.dillum.ch/html/napoleon_maystre_uebersetzung_09.htm

(translation from German to English on ggletransl: http://translate.google.com/# )


More amazing discoveries:

signature of cleopatra forgery
http://www.dillum.ch/html/kleopatra_papyrus_berlin.htm

falsification of history: treasure of troy
http://www.dillum.ch/html/schliemann_priamos_schatz.htm

fake pergamon altar
http://www.dillum.ch/html/pergamon_altar_berlin_faelschung.htm

nebra disc forgery
http://www.dillum.ch/html/nebra_sangerhausen_kalenderscheibe_faelschung.htm

"roman" settlement in switzerland
http://www.dillum.ch/html/klein_wabern.htm

freiburg castle
http://www.dillum.ch/html/freiburg_fryburg_fribourg.htm.htm

frienisberg monastery
http://www.dillum.ch/html/frienisberg_namenlandschaft.htm

"ancient" zurich
http://www.dillum.ch/html/zuerich_uetliberg_ortsnamen.htm
http://www.dillum.ch/html/z%C3%BCrich_bullinger_kritik.htm

federal charter of 1291 forgery
http://www.dillum.ch/html/bundesbrief_1291_kritik.htm

white book of sarnen forgery
http://www.dillum.ch/html/weisses_buch_sarnen_kritik.htm

pantheon, constructed in the 18th century
http://www.dillum.ch/html/pantheon_rom_chronologie.htm

fake swiss history
http://www.dillum.ch/html/stettler_alte_eidgenossen_kritik.htm
http://www.dillum.ch/html/berns_maechtige_zeit_kritik.htm
http://www.dillum.ch/html/berns_goldene_zeit_kritik.htm
http://www.dillum.ch/html/schweiz_krise_identitaet.htm

alexander mosaic of pompeii
http://www.dillum.ch/html/schilling_jammertal_pompeji_alexandermosaik.htm

gold treasure of erstfeld forgery
http://www.dillum.ch/html/erstfeld_goldschatz_faelschung.htm

albrecht von haller fake history
http://www.dillum.ch/html/albrecht_von-haller_universalgenie_kritik.htm

(translation from German to English on ggletransl: http://translate.google.com/# )



Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 28, 2010, 03:35:40 AM
The radical new chronology conspiracy goes far beyond the debates about the shape of the earth, or any other collection of alternative theories (nuclear industry/weapons hoax, the true shape of the atom).

The official historical chronology was altered and modified to suit the purposes of the same conspirators who also invented the round earth hoax.

Before 1720 AD, there were NO princes, kings, cathedrals, or official religion; the Torah, Koran and New Testament were created in the period 1715-1725 AD, as we have seen here, given the abundant and extraordinary proofs we have at our disposal. Iesous Christos (Christ) was crucified at the city of Constantinopole/Troy in 1715, and was not Hebrew at all.

Let us again read the ORIGINAL quote from the epistle to the Galatians:

(http://img57.imageshack.us/img57/4643/jerustroia2.jpg)

More fantastic details here: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg940930#msg940930

The Galatians/Trojans were ACTUAL WITNESSES to the crucifixion of Christ, and this event took place just a few hundred years ago.

Also, it was demonstrated here that both J. Scaliger and D. Petavius lived AT LEAST 100 HUNDRED YEARS LATER than previously thought.

The eruption of the Vesuvius volcano which destroyed Pompeii and Herculaneum occurred around 1740 AD, and the gothic/baroque architecture was all created in the period 1720 - 1750 AD; our history is JUST 500 years old, from Adam/Eve to present.

The first actual pope was, I believe, Innocent (with the XIII added later to his title) around 1721; please read the Pauline Epistles by the great British historian E. Johnson to see how the "ancient" documents were forged much later in order to modify the true historical chronology.

Other historians such as R. Baldauf, reached a similar conclusion (his study of numerous presumably ancient manuscripts and the exposure of the same as being, for the most part, recent forgeries). One must also mention Baldauf's study of numerous presumably ancient manuscripts and the exposure of the same as being, for the most part, recent forgeries. Baldauf discovered parallels between the "historical" books of the Old Testament and the works of the mediaeval Romance genre as well as Homer's Iliad that were blatant enough to lead the scientist to the assumption that the text of both the Iliad and the Bible date from the late Middle Ages.

Some of the mediaeval chronicles ascribed to different authors resembled each other to such an extent that Baldauf was forced to identify them as works of the same author, despite the fact that the two documents were presumed separated chronologically by an interval of two centuries at least. At any rate, some of the expressions characteristic for Romantic languages that one finds in both documents fail to correspond with either of the alleged datings (one of them being the IX and the other the XI century). Apart from that, some of the manuscripts contain distinctly more recent passages, such as frivolous stories of endeavours in public steam baths (which the Europeans only became acquainted with during the late Reconquista epoch) and even allusions to the Holy Inquisition. Baldauf's study of the "ancient" poetry in Volume 4 demonstrates that many "ancient" poets wrote rhymed verse resembling that of the mediaeval troubadours. Unlike Hardouin, Baldauf is convinced that the verse of Horace is of mediaeval origin, pointing out German and Italian influences inherent in his Latin. Furthermore, Baldauf points out such pronounced parallels between the poetry of Horace and Ovid (who were presumably unaware of each other's existence) that one becomes convinced that the works of both belong to a third party - apparently, a much later author - a fact most philologists explain by the fact that Roman literature was heavily influenced by Greek models and especially Homer's writings and the motives used in the Ilias and the Odysee have marked all occidental literature until today.

Baldauf sums up his research in the following words: "Our Romans and Greeks have been Italian humanists." All of them, Homer, Sophocles, Aristotle and many other "ancient" authors, so different in our perception, hail from the same century, the 14th and 15th of the Italian renaissance [according to the new chronology, that is, that history is only 1000 years old; we have proved here that we can advance to the radical new chronology theory in which history is just 500 years old]. Baldauf avers that the entire history of the Ancient Greeks and Romans -- likewise the Biblical "history," which correlates with the above to some extent -- was conceived and introduced by the Italian humanists, as well as their colleagues and followers from other countries. Humanism, he says, has given us a whole fantasy world of antiquity and the Bible, as well as the early Middle Ages, which Baldauf also considered an invention of the humanist writers.


Here is the C. Pfister of Germany, Wilhelm Kammeier (the counterfeiting of German history):

http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fweb.archive.org%2Fweb%2F20070818163029%2Fhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.jesus1053.com%2Fl2-wahl%2Fl2-autoren%2Fl3-Uwe-Topper%2Fkammeier.html&sl=de&tl=en

Original work in German: http://web.archive.org/web/20070818163029/http://www.jesus1053.com/l2-wahl/l2-autoren/l3-Uwe-Topper/kammeier.html



Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 03, 2010, 04:26:39 AM
According to the official theory, the inner core of Earth is solid sphere made up mainly of iron and nickel. The outer core (a liquid) is also composed of iron and nickel. The mantle is a rocky shell, predominantly solid, and it encloses the outer core. We also have the crust, composed of a great variety of igneous, metamorphic, and sedimentary rocks.

(http://www.moorlandschool.co.uk/earth/earth_science/earthfg2.gif)

As we have seen before, the area of land in the northern hemisphere of the earth is to the area of land in the southern hemisphere as three is to one. The mean weight of the land is two and three-quarter times heavier than that of water; assuming the depth of the seas in both hemispheres to be equal, the northern hemisphere up to sea level is heavier than the southern hemisphere, if judged by sea and land distribution; the earth masses above sea level are additional heavy loads. But this unequal distribution of masses does not affect the position of the earth, as it does not place the northern hemisphere with its face to the sun. A dead force like gravitation could not keep the unequally loaded earth in equilibrium. Also, the seasonal distribution of ice and snow, shifting in a distillation process from one hemisphere to the other, should interfere with the equilibrium of the earth, but fails to do so.


If we take into account the shape and size of the supercontinent Pangea, such a concentration of land mass in just one place would have meant an EVEN GREATER unequal load upon the inner layers of the Earth. It would have gradually stopped the Earth from rotating around its own axis, and Pangea would have faced the Sun 24 hours a day. The rotating layers of iron/nickel would have come to a dead stop in some weeks.

(http://www.scienceline.ro/_files/Image/articole/original/pangea_animation_03.gif)

And the origin of the oceans themselves is still a mystery to be solved...

http://www.varchive.org/itb/ecocean.htm


The eruption which did destroy Pompeii/Herculaneum took place at least after 1700 AD. The events described in the Gospels, actually occurred next to the sea of Marmara, and the crucifixion/resurrection happened on mount Beykoz, and not near Golgotha; the names and places were changed in the period 1715-1720, to create the biggest hoax of them all: the altered chronology of history. History is really just 500 years old.


As for the Michelson-Morley experiment, it was especially designed to find a SOLID type of ether, and this was no accident, as both A. Michelson and E. Morley knew very well the existence of a DYNAMIC ether.

Here you will find the exact description of the reasoning behind the M&M experiment of 1877, and the mistakes that were made:

http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?p=31008#p31008
http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?p=31007#p31007

Dayton Miller's 1933 paper in Reviews of Modern Physics details the positive results from over 20 years of experimental research into the question of ether-drift, and remains the most definitive body of work on the subject of light-beam interferometry.

Today, however, Miller's work is hardly known or mentioned, as is the case with nearly all the experiments which produced positive results for an ether in space. Modern physics today points instead to the much earlier and less significant 1887 work of Michelson-Morley, as having "proved the ether did not exist". "

The superb presentation of the errors inherent in A. Michelson's approach to his experiment:

http://web.archive.org/web/20040607062702/ca.geocities.com/rayredbourne/docs/21.htm
http://web.archive.org/web/20040612113918/ca.geocities.com/rayredbourne/docs/b.htm
http://web.archive.org/web/20040611112531/ca.geocities.com/rayredbourne/docs/b2.htm
http://web.archive.org/web/20040612033435/ca.geocities.com/rayredbourne/docs/23.htm

One of the greatest works which does show the errors committed by both Michelson and Einstein:

http://users.scnet.rs/~mrp/contents.html (chapters 5-10)

The errors of Michelson and Morley analyzed from a different point of view:

http://www.aquestionoftime.com/michelson.html

A. Micheons and E. Morley UNMASKED:

http://www.reformation.org/einstein-unmasked.html


H. Lorentz was a personal employee of J.P. Morgan, the unbelievable story detailing the whole conspiracy, here:

http://www.svpforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=696&sid=df49b40b0918509a3a67b10075bf83fc

Morgan was not only ruthless but extremely thorough. When the new Heaviside equations were tentatively accepted as the new Maxwell's theory to be taught in the electrical engineering just beginning to be set up in some universities etc., Morgan also directed his close scientific advisors to assure that this new electrical theory was harmless and did not contain or teach any of Tesla's energy freely from the active medium systems. In other words, not only was it essential to suppress the present Tesla, but it was essential to suppress all the future Teslas.

H. A. Lorentz was the man who was elicited to do the necessary symmetrization with ease, thereby accomplishing exactly what Morgan decreed to his own advisors that must be done: Get rid of those Tesla systems capable of taking and freely using EM energy from the active medium. H. A. Lorentz (with the t) simply lifted and used what L. V. Lorenz (without the t) had already done.

For the deliberate fixing of the already sharply curtailed Heaviside equations, see H. A. Lorentz, La Theorie Electromagnetique de Maxwell et son application aux corps mouvants, [The Electromagnetic Theory of Maxwell and its application to moving bodies], Arch. N?erl. Sci., Vol. 25, 1892, p. 363-552. [Also in H. A. Lorentz, Collected Papers, The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, vol. 2, pp. 168-238, esp. p. 168.] This is the work that Lorentz cites later (in 1895) for his proof of the symmetrical regauging theorems (the two equations of symmetrical regauging).

The intentional mistakes committed by H. Lorentz in deriving his transformations:

http://www.aquestionoftime.com/lorentz.html

The Dayton-Miller ether drift experiments:

http://www.orgonelab.org/miller.htm


"The effect [of ether-drift] has persisted throughout. After considering all the possible sources of error, there always remained a positive effect."  Dayton Miller (1928, p.399)

"My opinion about Miller's experiments is the following. ... Should the positive result be confirmed, then the special theory of relativity and with it the general theory of relativity, in its current form, would be invalid. Experimentum summus judex. Only the equivalence of inertia and gravitation would remain, however, they would have to lead to a significantly different theory."
 Albert Einstein, in a letter to Edwin E. Slosson, 8 July 1925 (from copy in Hebrew University Archive, Jerusalem.) See citations below for Silberstein 1925 and Einstein 1926.

"I believe that I have really found the relationship between gravitation and electricity, assuming that the Miller experiments are based on a fundamental error. Otherwise, the whole relativity theory collapses like a house of cards."
 Albert Einstein, in a letter to Robert Millikan, June 1921 (in Clark 1971, p.328)




If we substitute this increase in mass into the term for the Bohr radius of the atom, we see that special relativity predicts a contraction of the atomic radius. Outer electrons are dominated by another effect as they have a greater angular momentum but a lower velocity as they are further from the nucleus. As a result they do not contract and end up further form the inner electrons. As both these effects are greater for Gold  as it is larger than silver the difference causes a difference in reflection spectra. If there was a aether, gold would be white.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=36931.msg917925#msg917925
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=36931.msg918648#msg918648
(electron tunneling microscope photographs of the atom which do show A STANDING WAVE MODEL, and not at all a cloud of orbiting electrons)

Bohr had no right to propose a postulate WHICH DID NOT INCLUDE THE SOURCE OF THE ENERGY REQUIRED FOR THE ELECTRONS TO CONTINUE TO ORBIT AROUND THE NUCLEUS. The assumptions made by both Rutherford and Bohr are dealt with in the Case against the Nuclear Atom by Dr. Dewey Larson, and are shown to be dead wrong.

http://www.reciprocalsystem.com/cana/index.htm
http://www.reciprocalsystem.com/cana/cana02.htm
http://www.reciprocalsystem.com/cana/cana03.htm
http://www.reciprocalsystem.com/cana/cana04.htm
http://www.reciprocalsystem.com/cana/cana05.htm
http://www.reciprocalsystem.com/cana/cana01.htm

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=36931.msg919169#msg919169 (the tremendous mistakes committed by both Rutherford and Bohr)

The Rydberg formula for the spectral emission lines of atomic hydrogen is an effect of the aether vortex theory of atoms, and cannot be linked with an impossible hypothesis created by N. Bohr, who NEVER demonstrated the energy source for the orbiting electrons.

In point, Bohr suggested a means preventing the atom exploding when charges neutralise. Although the concept of a central positively charged nucleus surrounded by orbiting negatively charged electrons seemed to remove the acceptance problems in Thomson's model, explaining the theory of octaves by deception, it won some academic acceptance. Many found the model very difficult to use, having inherent real world animation problems. By 1912, Rutherford's education, his acceptance of the Bohr construct and his subsequent experiments on thin metal foils, led him to introduce this construct as his revolutionary atomic model; where the negative electrons orbit the positive nucleus. On paper, the static atomic model seems to satisfy the chemist's bonding requirements, placing the bonding electrons in the atom's outer orbital shell. Unfortunately, as Chemical theory promoted the fact of an indivisible atom, Rutherford's atomic model won popular appeal through default, due to the fact that the daily news carried various headlines stating in bold type, 'Rutherford splits the atom.' Because Chemistry got it so wrong, gullible people assumed that Rutherford's other claims must be right, and therefore, electrons do orbit the nucleus. Enthusiastically, the youth of the day accepted the assumption as an assertion of fact, and with these preconditioned beliefs, many knowledge viruses spread and mutated.

THE SPACE-TIME CONTINUUM HOAX:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39823.msg1005454#msg1005454





Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 04, 2010, 02:43:34 AM
Against Pangea, video documentary (presenting the same idea from the previous message):

http://www.continuitystudios.net/pangea.html

See also:

http://www.nealadams.com/EarthProject/antipangea.html

More information on the Pangea hoax:

http://www.freelists.org/post/geocentrism/Bible-anomaliesparst-1-2


BAROMETRIC PRESSURE PARADOX data:

http://www-das.uwyo.edu/~geerts/cwx/notes/chap01/diurnal.html

Surface pressure measurements in Taiwan (at 25 degrees N) are least around 4am and (especially) 4 pm Local Standard Time, and most around (especially) 10am, and 10pm LST; the amplitude of the semidiurnal cycle is about 1.4 hPa.

The weight of the atmosphere is constantly changing as the changing barometric pressure indicates. Low pressure areas are not necessarily encircled by high pressure belts. The semidiurnal changes in barometric pressure are not explainable by the mechanistic principles of gravitation and the heat effect of solar radiation. The cause of these variations is unknown.

It has been known now for two and a half centuries, that there are more or less daily variations in the height of the barometer, culminating in two maxima and two minima during the course of 24 hours. Since Dr. Beal's discovery (1664-65), the same observation has been made and puzzled over at every station at which pressure records were kept and studied, but without success in finding for it the complete physical explanation. In speaking of the diurnal and semidiurnal variations of the barometer, Lord Rayleigh says: The relative magnitude of the latter [semidiurnal variations], as observed at most parts of the earth's surface, is still a mystery, all the attempted explanations being illusory.

One maximum is at 10 a.m., the other at 10 p.m.; the two minima are at 4 a.m. and 4 p.m. The heating effect of the sun can explain neither the time when the maxima appear nor the time of the minima of these semidiurnal variations. If the pressure becomes lower without the air becoming lighter through a lateral expansion due to heat, this must mean that the same mass of air gravitates with changing force at different hours.

The lowest pressure is near the equator, in the belt of the doldrums. Yet the troposphere is highest at the equator, being on the average about 18 km. high there; it is lower in the moderate latitudes, and only 6 km. high above the ground at the poles.


ORIGIN OF GRANITE:

http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1183&start=15#p35572

No such thing as an iron core for the earth:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39361.msg982148#msg982148



Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 26, 2010, 02:26:53 AM
Jan. 5 2016

I was able to find the classical score most related to Blackbird:



Fernando Sor, Etude (Op. 60 No.19)


However, Adorno added elements from both the Hungarian Fantasy (Liszt) and the second movement of Beethoven's 7th Symphony.


It is commonly perceived that I'm A Believer (Monkees) was written by Neil Diamond; it was not. It was another Adorno song, a modified Help. Whether that was going to be another Beatles single in second half of 1966, we will never know; obviously after the disappearance of Paul from the public scene, and after John left the band too, everyone had to wait until January-February of 1967 for Penny Lane/Strawberry Fields to be released.

Now, there is no way that Neil Diamond would have had the courage to modify Help to turn into I'm A Believer; only Adorno could modify classical scores, and was also allowed to modify Beatles songs to give to other artists/groups.

Obviously the legend behind the song was offered to the public in order not to attract attention that in the era of the Beatles and the Rolling Stones another song of the same quality would peak at no.1 in 1966, and would become the biggest selling record of 1967.

I'm A Believer is another Adorno masterpiece, perhaps intended originally for the Beatles, clearly a modified version of Help.


Feb. 14, 2016

TOP 20 THEODOR ADORNO SONGS





20. Bridge Over Troubled Waters



In 1970, without the support of more Adorno songs, Simon and Garfunkel's career as a group was over. Adorno also wrote Mrs. Robinson.





19. Lola



A modified Something, an extraodinary work signed Adorno again.



Both Something and Lola were created by reworking one of the most beautiful scores ever written, the Adagio from Spartacus, by Khachaturian:







Adorno also modified Something into the Rain Song, which was given to Led Zeppelin.





18. Tuesday Afternoon



A modified A Day In The Life (originally given to the Beatles).





17. I'm A Believer



It is commonly perceived that I'm A Believer (Monkees) was written by Neil Diamond; it was not. It was another Adorno song, a modified Help. Whether that was going to be another Beatles single in second half of 1966, we will never know; obviously after the disappearance of Paul from the public scene, and after John left the band too, everyone had to wait until January-February of 1967 for Penny Lane/Strawberry Fields to be released. Now, there is no way that Neil Diamond would have had the courage to modify Help to turn into I'm A Believer; only Adorno could modify classical scores, and was also allowed to modify Beatles songs to give to other artists/groups.



Obviously the legend behind the song was offered to the public in order not to attract attention that in the era of the Beatles and the Rolling Stones another song of the same quality would peak at no.1 in 1966, and would become the biggest selling record of 1967.



I'm A Believer is another Adorno masterpiece, perhaps intended originally for the Beatles, clearly a modified version of Help.





16. Jumping Jack Flash



One of the very best songs ever written by Adorno, a modified Satisfaction; he also transformed Satisfaction into What Is Life which was actually a Beatles song; after Adorno's death in August 6, 1969, all the remaining Beatles songs (Maybe I'm Amazed, Live And Let Die, Give Me Love, Imagine, My Love, Admiral Holsy, Dark Horse, Another Day) were given to McCartney II, Lennon II and Harrison. The Stones were able to survive for some years after 1970 with the remaining Adorno songs they had at their disposal (Angie, Can't You Hear Me Knocking, Brown Sugar), but after 1976 they had to find new songwriters.





15. Light My Fire



A modified Ritual Fire Dance by De Falla (one can observe the similarities by listening to Jose Feliciano's version). Adorno also modified Light My Fire into Aqualung which was given to Jethro Tull.





14. Happy Together



A modified Penny Lane.





13. A tie: God Only Knows and Pinball Wizard



A modified Question (offered to the Moody Blues), given to The Who.



A modified Michelle given to the Beach Boys.





12. Nights In White Satin



One of the greatest songs written by Adorno, a modified Swan Lake by Tchaikovsky.





11. Kashmir



A full analysis of the song scored by Adorno, here:



www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg770568#msg770568 (includes an analysis of more Led Zeppelin songs written by Adorno, and also more Beatles songs)



Adorno also wrote Beck's Bolero (1966), a modified We Can Work It Out. He also scored See Emily Play given to Pink Floyd.





10. Live And Let Die



This song, written by Adorno in 1968, was supposed to be the Beatles' next single in 1970. A modified Magical Mystery Tour.





9. Martha My Dear



The best song on the White Album, a modified Martha by Von Flotow.





8. Blackbird



The most haunting ballad written for the Beatles, together with the masterpiece Yesterday.



A modified Fernando Sor, Etude (Op. 60 No.19)







However, Adorno added elements from both the Hungarian Fantasy (Liszt) and the second movement of Beethoven's 7th Symphony.





7. Yellow Submarine



Actually the theme from Verdi's Aida combined the Toreador song from Carmen by Bizet.





6. Got To Get You Into My Life



A modified Can't Buy Me Love (actually Aine Kleine Nacht Musik by Mozart).





5. A tie: Penny Lane and Something



Penny Lane - Mozart's Piano Concerto No. 21 (Elvira Madigan)



Something - Adagio from Spartacus, Khachaturian





4. Yesterday



A modified Neapolitan song, called "Piccere' Che Vene a Dicere"





3. Sgt. Pepper



Sgt. Pepper is clever combination of the Radetzky March and the Romanian rhapsody no 1 by Enescu





2. Hey Jude



For Hey Jude, Adorno pulled out all stops, he grouped into one song, masterfully, the Ride of the Walkiries by Wagner, the theme from the Piano Concerto no. 1 by Tchaikovsky, and the theme from Symphony no 9 by Beethoven.





1. A Hard Day's Night



The biggest monster hit of the entire rock-pop era, from the best Beatles LP by the same name.



A modified Rossini's Wilhelm Tell overture.




I did not include on the list my favorite Beatles songs, Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds, Magical Mystery Tour, Hello Goodbye, Lady Madonna, and Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey (a modified L.i.t.S.w.D).


www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg805137#msg805137 (full analysis of the work done by Adorno for the Beatles)


Apr. 28, 2016

The McCartney twins theory: mileswmathis.com/paul8.pdf


Jan. 22, 2018

Lennon twins theory:

pieceofmindful.com/2016/12/17/the-john-lennon-twins/

pieceofmindful.com/2016/12/04/john-lennon-family-photos/

Is Let It Be actually featuring Paul?

thebrainwashedhousewife.blogspot.ro/2016/05/phil-ackrill-hey-jude-1968-james-paul.html

More on the McCartney twins theory:

pieceofmindful.com/2016/09/27/more-mccartney-stuff/



Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 27, 2010, 07:16:22 AM
Hello Goodbye is a modified Great Gate of Kiev by Mussorgsky:



Pictures at an Exhibition was used before by Adorno of course to create Day Tripper (Promenade).

Lady Madonna is a modified When I'm 64 combined with the Morning Mood from the Peer Gynt suite (Grieg).

Mother Nature's Son is a modified God Only Knows, the masterpiece given to the Beach Boys.

The greatest mystery, so far, is the source for Norwegian Wood.


To experience the full beauty of the Beatles songs listen to them on youtube in classical style (beatles go baroque, hollyridge orchestra).

No one else has ever come even close to writing and orchestrating something similar to Tomorrow Never Knows, Within You Without You, Magical Mystery Tour (a modified Good Day Sunshine) or Lady Madonna. The musical repertoire of the Beatles is unmatched and unprecedented to this day.




Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey, which I believe was going to be the next Beatles single in 1970 (a modified version of Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds)


Feb. 12, 2018

Norwegian Wood is a modified Aquarium (Saint Saens, Carnival of the Animals).

God Only Knows contains elements from Gymnopedie No. 1 (Satie).


The solo career of John Lennon II featured these songs written by Adorno:

Imagine - a modified Let It Be

#9Dream - a modified We Can Work It Out

Watching The Wheels - a modified Maybe I'm Amazed

Just Like Starting Over -  a modified Pretty Woman (R. Orbison)

Mind Games - a modified All You Need Is Love

Bless You - a modified Band On The Run


Unfortunately, Lennon II managed to squander away the legacy inherited from John and the Beatles in just four months: already by the end of 1969 no one could care less about Plastic Ono Band and Lennon II's career. His stage presence was not the same as that of John, and the album cover for Two Virgins did not help at all (neither did the glasses and the long hair).

By January 1969, the greatest rock band in the world was reduced to singing on the rooftop of the Apple Studios: their image having changed so much that a full concert was becoming more and more unfeasible. The Beatles before 1967 had a certain image to live up to, a fact which was neglected after Sgt. Pepper.


Feb. 17, 2018

Mrs. Robinson (given to Simon & Garfunkel) is a modified theme from Porky and Bess by Gershwin.

(0:25 to 1:25)

Pretty Woman (given to R. Orbison) is a modified Do You Want to Know a Secret (Beatles).

She Said, She Said (one of the most beautiful songs from the Revolver album) is a modified The Word (from Rubber Soul).

Beck's Bolero is a modified We Can Work It Out.

Oh My My (the biggest hit of Ringo Starr's solo career) is a modified Get Back.


Feb. 26, 2018

Rockestra (the last of the great Beatles songs to appear on an ex-Beatle album) is a modified Good Day Sunshine.

Honey Pie (one of the best songs on the White Album) is a modified theme from An American In Paris by Gershwin:

(2:40 - 5:30)

I Love You (Wings) is a modified Maxwell Silver Hammer.

Let Me Roll It (Wings) is a modified Oh Darling.


Apr. 2, 2018

Obladi Oblada is a modified Yellow Submarine.

With A Little Help From My Friends is a modified version of Eight Days a Week.

Magical Mystery Tour is a brilliantly modified Nights On a Bald Mountain by Mussorgsky:



The theme from Nights On a Bald Mountain was also used by Adorno in Good Day Sunshine.

Magical Mystery Tour was itself modified at least twice to come up with Jet and Live And Let Die (Wings).

Help is a modified version of the Air suite by Bach:



Strawberry Fields is a modified Pachelbel's Canon:



No other rock group had the stage presence of the Beatles, not The Who, not Led Zeppelin, not the Stones, not Presley (see mileswmathis.com/elvis.pdf )




May 3, 2018

Rolling Stones, Child of the Moon:



It is practically Rain sung by the Beatles. Why would the Stones, at the height of their success, accept to copy Rain so perfectly (b side of Paperback Writer, 1966) and subject themselves to various comments such as the following:

'melody sounds like Rain by the Beatles, released in 1966.

Such and the composition of the song reminds 'Rain', always by The Beatles !

That opening reminds me of The Beatles 'It's All Too Much'. I can see where George Harrison got his inspiration!

It's almost exactly like Rain, if listened to side by side.'

These listeners did not realize, or even gave it a thought, that both songs were written by a single, different songwriter who penned both the Beatles and the Rolling Stones songs.

Nor did anyone else reflect on the fact that the songs published by the Stones after 1976 differ greatly from the huge hits of the 60s and early 70s.

Yes, Start Me Up, Undercover Of The Night, Emotional Rescue, Saint Of Me are very good hits which kept the Stones very close to the top in rock music, but they cannot be compared to Satisfaction, Paint It Black, Ruby Tuesday, Let's Spend The Night Together, Honky Tonk Woman or their greatest hit, Jumping Jack Flash.

Why would the quality of the songs published by the Stones after 1976 decrease, when by all accounts, had they been the real songwriters of their music, these songs could have and should have become even better?

"In just 7 years as Brian Jones was present they wrote 10 albums, it could be counted even more with differences from UK and US releases until 1967. For me also this period songs are best, most creative, soulful, original, amazingly diverse and much more, and those period are only albums that can be compared with the Beatles ! It is also their far most creative + productive period and this was their climax as band on all levels !"

(comment from youtube)

It was their most creative period because they had the best theoretical musician in the world writing their songs for them, just like he did with the Beatles.

But Adorno never gave the Stones the musical equivalents of Hey Jude, Lady Madonna, A Hard Days Night, Yellow Submarine, Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds, Hello Goodbye, or Yesterday.

He always kept the best for the Beatles.

Another very interesting fact: the intro for Jumping Jack Flash (Stones' greatest hit, a modified Satisfaction) has never been replicated in concert (instead the song starts with the main riff), which is bizarre if Richards and Jagger were the real songwriters, since the intro is the most mystical part of the song, a tremendous and extraordinary musical masterpiece, yet the Stones were unwilling to play it live to their advantage.


May 28, 2018

The legend goes like this: Ruthann Friedman wrote Windy for the Association in 1967.

However, Windy is a modified Good Morning, Good Morning by the Beatles (also 1967).

Cherish is a modified Here, There and Everywhere (Beatles, 1966).

Never My Love is a modified She Said, She Said (Beatles, 1966).

Let us remember that Happy Together was also written by Adorno and given to the Turtles (the modified trumpet solo from Penny Lane).

Since the Association were given several huge hits, they were able to stay in the limelight for several years.

By contrast, The Creation were only given one huge hit (Painter Man, a modified Light My Fire) which could been featured on either a Beatles or a Rolling Stones album: that is why they disbanded in early 1968 (Painter Man included the very first bow on an electric guitar solo, a feat repeated by Jimmy Page years later).

In order to get things started, Jethro Tull were given several major hits: Aqualung (a modified Light My Fire), Mother Goose (a modified Battle of Evermore), Bungle in the Jungle (a modified Jumping Jack Flash), and Living the Past (a modified Day Tripper; here is a very interesting cover by K. Emerson: ).

The most beautiful ballad given to Jethro Tull was Nice Little Tune, a true masterpiece by Adorno, the most underrated Tull song of all time:

(6:37 to 7:42)

It is a modified theme from the English Folk Suite by V. Williams, one of the most beautiful melodies ever:

(5:22 - 6:07

Hotel California (the Eagles) is a modified We Used to Know (Jethro Tull).

The theme from Thick as a Brick is a modified Gymnopedie 1 and 2 by Satie (the first modification became God Only Knows, given to the Beach Boys, the second modification, the most magnificient, was Mother Nature's Son given to the Beatles).


We are told that Led Zeppelin was the greatest band from 1969 to 1979; the drumming prowess of J. Bonham, as an example:



Jimmy Page was one of the best lead guitarists ever.

But they were not the Beatles, with John and Paul.


Kashmir included several modified parts to the song:

The intro is from Mars the Bringer of War by Holst.

The famous part, the most magical of all Led Zeppelin songs:

(0:53 - 1:05)

is the modified theme from Scheherazade by Rimsky-Korsakov:

(5:05 to 5:, especially 5:30 to 5:40 and of course the majestic 40:06 to 41:03, the part from 40:43 to 41:03 is exactly the famous instrumental in Kashmir, that is where Adorno got the idea for Kashmir)

The magic of Kashmir, piano cover:



Another magical cover:



Adaggio from Spartacus was modified into the Rain Song (the first modification was Something given to the Beatles; the Rain Song itself was also modified into Lola for the Kinks).

Over the Hills and Far Away is a modified Afternoon of a Faun by Debussy, that is why the guitar intro is pure magic.


Much more on the Adorno - Beatles connection on page 1 of this thread.


Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Ichimaru Gin :] on October 27, 2010, 10:28:00 AM
Is Sandokan (although I know it is classified as fictional) based upon any true historical events in your chronology?
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 28, 2010, 02:11:11 AM
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg945934#msg945934 (the artifacts found at Pompeii/Herculaneum prove IMMEDIATELY that the eruption of Vesuvius which destroyed these cities, took place AT LEAST AFTER 1700 AD, AND NOT IN THE YEAR 79 AD, while the Jump of the Second Derivative of the Moon Elongation prove that the astronomical records of the period 700 BC - 1200 AD were made up much later in time; I urge all of you to read this carefully)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg945952#msg945952 (more proofs for those who accept the official chronology)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg858185#msg858185 (the classics HISTORY: SCIENCE OR FICTION VOL. 1 AND 2, and the BOOK OF CIVILIZATION)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg858706#msg858706 (Christoph Pfister discovered that there was NO HUMAN SETTLEMENT IN SWITZERLAND before 1700 AD)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg861961#msg861961 (more proofs)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg865008#msg865008 (more precise proofs)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg866855#msg866855 (the PAULINE EPISTLES by EDWIN JOHNSON, the extraordinary work which proves that the New Testament was forged at least after 1533 AD + C. Pfister's own site translated in English)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg939935#msg939935 (jump of the second derivative/moon elongation by R. Newton)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg940930#msg940930 (mysteries of the egyptian zodiacs/Christ crucified at Constantinopole/Troy)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg942177#msg942177

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg945204#msg945204 (stone levitation)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg945952#msg945952


http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg969919#msg969919 (more extraordinary proofs that the eruption of the volcano Vesuvius that destroyed Pompeii/Herculaneum took place in the 17th century AD)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg986690#msg986690 (who wrote the bible)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg998158#msg998158 (C. Pfister archive, one of the very best proofs for the fact that all history prior to 1770 AD)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1003416#msg1003416 (more about the radical new chronology)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg960675#msg960675 (Garden of Eden, north of Egypt and west of the Nile)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg945934#msg945934 (Pompeii destroyed at least after 1700 AD, more on the moon elongation paradox)


. Rowbotham in Earth is not a Globe:

If any allowance is to be made for refraction--which, no doubt, exists where the sun's rays have to pass through a medium, the atmosphere, which gradually increases in density as it approaches the earth's surface--it will considerably diminish the above-named distance of the sun; so that it is perfectly safe to affirm that the under edge of the sun is considerably less than 700 statute miles above the earth.


It is unfortunate that S. Rowbotham did not include in his book (1881) the classical experiment of G.B. Airy (1871) which did prove once and for all that there are multiple layers of aether, of various densities, between the Sun/Stars and Earth.

Here are the details concerning the experiment performed by G.B. Airy:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39116.msg986695#msg986695


Therefore, statements such as:

On March 21-22 the sun is directly overhead at the equator and appears 45 degrees above the horizon at 45 degrees north and south latitude. As the angle of sun above the earth at the equator is 90 degrees while it is 45 degrees at 45 degrees north or south latitude, it follows that the angle at the sun between the vertical from the horizon and the line from the observers at 45 degrees north and south must also be 45 degrees. The result is two right angled triangles with legs of equal length. The distance between the equator and the points at 45 degrees north or south is approximately 3,000 miles.  and  If a navigator neglects to apply the sun's radius to his observation at sea, he is 16 nautical miles (nearly) out in calculating the position his ship is in. A minute of arc on the sextant represents a nautical mile, and if the radius of the sun is 16 miles, the diameter is of course 32 miles. And as measured by the sextant, the sun's diameter is 32 minutes of arc, that is 32 nautical miles in diameter.

cannot be true given the effect of the many layers of aether (of various densities) upon the light emitted by the Sun. Also, measuring the angle of the sun from a latitude of 30 degrees or 60 degrees will give different results.

And there are further issues to be dealt with
, if we use simple triangulation to obtain possible figures for the Earth-Sun distance:

The sun crosses the celestial equator and moves southward in the northern hemisphere during the September equinox. The location on the earth where the sun is directly overhead at solar noon is known as the subsolar point. The subsolar point occurs on the equator during the September equinox and March equinox. At that time, the earth's axis of rotation is perpendicular to the line connecting the centers of the earth and the sun. This is the time when many people believe that the earth experiences 12 hours of day and night. However, this is not exactly the case.

Dispelling the exactly 12 hours of daylight myth
It is important to note that day and night during the September equinox is not exactly equal length. During the time of the September and March equinoxes many regions around the equator have a daylight length of about 12 hours and six-and-a-half minutes. Moreover, the day is slightly longer in places that are further away from the equator and the sun takes longer to rise and set in these locations.

According to the US Naval Observatory the dates of equal day and night occur about February 25 and October 15 at a latitude of five degrees in the northern hemisphere. They occur around March 17 and September 26 at a latitude of 40 degrees. On the dates of the equinoxes, the day is about seven minutes longer than the night at latitudes up to about 25 degrees, increasing to 10 minutes or more at a latitude of 50 degrees.


The ONLY possible way to discern/distinguish/infer the real diameter of the Sun, not to mention the correct Earth-Sun distance, is by direct comparison with an object/space shuttle/planet which would transit in front of the Sun.

Here are the actual videos which do show the REAL measure of the diameter of the Sun and the CORRECT Earth-Sun distance:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39728.msg994892#msg994892

Also included are the photographs taken in Antarctica by F. Bruenjes which do confirm the figures which can be easily deduced from the transit videos.



Impossibility of a round Sun shape:

The atmospheric pressure of the sun, instead of being 27.47 times greater than the atmospheric pressure of the earth (as expected because of the gravitational pull of the large solar mass), is much smaller: the pressure there varies according to the layers of the atmosphere from one-tenth to one-thousandth of the barometric pressure on the earth; at the base of the reversing layer the pressure is 0.005 of the atmospheric pressure at sea level on the earth; in the sunspots, the pressure drops to one ten-thousandth of the pressure on the earth.

The pressure of light is sometimes referred to as to explain the low atmospheric pressure on the sun. At the surface of the sun, the pressure of light must be 2.75 milligrams per square centimeter; a cubic centimeter of one gram weight at the surface of the earth would weigh 27.47 grams at the surface of the sun. Thus the attraction by the solar mass is 10,000 times greater than the repulsion of the solar light. Recourse is taken to the supposition that if the pull and the pressure are calculated for very small masses, the pressure exceeds the pull, one acting in proportion to the surface, the other in proportion to the volume. But if this is so, why is the lowest pressure of the solar atmosphere observed over the sunspots where the light pressure is least?

Because of its swift rotation, the gaseous sun should have the latitudinal axis greater than the longitudinal, but it does not have it. The sun is one million times larger than the earth, and its day is but twenty-six times longer than the terrestrial day; the swiftness of its rotation at its equator is over 125 km. per minute; at the poles, the velocity approaches zero. Yet the solar disk is not oval but round: the majority of observers even find a small excess in the longitudinal axis of the sun. The planets act in the same manner as the rotation of the sun, imposing a latitudinal pull on the luminary.

Gravitation that acts in all directions equally leaves unexplained the spherical shape of the sun. As we saw in the preceding section, the gases of the solar atmosphere are not under a strong pressure, but under a very weak one. Therefore, the computation, according to which the ellipsoidity of the sun, that is lacking, should be slight, is not correct either. Since the gases are under a very low gravitational pressure, the centrifugal force of rotation must have formed quite a flat sun.

Near the polar regions of the sun, streamers of the corona are observed, which prolong still more the axial length of the sun.

If planets and satellites were once molten masses, as cosmological theories assume, they would not have been able to obtain a spherical form, especially those which do not rotate, as Mercury or the moon (with respect to its primary).



(http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0805/antarcticeclipse_bruenjes_big.jpg)

(http://www.moonglow.net/eclipse/2003nov23/CRW_4623.jpg)(http://www.moonglow.net/eclipse/2003nov23/composite2.jpg)

(http://www.moonglow.net/eclipse/2003nov23/CRW_4632a.jpg)(http://www.moonglow.net/eclipse/2003nov23/3rdcontact_vidcap.jpg)
This is what the Black Sun actually looks like; it is the source of energy for the visible Sun (tachyons) without which we would have no visible light, and no infrared radiation.

These photographs are confirmed by the transit videos:

SUN - EARTH OFFICIAL DISTANCE = 149 MILLION KM
SUN DIAMETER = 1,4 MILLION KM
MOON - EARTH DISTANCE = 384000 KM

WE SEE THE ATLANTIS/ISS RIGHT NEXT TO THE SUN, WITH NO 149 MILLION KM BETWEEN THEM, THE VIDEOS ARE VERY CLEAR:




NO 149 MILLION DISTANCE BETWEEN THE SUN AND ISS.



SAME THING.

SLOW MOTION, ONLY A FEW KM BETWEEN THE ISS AND THE SUN (IF THAT MUCH):



dionysios, I hope you do not need glasses, no 149 million km to the Sun.

TAKE A LOOK AT THIS ONE, ATLANTIS IN FRONT OF THE SUN:




AND NOW THE MOON - ISS TRANSITS, SAME DISTANCE, SAME DIAMETER AS IN THE SUN - ISS VIDEOS:






The Sun/ISS/Mercury transit videos show clearly the real dimensions of the Sun: not 1.4 million km in diameter (or for that matter, 50 km/32 mi), but just 1000/PHI ~= 618 meters:








The Moon/ISS transits show the same diameter as that of the Sun:



Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 29, 2010, 04:24:56 AM
There are further topics of discussion which will enable us to understand, even better, the nature of gravity/aether/light.

Spintronics (the four vortices of a magnet + central column, air - fire - earth - water - akasha):

http://www.scribd.com/doc/34317/Spintronics-The-Secret-World-of-Magnets-2006-by-Howard-Johnson


E. Leedskalnin (Coral Temple) levitation/true diagram of a magnet (tube of Anu/tachyons/subquarks through which flow bosons in both directions):

http://www.electricitybook.com/magnetricity/hojo-leed.jpg

E. Leedskalnin theory of magnetism (double helices, see the photographs in Spintronics):

http://www.leedskalnin.com/ (no such thing as an electron)

http://keelynet.com/unclass/magcurnt.txt (Magnetic Current by E. Leedskalnin)


Light DOES NOT split in a spectrum of colors, the fantastic photographs/proofs (neutral element of akasha at a different frequency, surrounded by yang/yin waves):

http://home.earthlink.net/~johnrpenner/Articles/GoetheColour.html

(http://home.earthlink.net/~johnrpenner/Images/ColourProjection.jpeg)

N. Tesla on the nature of light: Light cannot be anything else but a longitudinal disturbance in the ether, involving alternate compressions and rarefactions. In other words, light can be nothing else than a sound wave in the ether...


Double Helix Theory of the Magnetic Field:

http://www.wbabin.net/science/tombe.pdf
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/4045-theories-frederick-david-tombe.html


The sacred cubit (0,63566 m - http://fliiby.com/file/893604/7bs6zt4et4.html ) constitutes the real basis for the true musical scale; it is also related to the distances between notes in a tachyon, the chakras in the human body, and the figures used in the Great Pyramid at Gizeh.

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v335/prezhorusin04/CAVEWALL1/pyramidbrain.jpg)

286,1 inches (1 sacred cubit = 25 inches) - missing intervals (capstone - gigantic crystal which was placed there)
286,1 sacred cubits from capstone to Underground Chamber

G. Gurdjieff's two missing intervals correspond to the white/red bindu terminonology used in vedic science; the intervals DO - SI and FA - MI.


CYMATICS (akasha fills all the space underneath the Schumann Cavity/Heavenly Dome); upon activation by sound, various geometrical shapes of this grid of energy become visible (it includes the Hartmann/Curry lines):





The best work on telluric currents:

http://johnbedini.net/john34/eternal%20lanterns.htm

Dr. Gustave Le Bon, true nature/source of radioactivity:

http://www.rexresearch.com/lebonmat/lebonmat.htm


Biefeld-Brown effect (link between electricity/gravity, that is between the yang/yin currents flowing through Anu/tachyons):

http://montalk.net/science/84/the-biefeld-brown-effect
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Thomas_Townsend_Brown
http://www.doctorkoontz.com/Antigravity/Townsend_Brown/page90.html
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/secret_projects/project166.htm


Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Ichimaru Gin :] on October 29, 2010, 09:10:48 AM
Is sacred cubit and amah interchangeable?  Sofer also mentions an equal measurement of 1 amah as being 24 zoll.
Of course translation of Sun would important then Levee?

Correct me if I'm wrong by the math implies that the two pillars of Solomon's Temple is 54 sc since measured individually it was shown per pillar we would 27sc which=1714.5cm but then going back we see 24 zoll=24.888 inches yet when looking at AU proof and Great Pyramid sections we see being used 1 SC=25 inches by the author yielding 63.5cm. So in my interpretation, a little variation could be expected on exact values to begin with just because of inconsistent rounding methods when doing a unit analysis conversion by the author. Agree/Disagree?
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 01, 2010, 04:01:58 AM
There was no Solomon's Temple IN Jerusalem (Ur-Shulim); Hagia Sophia IS Solomon's Temple, please read the works by A. Fomenko, especially the first few chapters in volume I of History: Science or Fiction?; also read The Pauline Epistles by E. Johnson. Please read the message here, posted earlier, which shows that a few hundred years ago, Jerusalem = Troy = Constantinopole were terms which meant one and the same city, the place where Jesus Christ was crucified by the Trojans approximately in 1715 AD. Please read the proofs relating to the fact that Pompeii and Herculaneum were destroyed by eruption from the volcano Vesuvius around 1740-1760 AD, also the C. Pfister archive, the historian who discovered that prior to 1700 AD there was NO human presence in present day Switzerland, also the Moon Elongation Parameter argument.

The best flat earth map has already been provided by me a long time ago, it does solve ALL the problems linked with the current northern circumpolar map used by the FES.


August 7, 2018

(Beatles live at Circus Krone)

Two of the best comments:

Kind of hard to imagine within a year of that Sgt. Pepper would be out.

i find it so hard to imagine this was only a year before they released sgt pepper's. such an amazing transformation in a short space of time.


Exactly.

Now, decades later, people are beginning to realize that the Beatles music was written by someone else.

Practically, after the first half of 1966, we never hear from John again; from 1963 to 1966, all of the singles, with three exceptions (Yesterday, Can't Buy Me Love and We Can Work It Out), are sung by John. After 1966, it is the other way around: Lennon II gets only three big hits (All You Need Is Love, Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds and Revolution), while Paul II gets to sing of the other huge hits (now, we know that even before 1966, there were at least two John and Pauls switching roles in the Beatles lineup). As I explained earlier, John II was a better guitar player than John, but did not have the same charisma needed to enchant and mesmerize the audience. On the Revolver album, John only gets to sing on two great songs, Yellow Submarine and And Your Bird Can Sing, while McCartney gets all of the others for the first time; John wears those sunglasses in 1966, as if to prepare everyone for the appearance of John II in How I Won The War. There is no way that John would have accepted to wear glasses, or to appear on the Two Virgins album cover, or to sing with the Plastic Ono Band.

In August 1969, they still had some 25-30 Beatles songs left; they should have never chosen to go for the solo careers. Instead, they should have released a new album in 1972-1973 (with Maybe I'm Amazed as a single) and another one in 1975-1976 (with Live and Let Die as a single), featuring Imagine, Give Me Love, My Love, Admiral Halsey, Oh My My, Dream #9... then somehow hire classical music composers to at least partially try to follow in the steps of Adorno; however, the magical orchestrations could not have been repeated. Not even today, 50 years later, no one has been able to equal the Beatles, songs like Tommorow Never Knows, Martha My Dear, Norwegian Wood, Yellow Submarine.

Pure magic:

(You've Got To Hide Your Love Away)


September 19, 2018

For No One (one of the best songs on the Revolver album) is a modified La Donna E Mobile by Verdi:



On the same LP, Adorno used another famous song byVerdi, the theme from Aida, to create Yellow Submarine.

Sgt. Pepper is a modified theme from the Barber of Seville suite by Rossini:



Yes, it includes themes from the Radetzky March by Strauss, and from the Romanian Rapsody by Enescu, but mainly is a modified theme from the Barber of Seville.

A Hard Day's Night, of course, is a modified Wilhelm Tell overture, again by Rossini:



As I mentioned before, Kashmir (given to Led Zeppelin) was created by merging several themes from the Scheherazade suite by Rimsky-Korsakov.

Magical Mystery Tour, the most advanced Beatles song (my opinion), is a modified Night on a Bald Mountain by Mussorgsky; which was adapted again for Live and Let Die.

Let us compare Live and Let Die and Kashmir (Gregorian chant interpretation), and see how great a song Live and Let Die actually is:





Blackbird (which is a modified Fernando Sor, Etude (Op. 60 No.19)), Gregorian chant rendition:




There was a controversy regarding The Last Time (given to the Rolling Stones), the fact that it includes a few seconds from This May Be the Last Time by the Stapple Singers, that may be so; however, no one has noticed that The Last Time is actually a modified Eight Days a Week given to the Beatles (the best song on the Beatles For Sale album).

(continued from https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1079938#msg1079938 )


September 24, 2018

Sgt. Pepper vs. Barber of Seville


(Sgt. Pepper, take 9)

0:07 - 0:15 (intro to Sgt. Pepper, guitar riff)


(the Barber of Seville)

(2:09 - 2:31)





0:16 - 0:35 (Paul II)



2:14 - 2:21



 
0:36 - 0:48 orchestral transition to main theme



2:21 - 2:27




0:49 - 1:18



3:42 - 4:19




1:19 - 1: 38 (John II)



4:16 - 4:29


Now the entire theme from the Barber of Seville:



5:17 - 6:38

That is why Sgt. Pepper is one of the best Beatles songs, it was adapted from the Barber of Seville overture.


Martha My Dear is a modified Martha by von Flotow (M'appari tutt' amor):



What Adorno did, however, is to blend this song with the Humoresque by Dvorak:




October 8, 2018

Eight Days a Week is a modified Eine Kleine Nachtmusik, fourth movement Rondo Allegro:



Then, Adorno used Eight Days a Week to come up with Help, with a little aid from the Air Suite by Bach (the first movement from Eine Kleine Nachtmusik = Can't Buy Me Love ).

We Can It Work It Out, baroque style, it brings out the exquisite beauty of this song:



(a rare version of the Beatles playing the song)

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Ski on November 01, 2010, 04:57:00 AM
Is sacred cubit and amah interchangeable?  Sofer also mentions an equal measurement of 1 amah as being 24 zoll.

I was going to defer to Levee on this, but he seems to have abandoned the question in pursuit of the larger issue of historical revisionism. But what you have there is rabbinically correct.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 02, 2010, 04:06:14 AM
But I already did answer both messages with this link: http://fliiby.com/file/893604/7bs6zt4et4.html

More on cymatics: http://kylepounds.org/science/cymatics.html

In order to fully understand the nature of ether/aether(akasha)/subquarks/tachyons/sound/light, please see:

http://www.alliancesforhumanity.com/matter/matter.htm
http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/ocindex.htm

Tibetan sound levitation uses the sacred cubit distances (multiples) of the wavelength of the telluric currents to raise blocks of stone hundreds of meters in the air:

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/antigravityworldgrid/ciencia_antigravityworldgrid08.htm

The atoms of the stone, normally in E5 state (solid state of matter), are subjected to a much higher form of vibration based on sound, which does take the atoms to the E4 state (prakriti, first state of ether); the descendants of Kush/Misraim, in Egypt/Syria and Europe, used ball lightning, using the staff of Ptah/Horus (tuning fork, djed - permanent magnet, and ankh), to cause the levitation of blocks of stones (most notably at Baalbek), it could also be used for the transmutation of metals...
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 05, 2010, 03:38:15 AM
As I have said many times before, some serious research will solve all of your problems (including the infinite earth hypothesis, which has been disproved totally).

History: Science or Fiction? table of contents, chapters 1 and 2, volume I


Chapter 1
The problems of historical chronology
1. Roman chronology as the foundation of European chronology
2. Scaliger, Petavius, and other clerical chronologers. The creation of contemporary
chronology of the ancient times in the XVI-XVII century a.d.
3. The veracity of the Scaliger-Petavius chronology was questioned as early as the XVI century
3.1. Who criticized Scaliger's chronology and where.
3.1.1. De Arcilla, Robert Baldauf, Jean Hardouin, Edwin Johnson, Wilhelm Kammeyer
3.1.2. Sir Isaac Newton
3.1.3. Nikolai Alexandrovich Morozov
3.1.4. Recent publications of German scientists containing criticisms of Scaliger's chronology.
3.2. The questionable veracity of the Roman chronology and history. The hypercritical school of the XIX century
4. The problems in establishing a correct chronology of "ancient" Egypt
5. The problem in dating the "ancient" sources. Tacitus and Poggio. Cicero and Barzizza. Vitruvius and Alberti
6. Timekeeping in the Middle Ages. Historians discuss the "chaos reigning in the mediaeval datings." Peculiar mediaeval anachronisms
7. The chronology and the dating of Biblical texts
8. Difficulties and contradictions arising from the reading of old texts
8.1. How does one read a text written in consonants exclusively? The vocalization problem
9. Problems in the Scaligerian geography of Biblical events
9.1. Archaeology and the Old Testament
9.2. Archaeology and the New Testament
10. Ancient historical events: geographic localization issues
10.1. The locations of Troy and Babylon.
10.2. The geography of Herodotus is at odds with the Scaligerian version
10.3. The inverted maps of the Middle Ages
11. A modern analysis of Biblical geography
12. The mysterious Renaissance epoch as a product of the Scaligerian chronology
13. The foundations of archaeological methods have been based on the Scaligerian
chronology from the very beginning
13.3. The alleged acceleration of the destruction of the "ancient" monuments
13.4. When did the construction of the Cologne Cathedral really begin?
13.5. Archaeological methods are most often based on Scaliger's datings
13.6. One of the numerous problems of the Scaligerian history - the problem of bronze manufacture before the discovery of tin.
14. The problems and deficiencies of dendrochronology and several other dating methods
14.1. The consequent scale of dendrochronological datings does not extend further back in time than the X century a.d.
14.2. Sedimentary layer datings. The methods of radium-uranium and radium-actinium analysis
15. Are radiocarbon datings to be trusted?
15.1. The radiocarbon datings of ancient, mediaeval, and modern specimens are scattered chaotically
15.1.1. Libby's initial idea. The first failures
15.1.2. A criticism of the application of the radiocarbon method to historical specimens
15.2. The dating of the Shroud of Turin
15.3 Modern radiocarbon analysis of Egyptian artifacts demonstrates serious contradictions
16. Critical analysis of the hypotheses on which the radiocarbon method is based. By A. S. Mishchenko
16.1. W. F. Libby's initial idea
16.2. Physical basics of the radiocarbon method
16.3. The hypotheses that the radiocarbon method is based upon
16.4. The moment of the object's departure from the exchange reservoir
16.5. Radiocarbon content variations in the exchange reservoir
16.6. Variations in radiocarbon content of living bodies
18. Numismatic datings

Chapter 2
Astronomical datings
1. The strange leap of parameter D" in the Theory of Lunar Motion
2. Are the "ancient" and mediaeval eclipses dated correctly?
2.1. Some astronomical data
2.2. The discovery of an interesting effect: an unprejudiced astronomical dating
shifts the dates of the "ancient" eclipses to the Middle Ages
2.3. Three eclipses described by the "ancient" Thucydides
2.4. The eclipses described by the "ancient" Titus Livy
3. Transferring the dates of the "ancient" eclipses forward in time into the Middle Ages eliminates the enigmatic behavior of the parameter D".
4. Astronomy moves the "ancient" horoscopes into the Middle Ages
4.1. The mediaeval astronomy
4.2. The method of unprejudiced astronomical dating
4.3. Many "ancient astronomical observations" may have been theoretically calculated by late mediaeval astronomers and then included into the "ancient" chronicles as "real observations"
4.4. Which astronomical "observations of the ancients" could have been a result of late mediaeval theoretic calculations?
5. A brief account of several examples of Egyptian Zodiacs
5.1. Some general observations
5.2. The Dendera Zodiacs
5.3. The horoscopes of Brugsch and Flinders Petrie
5.4. Finite datings of the Egyptian Zodiacs based on their complete deciphering, as obtained by A. T. Fomenko and G. V. Nosovskiy in 2001
5.5. On the errors of E. S. Goloubtsova and Y. A. Zavenyagin
6. Astronomy in the New Testament

Learn how and why Ancient Rome, Greece and Egypt were invented and crafted during Renaissance. Discover the Old Testament as a veiled rendition of events of Middle Ages written centuries after the New Testament. Perceive the Crusaders as contemporaries of The Crucifixion punishing the tormentors of the Messiah.

Sounds unbelievable? Not after you've read "History: Fiction or Science?" by Anatoly Fomenko, leading mathematician of our time. He follows in steps of Sir Isaac Newton, finds clear evidence of falsification of History by medieval clergy and humanists. Armed with computers, astronomy and statistics he proves the history of humankind to be both dramatically different and drastically shorter than generally presumed. Archaeological, dendrochronological, paleographical and carbon methods of dating of ancient sources and artifacts are both non-exact and contradictory, therefore there is not a single piece of firm written evidence or artifact that could be reliably and independently dated earlier than the XI century.

The consensual chronology we live with was essentially crafted in the XVI century from the contradictory mix of innumerable copies of ancient Latin and Greek manuscripts (all originals have mysteriously disappeared) and the "proofs" delivered by the late mediaeval astronomers, cemented by the authority of writings of the Church Fathers.

Anyone who comes to these books with an open mind and no pre-conceived dogmas about history (and religion) will find a great deal to ponder and to further investigate on their own.


Fomenko certainly does prove that our history is at most 1000 years old, that is, in the approach of the new chronology; but he has not gone far enough, given the findings at Pompeii and Herculaneum, not to mention the facts uncovered by C. Pfister...
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Username on November 06, 2010, 08:09:08 AM
Historical revisionism has no place in hard science and is simply laughable.

As for the infinite earth hypothesis being disproved - it is from this it is clear more so than any other statement you've made so far that you have no idea what aether is, what its properties are, and what its raison d'etra is.   

All that said, great posts. I look forward to hearing more.  You have always been one of our most valued posters.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 07, 2010, 02:04:58 AM
November 13, 2018

The Beatles' first release of 1968 was a single like no other. I always thought that Lady Madonna was one of the very best Beatles songs.

However, no direct link to any classical music could be made.

It was only after listening to the Beatles go baroque, when I realized that Lady Madonna is a modified version of A Hard Day's Night.

Lady Madonna, baroque:



A Hard Day's Night, baroque:



A rhythm similar to Bad Penny Blues (1956) was produced, but Lady Madonna is a fantastic modified version of A Hard Day's Night, that is why it sounds to great.


From the comments section of Reasons for Waiting (Jethro Tull):

One of the most beautiful rock songs ever written.

I still consider this the most beautiful song Ian Anderson ever wrote.




However, Reasons for Waiting is a modified Mother Nature's Son given to the Beatles, that is the reason for its haunting beauty.


Queen's Bohemian Rhapsody was voted the "best song ever". However, the dynamical part of the song (4:11 - 4:55) is a modified version of Revolution by the Beatles.

We Are The Champions is a modified Nights In White Satin (Moody Blues), the modified theme from the Swan Lake suite.

Seaside Rendezvous is a modified Martha My Dear.


November 30, 2018

Letting Go (Wings) is a modified I've Got A Feeling (Beatles).

Magneto and Titanium Man (Wings) is a modified Hi, Hi, Hi (Wings) which in turn is a modified Helter Skelter.

Venus and Mars is a modified Maybe I'm Amazed (a modified version of Long and Winding Road).

Junk (one of the best songs on McCartney II's first solo album) is a modified Fixing A Hole.

Without the support of the few remaining Beatles songs, McCartney II's solo career, not to mention his colaboration with Wings, wouldn't have been possible.  Let us imagine "Ram" without Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey, or "Red Rose Speedway" without My Love (I am not even mentioning here "Wild Life").


December 9, 2018

Let us carefully analyze We Are The Champions, given to Queen.



In the classical style/version, it is easier to discern, to find out the original score upon which it was based.

It is obvious that We Are The Champions is a modified version of Tchaikovsky's Piano Concerto No. 1:



Yes, it does have notes borrowed from Nights in White Satin, but essentially it is a beautifully modified version of the Piano Concerto No. 1.

Thus, we can reach a most interesting conclusion: both We Are The Champions and Seaside Rendezvous were originally Beatles songs; after the disappearance of Adorno in August, 1969, the Beatles project was put on hold, and the remaining best songs were shelved. From that formidable arsenal of songs, both We Are The Champions and Seaside Rendezvous were given to Queen, since the Beatles project was no longer feasible.

The major music publishing companies tried to copy Adorno's style of modifying classical scores, but the best they could achieve was this: KISS' Lick It Up is a not so subtle modified version of Free's All Right Now, while Billy Joel's Just The Way You Are is a not so subtle modified version of 10cc's I'm Not In Love.

Only Adorno could have modified Tchaikovsky's Piano Concerto into We Are The Champions; he always gave the best songs to the Beatles, light years ahead of anyone else. A Hard Day's Night, Yellow Submarine, Hey Jude are light years ahead of anyone else, be it the Stones, Pink Floyd, Zeppelin, The Who.

I regard Penny Lane as a finer/better song than We Are The Champions; let us remember that George Martin said in 1967 that Penny Lane/Strawberry Fields was the Beatles' best single to date, and in a way he was right.



Seaside Rendezvous = Martha My Dear:




Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Ichimaru Gin :] on November 07, 2010, 09:03:15 AM
Ether is just an organic functional group. What's so hard about that?
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 08, 2010, 02:25:28 AM
Now, both ua acceleration and the infinite earth conjectures were created in order to explain terrestrial/planetary gravitation/gravity on a flat earth; and both fail miserably to address even this single issue.

I have posted countless times already the direct quotes from I. Newton specifying the fact that he believed that there are two DIFFERENT gravitational forces: one of a rotational type, responsible for planetary/stellar orbits, and the other responsible for the terrestrial gravitation phenomenon.

I have posted, also, the direct arguments relating to the perturbation of planetary orbits, impossibility of the existence of a field of gravitons which would allow a Sun - Planet - Satellite system to function, and much more; the gravitational force responsible for planetary/stellar orbits is of a ROTATIONAL TYPE, completely different than the terrestrial gravitation encoutered here, on the flat earth.

I have also demonstrated directly and very clearly that there is no attractive gravity; we have PUSHING gravity, caused by the pressure of the terrestrial/telluric currents. And there must be a shield/barrier of energy (call it the Schumann Cavity) between the two types of gravitational phenomena just described.

Both infinite earth/ua acceleration are armchair, fictitious hypotheses which do not answer the most basic questions when it comes to the gravitational anomalies known to exist over the surface of the earth/oceans (an issue I have presented here frequently).

My advice to the FES leadership is to completely erase the present official FAQ, and start over with my explanations and messages, Lord Wilmore could do that just nicely...then you would be in a position to present flat earth theory precisely, in the best possible way...the secondary, supporting theory, as it is presented right now, is a disaster, being taken advantage of each and every time a new thread is opened by the round earth supporters.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: James on November 11, 2010, 05:12:56 AM
Now, both ua acceleration and the infinite earth conjectures were created in order to explain terrestrial/planetary gravitation/gravity on a flat earth; and both fail miserably to address even this single issue.

I am not sure that either the Law of Universal Acceleration or the infinity of the Earth can be accurately explicated in terms which imply that they are some sort of post hoc conjecture. They are scientific facts, facts of two different but related sorts: the Law of Universal Acceleration, besides being plainly, trivially true to any sufficiently liberated and perceptive mind, is demonstrable by submission to direct experiment. The infinity of the Earth is an empirical induction, and, while it is technically unfalsifiable (since ex hypothesi an infinite number of explorers could spend infinitely many years traversing the snow and hail, howling winds, and indescribable storms and hurricanes which populate the outer gloom and darkness, in which the material world is lost to human perception, without discovering any terminating feature), it still is to the best of our current knowledge utterly correct.

I have posted countless times already the direct quotes from I. Newton specifying the fact that he believed that there are two DIFFERENT gravitational forces: one of a rotational type, responsible for planetary/stellar orbits, and the other responsible for the terrestrial gravitation phenomenon.

I appreciate that Asag Newton claimed to believe a great many outrageous affronts against the most basic decencies of human reason, but I do not understand quite why you think the testimony of this devil-worshipping barbarian is convincing evidence in support of any theory. The beliefs and utterances of Asag Newton are permeated to their detestable core with falsehood and insanity. Inspired from a young age by the satanic heresies of Johannes Kepler, he conspired to assassinate his own mother and her pious husband by setting fire to their familial home. When his perverse patricidal fantasies were thwarted, by his forced removal to a boarding school, he went on to create that purely ficticious and malevolent web of lies known today as classical mechanics. The foundations of Newtonian gravitational theory are essentially the doctrines of Satanism.


I have posted, also, the direct arguments relating to the perturbation of planetary orbits, impossibility of the existence of a field of gravitons which would allow a Sun - Planet - Satellite system to function, and much more; the gravitational force responsible for planetary/stellar orbits is of a ROTATIONAL TYPE, completely different than the terrestrial gravitation encoutered here, on the flat earth.

It is true that the graviton is one of the most iniquitous fictions of modern life. However, you are mistaken about the motions of the planets. I must refer you to the cosmological heritage of Ptolemy, whose epicyclical system is the cornerstone of all true and accurate astronomy.


I have also demonstrated directly and very clearly that there is no attractive gravity; we have PUSHING gravity, caused by the pressure of the terrestrial/telluric currents. And there must be a shield/barrier of energy (call it the Schumann Cavity) between the two types of gravitational phenomena just described.

The only cavity here, I am afraid, is the cavity between the neo-Newtonian dual-gravity hypothesis and the actual truth. You are quite correct in your observation that attractive gravity is nonsense; for this I applaud you. However, the only PUSHING gravity which we have in actuality is the upward pushing of the Universal Accelerator, upon which all up-falling of the Earth to the objects which rest upon it is wholly reliant.



Both infinite earth/ua acceleration are armchair, fictitious hypotheses which do not answer the most basic questions when it comes to the gravitational anomalies known to exist over the surface of the earth/oceans (an issue I have presented here frequently).

These anomalies are themselves for the most part ficticious, except where they are brought about by the natural swelling and deflation of the Earth's surface under certain obvious conditions, conditions which I assure you are never accounted for in any so-called scientific test which pretends to discover "gravitational" anomalies. (That is to say, when they are not straightforwardly caused by the drunkenness of the globularist investigator).

you should stop the printing press on your book; you should let me write the chapters on gravity/ether, maybe then you will sell more than 2 copies...

I am unspeakably excited about the prospect of such a collaboration.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Username on November 11, 2010, 07:46:11 AM
If levee, or any other flat earther here, wishes to post an essay in the book to present their opposing view or views I'd be happy to add the necessary pages to the book.  However, it must be coherent and print worthy (to my discretion).
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 12, 2010, 02:21:30 AM
James, please read again:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=38959.msg971069#msg971069

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=38959.msg976795#msg976795

As for Ptolemy, I invite you to do a serious research, starting from:

THE CRIME OF CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY, BY PROFESSOR ROBERT NEWTON

In 1977, Robert R. Newton published his book The Crime of Claudius Ptolemy in which he accused Ptolemy of being the "most successful fraud in history". Newton charged Ptolemy with faking the observations of his predecessors to better suit his theory.

Newton realized, later, that in fact it was none other than Johannes Kepler who wrote the Almagest by Ptolemy; and we know now, that Kepler lived AT LEAST 100 YEARS LATER, than it is  acknowledged in the conventional chronology.

HISTORY, SCIENCE OR FICTION? BY PROFESSOR A. FOMENKO, VOLUME 3:

http://www.amazon.com/History-Astronomical-chronology-Almagest-Chronology/dp/2913621082/ref=pd_sim_b_2

Dr Prof Anatoly Fomenko and team dissect Almagest of ancient Ptolemy compiled allegedly in 150 a.d. and considered to be the corner stone of classical history. Their report states: Almagest was compiled in XVI-XVII centuries from astronomical data of IX-XVI centuries. As the King of astronomers Ptolemy is proven to be a medieval phantom, therefore standing aquitted of the crime he was accused by the late American astrophycist Robert Newton. Allegedly ancient Egyptian horoscopes painted in Pharaohs tombs of the Valley of Kings or cut in stone in Dendera and Esna for centuries considered impenetrable are decoded at last! All dates contained therein turn out definitely medieval and pertain to the XI centuries a.d. the earliest.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 24, 2010, 02:55:52 AM
Let us take a closer look at those gravitational anomalies which cannot be explained, either in the now accepted attractive gravity scenario, or in the UA acceleration/infinite earth models (quote: these anomalies are themselves for the most part ficticious, except where they are brought about by the natural swelling and deflation of the Earth's surface under certain obvious conditions):


Mountainous masses do not exert the gravitational pull expected by the theory of gravitation. The influence of the largest mass on the earth, the Himalaya, was carefully investigated with plumb line on the Indian side. The plumb line is not deflected as calculated in advance. The attraction of the mountain-ground thus computed on the theory of gravitation, is considerably greater than is necessary to explain the anomalies observed. This singular conclusion, I confess, at first surprised me very much. (G. B. Airy.) Out of this embarrassment grew the idea of isostasy. This hypothesis explains the lack of gravitational pull by the mountains in the following way. The interior of the globe is supposed to be fluid, and the crust is supposed to float on it. The inner fluid or magma is heavier or denser, the crust is lighter. Where there is a mountainous elevation, there must also be a protuberance beneath the mountains, this immersed protuberance being of lesser mass than the magma of equal volume. The way seismic waves travel, and computations of the elasticity of the interior of the earth, force the conclusion that the earth must be as rigid as steel; but if the earth is solid for only 2000 miles from the surface, the crust must be more rigid than steel. These conclusions are not reconcilable with the principle of isostasy, which presupposes a fluid magma less than 60 miles below the surface of the earth. There remains a contradiction between isostasy and geophysical data.

Over the oceans, the gravitational pull is greater than over the continents, though according to the theory of gravitation the reverse should be true; the hypothesis of isostasy also is unable to explain this phenomenon. The gravitational pull drops at the coast line of the continents. Furthermore, the distribution of gravitation in the sea often has the peculiarity of being stronger where the water is deeper. In the whole Gulf and Caribbean region the generalization seems to hold that the deeper the water, the more strongly positive the anomalies.

As far as observations could establish, the sea tides do not influence the plumb line, which is contrary to what is expected. Observations on reservoirs of water, where the mass of water could be increased and decreased, gave none of the results anticipated on the basis of the theory of gravitation.


In 1981 a paper was published showing that measurements of G in deep mines, boreholes, and under the sea gave values about 1% higher than that currently accepted.4 Furthermore, the deeper the experiment, the greater the discrepancy. However, no one took much notice of these results until 1986, when E. Fischbach and his colleagues reanalyzed the data from a series of experiments by Eotvos in the 1920s, which were supposed to have shown that gravitational acceleration is independent of the mass or composition of the attracted body. Fischbach et al. found that there was a consistent anomaly hidden in the data that had been dismissed as random error. On the basis of these laboratory results and the observations from mines, they announced that they had found evidence of a short-range, composition-dependent fifth force. Their paper caused a great deal of controversy and generated a flurry of experimental activity in physics laboratories around the world.

The majority of the experiments failed to find any evidence of a composition-dependent force; one or two did, but this is generally attributed to experimental error. Several earlier experimenters have detected anomalies incompatible with newtonian theory, but the results have long since been forgotten. For instance, Charles Brush performed very precise experiments showing that metals of very high atomic weight and density tend to fall very slightly faster than elements of lower atomic weight and density, even though the same mass of each metal is used. He also reported that a constant mass or quantity of certain metals may be appreciably changed in weight by changing its physical condition. His work was not taken seriously by the scientific community, and the very precise spark photography technique he used in his free-fall experiments has never been used by other investigators. Experiments by Victor Cremieu showed that gravitation measured in water at the earth?s surface appears to be one tenth greater than that computed by newtonian theory.


On the basis of newtonian gravity, it might be expected that gravitational attraction over continents, and especially mountains, would be higher than over oceans. In reality, the gravity on top of large mountains is less than expected on the basis of their visible mass while over ocean surfaces it is unexpectedly high. To explain this, the concept of isostasy was developed: it was postulated that low-density rock exists 30 to 100 km beneath mountains, which buoys them up, while denser rock exists 30 to 100 km beneath the ocean bottom. However, this hypothesis is far from proven. Physicist Maurice Allais commented: There is an excess of gravity over the ocean and a deficiency above the continents. The theory of isostasis provided only a pseudoexplanation of this.

The standard, simplistic theory of isostasy is contradicted by the fact that in regions of tectonic activity vertical movements often intensify gravity anomalies rather than acting to restore isostatic equilibrium. For example, the Greater Caucasus shows a positive gravity anomaly (usually interpreted to mean it is overloaded with excess mass), yet it is rising rather than subsiding.


Law of acceleration in view of the ether/aether theories:

http://www.rexresearch.com/brush/brush.htm

http://keelynet.com/gravity/grav7.txt


J.C. Maxwell's original ether theory, the very best explanation, also torsion physics:

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_hyperphysics1.htm#Part%20I

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_hyperphysics2.htm#Part%20II

Double Helix theory of the Magnetic Field:

http://www.wbabin.net/science/tombe.pdf

http://www.wbabin.net/science/tombe4.pdf


How J.P. Morgan hired H. Lorentz and O. Heaviside to eliminate and hide the terms of the original equations of Maxwell which were related to aether vortex theory:

http://www.svpforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=696&sid=df49b40b0918509a3a67b10075bf83fc


How H. Lorentz eliminated the terms of the Maxwell equations, which were not wanted by J.P. Morgan:

http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=205

Tom Bearden on the modified Maxwell equations:

" ... In discarding the scalar component of the quaternion, Heaviside and Gibbs unwittingly discarded the unified EM/G [electromagnetic/ gravitational] portion of Maxwell's theory that arises when the translation/directional components of two interacting quaternions reduce to zero, but the scalar resultant remains and infolds a deterministic, dynamic structure that is a function of oppositive directional/translational components. In the infolding of EM energy inside a scalar potential, a structured scalar potential results, almost precisely as later shown by Whittaker but unnoticed by the scientific community. The simple vector equations produced by Heaviside and Gibbs captured only that subset of Maxwell's theory where EM and gravitation are mutually exclusive. In that subset, electromagnetic circuits and equipment will not ever, and cannot ever, produce gravitational or inertial effects in materials and equipment.

"Brutally, not a single one of those Heaviside/ Gibbs equations ever appeared in a paper or book by James Clerk Maxwell, even though the severely restricted Heaviside/Gibbs interpretation is universally and erroneously taught in all Western universities as Maxwell's theory.


The best place to start in explaining what gravity actually is, and how this is related to the vorticular physics approach which describes the atom, is one of the greatest mysteries of modern science.

Francis Crick, codiscoverer of the DNA structure, describes this strange characteristic of the molecules of living organisms:

    It has been well known for many years that for any particular molecule only one hand occurs in nature.  For example the amino acids one finds in proteins are always what are called the L or levo amino acids, and never the D or dextro amino acids.  Only one of the two mirror possibilities occurs in proteins.

Living tissue (with the exception of some bacteria) contains only L-amino acids (laevorotatory-left handed); dead tissue only D-amino acids (dextrorotatory-right handed).


Linus Pauling, Nobel laureate in chemistry:

        This is a very puzzling fact . . . . All the proteins that have been investigated, obtained from animals and from plants, from higher organisms and from very simple organisms, bacteria, molds, even viruses are found to have been made of L-amino acids.


http://creationsafaris.com/epoi_c03.htm

A.N. Kozyrev's celebrated gyroscope experiments also show that there are two vorticular forces at work in the universe:

http://divinecosmos.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=95&Itemid=36 (also contains an account of Bruce DePalma's spinning ball experiment)


Isn't it strange that our FES members do support the view of a flat earth (as they should, of course) but use as an explanation for the orbits of the planets/stars the concept of photoelectric suspension? The very notion of the photon was invented by the same conspirators who came up with the hoax concerning the shape of the earth (and much more, as they modified radically the chronology of history).

Here is someone who chose to think carefully about the concept of the photon:

www.wbabin.net/science/schreiber12.pdf


More facts which do show the real nature of gravitY...

http://johnbedini.net/john34/eternal%20lanterns.htm

ELECTRIC ROCK, GROUND ENERGY, SPACE RAYS, PHOTONUCLEAR REACTORS, SEA OF ENERGY, RADIOACTIVE IMPULSES SECTIONS


Cosmic rays are nothing but telluric currents; these telluric currents are torsion waves, consisting of dextrorotatory strings (gravity), and laevorotatory strings (electricity)...
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Ichimaru Gin :] on November 24, 2010, 09:04:20 AM
Thank you Levee. Chirality is always an interesting topic. Especially with polarized light optic activity.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 04, 2010, 03:11:46 AM
You will find an excelent introduction to torsion physics (Kozyrev/DePalma) and much more in chapter 2 (Hyperdimensional Physics) of Dark Mission by R. Hoagland:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/36392975/Hoagland-amp-Bara-Dark-Mission-The-Secret-History-of-NASA-2007

And, in chapter 5, you will find the perfect reason (a point which has not been observed by any other author until now) why the Nasa Apollo missions COULD NOT have taken place at all.


http://divinecosmos.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=95&Itemid=36 (Kozyrev/DePalma torsion physics experiments)


What is time?

A. Kozyrev time theory:

http://www.univer.omsk.su/omsk/Sci/Kozyrev/paper1a.txt
http://www.chronos.msu.ru/RREPORTS/kozyrev_100/johansen_basic.pdf

Kozyrev - Barbour theory, Non-uniform time:

http://physicoschronos.org/pdf/poliakov.pdf


Julian Barbour - End of Time - Nows, time capsules

http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/barbour/barbour_p1.html (10 pages)

http://www.acampbell.ukfsn.org/bookreviews/r/barbour.html


Julian Barbour - Killing Time documentary:




Absolute or Relative Motion? J. Barbour:

http://books.google.ro/books?id=ekA9AAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=julian+barbour+absolute&hl=ro&ei=LaN_TPurC47KswaN39H_Dw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

End of Time/ J. Barbour:

http://books.google.ro/books?id=TpzEqWEGYoMC&printsec=frontcover&dq=julian+barbour+end+of+time&hl=ro&ei=naN_TOWhLY3CswblovTkDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false


Space-Time continuum hoax:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39372.msg982142#msg982142


Flat Earth Universe in the vision of the shamans of the Amazon:

(http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/3218/incatreeoflife.jpg)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Username on December 04, 2010, 03:47:10 AM
You will find an excelent introduction to torsion physics (Kozyrev/DePalma) and much more in chapter 2 (Hyperdimensional Physics) of Dark Mission by R. Hoagland:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/36392975/Hoagland-amp-Bara-Dark-Mission-The-Secret-History-of-NASA-2007

And, in chapter 5, you will find the perfect reason (a point which has not been observed by any other author until now) why the Nasa Apollo missions COULD NOT have taken place at all.


http://divinecosmos.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=95&Itemid=36 (Kozyrev/DePalma torsion physics experiments)


What is time?

A. Kozyrev time theory:

http://www.univer.omsk.su/omsk/Sci/Kozyrev/paper1a.txt
http://www.chronos.msu.ru/RREPORTS/kozyrev_100/johansen_basic.pdf

Kozyrev - Barbour theory, Non-uniform time:

http://physicoschronos.org/pdf/poliakov.pdf


Julian Barbour - End of Time - Nows, time capsules

http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/barbour/barbour_p1.html (10 pages)

http://www.acampbell.ukfsn.org/bookreviews/r/barbour.html


Julian Barbour - Killing Time documentary:




Absolute or Relative Motion? J. Barbour:

http://books.google.ro/books?id=ekA9AAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=julian+barbour+absolute&hl=ro&ei=LaN_TPurC47KswaN39H_Dw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

End of Time/ J. Barbour:

http://books.google.ro/books?id=TpzEqWEGYoMC&printsec=frontcover&dq=julian+barbour+end+of+time&hl=ro&ei=naN_TOWhLY3CswblovTkDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false


Space-Time continuum hoax:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39372.msg982142#msg982142


Flat Earth Universe in the vision of the shamans of the Amazon:

(http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/3218/incatreeoflife.jpg)

I used to have a wonderful collection of essays concerning Shamans worldview and their intrinsically flat earth nature.  I'll see if I can find out the title as I think it may have some relevant information.

Specifically, it comes to mind that it does resemble, from what I know of your work, your view in many aspects.

Do you hold shamanistic worldviews to be glimpses of truth endowed upon them?  For example, one specific instance I can think of is the zetetic nature of their worldview in many areas - most notably the heavens - specifically in reference to and from simple observation of tiny holes in their tents and living areas.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 06, 2010, 01:49:54 AM
Have you ever read Cosmic Serpent: DNA and the Origins of Knowledge by J. Narby? If not, you will find ALL your answers there, relating to your last post:

http://www.world-mysteries.com/newgw/cosmicserpent.htm

The problem with ayahuasca/peyotl is that it activates the thalamus gland (the third eye) and this can lead to a great deal of problems; please read:

http://www.prosveta.com/product_detail.phtml?id=285&pos=9&collection_id=3 (a great work by O. Aivanhov)

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 06, 2010, 03:07:35 AM
RE: star trails/northern and southern circumpolar constellations:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=32378.msg804555#msg804555
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg955618#msg955618

Rowbotham did not take this fact into consideration (three kinds of stellar orbits), that is why the official map (the one in the faq) is so wrong and distorted.

EDIT: The inquiries/questions addressed by RE supporters in the three main boards, cannot be answered by the facts listed in the main/official faq; here, in the alternative flat earth theory, we do answer ALL those questions re: sunrise/sunset (the Sun does in fact rise and set), star trails, FE maps, gravity (all the necessary details), ether vs. space-time continuum, the conspiracy (how, why, when), and much more...
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 13, 2010, 06:04:13 AM
Somebody wrote at the Coriolis effect thread something to the effect, "another victory for RE..."...not by a long shot, please research the topic before offering premature conclusions:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg953747#msg953747 (the very best work done on the Coriolis force, includes links to Foucault's pendulum/Cloud trajectories threads...)

On the contrary, the Coriolis force is one of the most important arguments to be used in proving that the Earth is indeed absolutely stationary...


Tunguska explosion seen all the way from London/Antwerp/Stockholm, all the details (includes the ball lightning argument):

http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1142




Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Ski on December 15, 2010, 03:23:44 PM
I just read a bit of Narby-related material and found it interesting. I will be looking to pickup "Cosmic Serpent: ..." in the next few weeks or when I next visit the library.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 21, 2010, 01:02:16 AM
The complete demonstration that there is no such thing as attractive gravity (without attractive gravity, round earth theory amounts to nothing):

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39823.msg1000783#msg1000783
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39823.msg1002693#msg1002693
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39823.msg1003411#msg1003411
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39823.msg1003454#msg1003454
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39823.msg1003916#msg1003916
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39823.msg1004780#msg1004780
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39823.msg1004781#msg1004781
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39823.msg1004830#msg1004830
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39823.msg1005453#msg1005453
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39823.msg1005454#msg1005454

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 25, 2010, 08:59:06 AM
Garden of Eden, north of Egypt, west to the Nile, right next to the Sea of Marmara:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg960675#msg960675 (I was able to decipher the meaning of the terms: sea of Atil, mount Riphath, river Tina)


Who wrote the Bible?

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg986690#msg986690


ORIGINAL quote from Galatians 3:1:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1003416#msg1003416


CHRIST entering Constantinopole/Troy, the TROJAN Pilate:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg940930#msg940930
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 26, 2010, 04:05:20 AM
Although there are dozens of videos on the net showing the Strait of Gibraltar with no curvature whatsoever, I chose to present only profesionally made documentaries, so that there would no doubt as to the quality of the film itself.

Here is the new web address for the Islamic History of Europe (part I):



Between 2:56 si 3:00 the author shows us the spanish beach and points towards the african coastline

Between 3:02 si 3:07 we can see clearly that there is no curvature all the way to Morocco; moreover, if we use the full screen option, we will see the waves splashing onto the opposing beach/shore...this is actually a closeup taken, again, from that beach...

Between 3:19 - 3:22, WE CAN SEE THE WAVES SPLASHING ONTO THE OPPOSING BEACH, EVEN WITH THE AUTHOR STANDING ON THE SPANISH SHORELINE, RIGHT NEXT TO THE STRAIT OF GIBRALTAR; on a round earth, we would see an ascending slope, with a midpoint curvature of 3.31 meters.

Between 3:43 si 3:45, the same thing, zero curvature...full screen option, the waves splashing onto the opposing beach/shore, WITH THE AUTHOR STADING RIGHT THERE ON THE SPANISH BEACH.


The Barbarians, here are the details, where we can see very clearly that there is no ascending slope, no midpoint curvature:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-811260411880444286&q=barbarians+terry+jones&total=22&start=10&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1#

Between 38:28 - 38:35, we can see clearly ABSOLUTELY NO CURVATURE ALL THE WAY TO MOROCCO...the surface of the strait is completely flat...

And a photograph shot from the same place:

(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/55/130948289_44854d63fa_b.jpg)

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 24, 2011, 04:29:43 AM
The superb demonstration that the Council of Nicaea (dated in the official chronology in the year 325 A.D.) could not have taken place BEFORE THE YEAR 875 A.D., the most precise proofs based on classical astronomy given by the Russian mathematician G. Nosovsky:

http://www.google.com/base/a/1562225/D7146657310909970098

Let us follow very closely the arguments...


Despite the fact that no original Easter edicts of the Nicaean council remain, it is said that the Council issued its edicts in the alleged year 325 AD, when the the actual methods of calculating the Easter dates had already been well developed, and the Easter date table that had been used for centuries had been compiled. The latter is quite natural, since every 532 years, the Christian Easter cycle repeats from the very start the Paschalian tables for each year of 532 were in existence.



THE NICAEAN COUNCIL OF 325 AD CONTRADICTS THE PASCHALIA

There is a traditional consensual opinion according to which the Paschalia church calendar was canonized during the first Ecumenical Council in Nicaea. Nobody seem to be aware, however, that all of this blatantly contradicts Scaliger's dating of the Nicaean council 325 AD, and the epoch of the IV century AD in general.

The matter here is that the Paschalia consists of a number of calendarian and astronomical tables. The time of their compilation can be calculated from their contents qv below. In other words, the Paschalia can be dated by its astronomical contents. We see that the resulting dating of the Paschalia contradicts the dating of the Nicaean Council as the IV century AD.

The contradiction had been discovered a long time ago, and it was mentioned in the beginning of the XX century by Easter table specialists. However, to this day, there has been no comprehensive explanation of this phenomenon given.

Let us turn to the canonical mediaeval ecclesial tractate - Matthew Vlastar's Collection of Rules Devised by Holy Fathers, or The Alphabet Syntagma. This rather voluminous book represents the rendition of the rules formulated by the Ecclesial and local Councils of the Orthodox Church.

Matthew Vlastar is considered to have been a Holy Hierarch from Thessalonica, and written his tractate in the XIV century. Today's copies are of a much later date, of course. A large part of Vlastar?s Collection of Rules Devised by Holy Fathers contains the rules for celebrating Easter. Among other things, it says the following:

The Easter Rules makes the two following restrictions: it should not be celebrated together with the Judaists, and it can only be celebrated after the spring equinox. Two more had to be added later, namely: celebrate after the first full moon after the equinox, but not any day it should be celebrated on the first Sunday after the equinox. All of these restrictions, except for the last one, are still valid (in times of Matthew Vlastar  the XIV century  Auth.), although nowadays we often celebrate on the Sunday that comes later. Namely, we always count two days after the Lawful Easter (that is, the Passover, or the full moon Auth.) and end up with the subsequent Sunday. This didn't happen out of ignorance or lack of skill on the part of the Elders, but due to lunar motion.

Let us emphasize that the quoted Collection of Rules Devised by Holy Fathers is a canonical mediaeval clerical volume, which gives it all the more authority, since we know that up until the XVII century, the Orthodox Church was very meticulous about the immutability of canonical literature and kept the texts exactly the way they were; with any alteration a complicated and widely discussed issue that would not have passed unnoticed.

This means that we can hope for Matthew Vlastar's text to give us a precise enough account of the opinions held by the Constantinople scientists of the XIV century, in regard to the Easter issue. As we can see, Matthew Vlastar tells us the following:

In addition to the two Apostolic Easter rules, namely:

1) Not celebrating Easter together with the Judaists.

2) Only celebrating Easter after the spring equinox.

The Elders of the Council that introduced the Paschalia added two more rules for certainty, since the previous two do not define Easter day explicitly enough:

3) Only celebrating Easter after the first full moon in a given spring. That is, after the Passover that is often called Lawful Easter in Christian clerical literature that is, Easter celebrated in accordance with the Law of Moses or, alternatively, that of the 14th Moon.

4) Easter cannot be celebrated on any weekday; the celebration is to occur on the first Sunday following this full moon, or the Passover.


THE FOURTH RULE BROKEN

The first three rules of four were still quite valid in the XIV century, according to Vlastar, whereas the 4th rule of Easter Sunday being the first Sunday after the full moon was already broken.

Furthermore, Matthew Vlastar gives a perfectly valid astronomical explanation of why the rule was broken. The reason is that the Circle for Moon (Methon's Cycle) isn?t completely precise. There is a very slow shift of real full moon dates in relation to the ones stated by the Circle for Moon that the Elders of the Council may have been unaware of. However, in the age of Matthew Vlastar, knowledge of the shift already existed. Vlastar was aware of it and gave its correct value about 24 hours in 300 years.

This is why no less than two days should pass between the full moon and Easter (according to Vlastar, and applicable to his age). The matter is that the calculations of the Christian Easter are based on the calendar with its Circle for Moon values, as opposed to real full moon dates given by astronomy.

When, over the passage of time, a two-day discrepancy between the Paschalian Circle for Moon and the real full moon schedule had evolved, this could not fail to impact the distance between the astronomical spring equinox and Easter Sunday. If the previous distance equalled zero or more (so that Easter could not come before the full moon), it became equalling two or moreso that the Easter could not come earlier than two days after the full moon.

However, most often the amount of days separating the full moon and Easter Sunday, exceeded two, anyway, since the rules have it so that one had to wait for the Easter's advent from the vernal full moon and until the closest Sunday, that is, about three days (half a week) in average, and more than two days in most cases.

So the two-day gap that had accumulated by the age of Vlastar did not always manifest, and no rules were broken in the years when several days had to pass between the full moon and Easter.

However, in certain years, when the distance proved less than two days, the 4th Easter rule was broken, namely, Easter Sunday fell on the second Sunday after the vernal full moon. For example, if the Passover falls on a Saturday, Easter has to be celebrated the next day, on Sunday.


Thus, we know a lot, almost everything, about the Paschalia. So, why the astronomical context of the Paschalia contradicts Scaliger's dating (alleged 325 AD) of the Nicaean Council where the Paschalia was canonized?

This contradiction can easily be seen from the roughest of calculations.

1) The difference between the Paschalian full moons and the real ones grows at the rate of one day in 300 years.

2) A two-day difference had accumulated by the time of Vlastar, which is roughly dated 1330 AD.

3) Ergo, the Paschalia was compiled somewhere around 730 AD, since

1330 - (300 x 2) = 730.

It is understood that the Paschalia could only be canonized by the Council sometime later. But this fails to correspond to Scaliger's dating of its canonization as 325 AD in any way at all!

Let us emphasize, that Matthew Vlastar himself, doesn't see any contradiction here, since he is apparently unaware of the Nicaean Council's dating as the alleged year 325 AD. A natural hypothesis: this traditional dating was introduced much later than Vlastar's age. Most probably, it was first calculated in Scaliger's time.


The conclusion we came to:

FIRST STATEMENT:

The Council that introduced the Paschalia according to the modern tradition as well as the mediaeval one, was the Nicaean Council  could not have taken place before 784 AD, since this was the first year when the calendar date for the Christian Easter stopped coinciding with the Passover full moon due to slow astronomical shifts of lunar phases.

The last such coincidence occurred in 784 AD, and after that year, the dates of Easter and Passover drifted apart forever. This means the Nicaean Council could not have possibly canonized the Paschalia in IV AD, when the calendar Easter Sunday would coincide with the Passover eight (!) times ? in 316, 319, 323, 343, 347, 367, 374, and 394 AD, and would even precede it by two days five (!) times, which is directly forbidden by the fourth Easter rule, that is, in 306 and 326 (allegedly already a year after the Nicaean Council), as well as the years 346, 350, and 370.

Thus, if we're to follow the consensual chronological version, we'll have to consider the first Easter celebrations after the Nicaean Council to blatantly contradict three of the four rules that the Council decreed specifically for this feast! The rules allegedly become broken the very next year after the Council decrees them, yet start to be followed zealously and in full detail five centuries (!) after that.

Let us note that J.J. Scaliger could not have noticed this obvious nonsense during his compilation of the consensual ancient chronology, since computing true full moon dates for the distant past had not been a solved problem in his epoch.

A satisfactory coincidence of calendarian Passover full moons with the astronomical ones had only existed between 700 AD and 1000 AD (by which we mean their occurrence within the range of 24 hours from each other). Prior to that, the calendarian full moons have always taken place after the Passover ones, and after 1000 AD, the opposite started to happen. The beginning of the 13th Great Indiction (877 AD) falls on the period of ideal coincidence of Passover and astronomical full moons.

This means the Paschalia could only have been compiled in the period between the IX and XI centuries AD.

Propter hoc, the dating of the Nicaean Council (as the Council that had introduced the Paschalia) is only possible, within the timeframe of the VII-XI centuries, the most probable one being the epoch of the X-XI centuries, after the year 877 AD.

SUMMING UP THE DATINGS OF THE NICAEAN COUNCIL

The Paschalia could have been compiled in the following timeframe:

- not any earlier than 784 AD by the actual definition of Easter;
- not any earlier than 700 AD by the coincidence of Paschalian and astronomical full moons;
- not any earlier than 700 AD by the Palm of Damascenus;
- not any earlier than 743 AD according to Matthew Vlastar;

Hence, the Paschalia was first compiled earliest around the second half of the VIII century AD. The Paschalia was canonized at the Nicaean Council that took place in the XI-XIV centuries. The Paschalia might well have contained certain astronomical concepts of the VII-XI centuries that had already been a part of the ecclesial tradition by that time.


In another article, "The Dating of the First Oecumenical Council of Nicaea and the Beginning of the Christian Era" by G. Nosovsky, it is clearly demonstrated that the Gregorian calendar reform was done incorrectly (and now we know that it was done at least after 1750 A.D., given the fact that the volcano eruption which destroyed both Pompeii and Herculaneum must have occurred at least after 1740 A.D.)...see also http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1109929#msg1109929

Since the Council of Nicaea MUST HAVE TAKEN PLACE AT LEAST AFTER THE YEAR 875 A.D., the official chronology of the period 100 - 1100 A.D. is one which was made up at a much later date...
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 26, 2011, 12:55:47 AM
December 24, 2018

"At the very beginning of this journey, I noted that Jim Morrison’s story was not “in any way unique.” As it turns out, however, that proclamation is not exactly true. It was a true enough statement in the context in which it appeared – which is to say that Morrison’s family background did not differ significantly from that of his musical peers – but in many other significant ways, Jim Morrison was indeed a most unique individual, and quite possibly the unlikeliest rock star to ever stumble across a stage.


Morrison essentially arrived on the scene as a fully-developed rock star, complete with a backing band, a stage persona and an impressive collection of songs – enough, in fact, to fill the Doors’ first few albums. How exactly Jim Morrison reinvented himself in such a radical manner remains something of a mystery, since before his sudden incarnation as singer/songwriter, James Douglas Morrison had never shown the slightest interest in music. None whatsoever. He certainly never studied music and could neither read nor write it. By his own account, he never had much of an interest in even listening to music. He told one interviewer that he “never went to concerts – one or two at most.” And before joining the Doors, he “never did any singing. I never even conceived of it.” Asked near the end of his life if he had ever had any desire to learn to play a musical instrument, Jim responded, “Not really.”

So here we had a guy who had never sang (apparently not even in the shower or in his car, which seems rather odd to me), who had “never even conceived” of the notion that he could open his mouth and makes sounds come out, and who couldn’t play an instrument and had no interest in learning such a skill, and who had never much listened to music or been anywhere near a band, even just to watch one perform, and yet this guy somehow emerged, virtually overnight, as a fully-formed rock star who would quickly become an icon of his generation. And even more bizarrely, legend holds that he brought with him enough original songs to fill the first few Doors’ albums. Morrison did not, you see, do as any other singer/songwriter does and pen the songs over the course of the band’s career; instead, he allegedly wrote them all at once, before the band was even formed. As Jim once acknowledged in an interview, he was “not a very prolific songwriter. Most of the songs I’ve written I wrote in the very beginning, about three years ago. I just had a period when I wrote a lot of songs.”

In fact, all of the good songs that Morrison is credited with writing were written during that period – the period during which, according to rock legend, Jim spent most of his time hanging out on the rooftop of a Venice apartment building, consuming copious amounts of LSD. This was just before he hooked up with fellow student Ray Manzarek to form the Doors. Legend also holds, strangely enough, that that chance meeting occurred on the beach, though it seems far more likely that the pair would have actually met at UCLA, where both attended the university’s rather small and close-knit film school.


In any event, the question that naturally arises (though it does not appear to have ever been asked of him) is: how exactly did Jim “The Lizard King” Morrison write that impressive batch of songs? I’m certainly no musician myself, but it is my understanding that just about every singer/songwriter across the land composes his or her songs in essentially the same manner: on an instrument – usually either a piano or a guitar. Some songwriters, I hear, can compose on paper, but that requires a skill set that Jim did not possess. The problem, of course, is that he also could not play a musical instrument of any kind. How then did he write the songs?

He would have had to have composed them, I’m guessing, in his head. So we are to believe then that a few dozen complete songs, never heard by anyone and never played by any musician, existed only in Jim Morrison’s acid-addled brain. Anything is possible, I suppose, but even if we accept that premise, we are still left with some nagging questions, including the question of how those songs got out of Jim Morrison’s head. As a general rule of thumb, if a songwriter doesn’t know how to read and write music, he can play the song for someone who does and thereby create the sheet music (which was the case, for example, with all of the songs that Brian Wilson penned for the Beach Boys). But Jim quite obviously could not play his own songs. So did he, I don’t know, maybe hum them?

And these are, it should be clarified, songs that we are talking about here, as opposed to just lyrics, which would more accurately be categorized as poems. Because Jim, as we all know, was quite a prolific poet, whereas he was a songwriter only for one brief period in his life. But why was that? Why did Morrison, with no previous interest in music, suddenly and inexplicably become a prolific songwriter, only to just as suddenly lose interest after mentally penning an impressive catalogue of what would become regarded as rock staples? And how and why did Jim achieve the accompanying physical transformation that changed him from a clean-cut, collegiate, and rather conservative looking young man into the brooding sex symbol who would take the country by storm? And why, after a few years of adopting that persona, did Jim transform once again, in the last year or so of his life, into an overweight, heavily-bearded, reclusive poet who seemed to have lost his interest in music just as suddenly and inexplicably as he had obtained it?


It wasn’t just Morrison who was, in retrospect, a bit of an oddity; the entire band differed from other Laurel Canyon bands in a number of significant ways. As Vanity Fair noted many years ago, “The Doors were always different.” All four members of the group, for example, lacked previous band experience. Morrison and Manzarek, as noted, were film students, and drummer John Densmore and guitarist Robby Kreiger were recruited by Manzarek from his Transcendental Meditation class – which is, I guess, where one goes to find musicians to fill out one’s band. That class, however, apparently lacked a bass player, so they did without – except for those times when they used session musicians and then claimed that they did without.


Anyway, the point is that none of the four members of the Doors had band credentials. Even a band as contrived as the Byrds, as we shall soon see, had members with band credentials. So too did Buffalo Springfield, with Neil Young and Bruce Palmer, for example, having played in the Mynah Birds, backing a young vocalist by the name of Rick “Superfreak” James (Goldie McJohn of Steppenwolf, oddly enough, had been a Mynah Bird as well). The Mamas and the Papas were put together from elements of the Journeymen and the Mugwumps. And so on with the rest of the Laurel Canyon bands

The Doors could cite no such band lineage. They were just four guys who happened to come together to play the songs written by the singer who had never sung but who had a sudden calling and a magical gift for songwriting. And as you would expect with four guys who had never actually played in a band before, they pretty much sucked. But don’t take my word for it; let’s let the band’s producer, Paul Rothchild, weigh in: “The Doors were not great live performers musically. They were exciting theatrically and kinetically, but as musicians they didn’t make it; there was too much inconsistency, there was too much bad music. Robby would be horrendously out of tune with Ray, John would be missing cues, there was bad mike usage too, where you couldn’t hear Jim at all.”

Another thing that was unusual about the band, however, is that, from the moment the band was conceived, the lineup never changed. No one was added, no one was replaced, no one dropped out of the band over ‘artistic differences,’ or to pursue a solo career, or to join another band, or for any of the other reasons that bands routinely change shape.

It would be difficult to identify another Laurel Canyon band of any longevity that could make the same claim. After their first two albums, the Byrds changed line-ups with virtually every album release. Frank Zappa’s Mothers of Invention were in a near-constant state of flux. Laurel Canyon’s country-rock bands were also constantly changing shape, usually by incestuously swapping members amongst themselves.

But not the Doors. Jim Morrison’s band arrived on the scene as a fully-formed entity, with a name, a stable line-up, a backlog of soon-to-be hit songs – and no previous experience writing, arranging, playing or performing music. Other than that though, they were just your run-of-the-mill, organic, grass-roots rock-and-roll band – with a curious aversion to political advocacy."


As I said from the very start, The Doors' music was composed by Adorno. Hello I Love You is a modified All Day And All Of The Night (Kinks). Light My Fire is a modified I Feel Fine (Beatles) which itself was taken from Manuel de Falla's Fire Dance.


January 15, 2019

RHCP's (Red Hot Chili Peppers) biggest hit up until 1992 was, by far, Breaking The Girl; however, for them, this came out of nowhere, since nothing they had done previously was any indication that they were capable of writing such a great song; indeed, Breaking The Girl could have been featured on the Led Zeppelin IV or Houses of the Holy albums, or even on a Beatles b-side of a single. Surprinsingly, critics were quick to point out that Breaking The Girl is a modified Norwegian Wood, however there is more to this story than meets the ear.



Iron Maiden's only ballad, Prodigal Son:



Both are modified versions of this Beatles song:




RHCP's next biggest hit was My Friends:



A beautiful modified version of Dear Prudence:




Pink Floyd's Money is a modified Moondance (Van Morrison):





Moondance is a modified Bouree (Bach's Suite in E Minor for Lute), given by Adorno to Jethro Tull:




Pink Floyd's Brain Damage is a modified Space Oddity given to David Bowie by Adorno:






Therefore, Roger Waters did not write any of the songs on the Dark Side of the Moon album.


Another Brick In The Wall Pt. 2 is a modified And Your Bird Can Sing (Beatles):




In the Flesh is a modified Shine On You Crazy Diamond. Once we figure out where Shine On You Crazy Diamond came from, we will understand that Pink Flody did not write any of their hits, but instead were given these songs to be played by them, just like The Who, Led Zeppelin, Cream, Deep Purple, Stones.


January 22, 2019

Shine On You Crazy Diamond is a modified Dig A Pony (Beatles):

(6:00 - 8:30)



S. Wonder's Living For The City is a modified Riders On The Storm (The Doors).



For those who haven't done their homework on the Coriolis effect issue, it is one of the best proofs that the Earth is stationary:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg953747#msg953747 (the main/official faq does not address this issue properly at all)

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 08, 2011, 04:47:30 AM
Notwithstanding Alexander the Great's inner earth journeys, here is another extraordinary argument from classical astronomy...

We are told that the motivation for the Gregorian reform was that the Julian calendar assumes that the time between vernal equinoxes is 365.25 days, when in fact it is about 11 minutes less. The accumulated error between these values was about 10 days (starting from the Council of Nicaea) when the reform was made, resulting in the equinox occurring on March 11 and moving steadily earlier in the calendar, also by the 16th century AD the winter solstice fell around December 11.

Byzantine historian Leo Diaconus (ca. 950-994), as he observed the total eclipse of 22 December 968 from Constantinople (now Istanbul, Turkey). His observation is preserved in the Annales Sangallenses, and reads:

"...at the fourth hour of the day ... darkness covered the earth and all the brightest stars shone forth. And is was possible to see the disk of the Sun, dull and unlit, and a dim and feeble glow like a narrow band shining in a circle around the edge of the disk".

NOW READ THIS CAREFULLY:

"When the Emperor was waging war in Syria, at the winter solstice there was an eclipse of the Sun such as has never happened apart from that which was brought on the Earth at the Passion of our Lord on account of the folly of the Jews. . . The eclipse was such a spectacle. It occurred on the 22nd day of December, at the 4th hour of the day, the air being calm. Darkness fell upon the Earth and all the brighter stars revealed themselves. Everyone could see the disc of the Sun without brightness, deprived of light, and a certain dull and feeble glow, like a narrow headband, shining round the extreme parts of the edge of the disc. However, the Sun gradually going past the Moon (for this appeared covering it directly) sent out its original rays, and light filled the Earth again."

Refers to a total solar eclipse in Constantinople of 22 December AD 968.
From: Leo the Deacon, Historiae, Byzantine.

http://www.mreclipse.com/Special/quotes2.html


The winter solstice in the year 968 MUST HAVE FALLEN on December 16, given the 10 day correction instituted by Gregory XIII, as we are told (a very simple calculation - 11 minutes in the length of a solar year amount to a full day for each 134 years).

THEREFORE, the dating of the Council of Nicaea in the year 325 AD could not possibly be true, the true date must be much closer to the year 968 BC; as we have seen already, see http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1124740#msg1124740  the precise astronomical proof does indicate very clearly that the correct date for the Council of Nicaea was in fact the year 876-877 AD, and INDEED, some 90 years later from that date, the winter solstice DID FALL on December 22 (in the year 968 BC; 876 + 134 = 1010). More on the error instituted (the error of the ten days introduced in the calendar), we are told, in the year 1582, the so-called calendar reformation by Gregory XIII, in "The Dating of the First Oecumenical Council of Nicaea and the Beginning of the Christian Era" by G. Nosovsky.


The magnificent article by Dr. Gunnar Heinsohn, Restoration of Ancient History, an extraordinary account of the archaeologically-missing ancient history:

http://www.specialtyinterests.net/heinsohn.html

G. Heinsohn discovered that the period of history between 2100 - 600 BC NEVER EXISTED, and was invented much later in time, his archaeological findings are very well documented also in the books Ghost empires of the past: did the Sumerians really ever exist? and When did the Pharaohs live?



Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 14, 2011, 06:39:43 AM
There have been several interesting topics of discussion lately, including this one:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=48831.0

As I have mentioned before, so many times, chapters III - XII in Earth is not a Globe are the weakest part of that book; some, if not most, of the information posted in the main faq is false, especially that relating to the movement of the sun (sun - earth distance, sun diameter, sun orbit).

The Sun does actually rise and set, and based on the strictest zetetic methods, the ones I always employ, we can figure out the right numbers for the movement of the sun, based on the photographs taken in Antarctica by F. Bruenjes, and the Sun/Moon ISS/Atlantis transit videos, which are included here in my thread.


There have been several new developments, including these ones:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=48357.msg1191815#msg1191815

We can safely say, now, that based on the proofs offered by the new radical chronology theory, that there are NO HISTORICAL RECORDS/DATA/PROOFS relating to any axial precession of the Earth, for the past 2000 years.

The Council of Nicaea could have taken place only after the year 876-877 e.n., as we have demonstrated in several previous messages here; therefore, the reformation of the calendar by Gregory XIII is completely false.

Given the fact that the winter solstice MUST HAVE FALLEN ON DECEMBER 22 at the Council of Nicaea, means that the dates given in the reformation of the calendar in 1582 are wrong.

Moreover, Matthew Vlastar (writing in 1330 e.n.) tells us that the Council of Nicaea could not have happened before the year 722 e.n.

A large part of Vlastar’s Collection of Rules Devised by Holy Fathers contains the rules for celebrating Easter. Among other things, it says the following:

“The Easter Rules makes the two following restrictions: it should not be celebrated together with the Judaists, and it can only be celebrated after the spring equinox. Two more had to be added later, namely: celebrate after the first full moon after the equinox, but not any day – it should be celebrated on the first Sunday after the equinox. All of these restrictions, except for the last one, are still valid (in times of Matthew Vlastar – the XIV century – Auth.), although nowadays we often celebrate on the Sunday that comes later. Namely, we always count two days after the Lawful Easter (that is, the Passover, or the full moon – Auth.) and end up with the subsequent Sunday. This didn’t happen out of ignorance or lack of skill on the part of the Elders, but due to lunar motion”

So, why the astronomical context of the Paschalia contradicts Scaliger’s dating (alleged 325 AD) of the Nicaean Council where the Paschalia was canonized?

This contradiction can easily be seen from the roughest of calculations.

1) The difference between the Paschalian full moons and the real ones grows at the rate of one day in 300 years.

2) A two-day difference had accumulated by the time of Vlastar, which is roughly dated 1330 AD.

            3) Ergo, the Paschalia was compiled somewhere around 730 AD, since

1330 – (300 x 2) = 730.

It is understood that the Paschalia could only be canonized by the Council sometime later. But this fails to correspond to Scaliger’s dating of its canonization as 325 AD in any way at all!

Let us emphasize, that Matthew Vlastar himself, doesn’t see any contradiction here, since he is apparently unaware of the Nicaean Council’s dating as the alleged year 325 AD.


From volume 3 of History: Fiction of Science? we can also see that J. Kepler, T. Brahe, N. Copernicus are one and the same person, writing at a time much later (at least after 1750 a.d.) than it is accepted in the conventional chronology.


We have already seen that the eruption of Vesuvius which destroyed both Pompeii and Herculaneum must have occurred at least after the year 1700 a.d.

Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiastica:

CHAPTER V.
The Last Siege of the Jews after Christ.

AFTER Nero had held the power thirteen years, and Galba and Otho had ruled a year and six months, Vespasian, who had become distinguished in the campaigns against the Jews, was proclaimed sovereign in Judea and received the title of Emperor from the armies there. Setting out immediately, therefore, for Rome, he entrusted the conduct of the war against the Jews to his son Titus.

But E. Johnson was able to prove that the Pauline Epistles were copied and developed from Eusebius' Historia Ecclesiastica, see:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=48357.msg1191856#msg1191856

Historia Ecclesiastica could not have been written before 1720 a.d., since it mentions both Vespasian and Titus:

Perhaps most important thing about the reign of Titus was his handling of the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius. Though the Jews claimed that the disaster that struck was God's vengeance against Rome, Titus' speedy and exhaustive efforts at relief likely went a long way towards winning him a permanent place in the hearts of the people.



 
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 21, 2011, 04:08:16 AM
To fully understand the significance of one of the most important scientific experiment ever performed (G.B. Airy, 1871):

Geocentric stellar parallax/stellar aberration:

https://web.archive.org/web/20070808224504/https://www.paradox-paradigm.nl/van_der_Togt_stellarab-final.pdf
http://www.freelists.org/post/geocentrism/Stellar-Parallax
http://www.geocentricity.com/ba1/no115/par-ab-rev.pdf
http://web.archive.org/web/20100826022827/http://www.realityreviewed.com/Negative%20parallax.htm

The phenomenon of stellar parallax is not what we have been generally led to believe, because in exactly the same way that Eddington 'proved' Einstein's General Theory of Relativity in 1919 by rejecting, omitting or deleting 60% of his measurement data on the bending of starlight, so modern astrophysics maintains the misconception that parallax 'proves' the Kopernikan philosophy of the World hurtling around the Sun, by ignoring and dismissing the entire dataset of negative parallax measurements.


G.B. Airy (one of the most eminent physicists of the 19th century, Airy differential equation, Airy function) and his experiment prove once and for all two things:

1. THE EXISTENCE of an energy layer (of various densities) which fills up the space between the earth and the sun/moon/stars (aether)

2. THE FACT THAT the Earth is completely stationary and does not revolve around its own axis (we only take into account here the geocentric theory, without the details about the shape of the earth, round or flat)


The body of evidence
Truth has a way of being indestructible. It may or may not be popular at any given time, it may even be barely noticeable, but it is always there. And it turns out that the truth actually gets in the way of "science"! Modern theoretical (non-applied a.k.a 'pure') physics is not really science-driven but agenda-driven. It is populated with heavily politicized academia. It has become nothing much more than a sham propaganda-exercise of empty eloquence with false authority. The inventor of the electric world we live in, Nikola Tesla was spot-on when he remarked that modern non-applied science has become nothing more than manipulative indulgence in fancy "thought experiments" and abstract, fuzzy math which have no relation to reality. Instead of the theories being made to fit reality, what we have is the opposite: reality being adjusted or in fact completely overthrown, in order to fit agenda-driven theories and models.

Then sometime later one George Biddle Airy decided to try out Boscovich's idea of a water filled telescope in order to test Bradleys heliocentric aberration theory a about a century after it was first proposed. He discovered that there was no change in the aberration through the refracting water in a supposedly "moving" earth. Airy didn't observe a larger eclipse and subsequently the experiment was declared a "failure". So that's why it is now commonly called Airy's Failure. Funny that - it was of course a failure in terms of failing to prove heliocentrism. So what did it show then? It showed that only one side was moving and since that was the star side, it means the earth was stationary all along!


Many think it proven long ago that the World orbits the Sun. However, the results of two simple experiments, both performed in the nineteenth century, showed that it is the stars which move, and not the World.

An experiment with a water-filled telescope was performed by the then Astronomer Royal, George Airy (after whom the Airy disc of diffraction theory is named), in 1871, which can be considered to be a variation of an earlier investigation by François Arago, performed with a moving slab of glass in 1810.

Arago showed that either light itself or the luminiferous aether is
dragged along by a moving piece of glass. Fresnel explained the effect
by assuming it was the light-carrying medium (this is called Fresnel
drag). George Stokes explained it via compression of the aether, but
the important point is whether we can tell which one is doing the
moving - the light source or the transparent material. When Arago
investigated this effect with starlight, he concluded that the World
(with respect to which the glass plate was stationary in this instance)
was at rest and that it was the stars that were moving.

The experiment subsequently performed by Airy was first proposed by
Ruggiero Boscovich for testing James Bradley's heliocentric aberration.
This, in turn, was thought up to explain the elliptical
motion of the star Gamma D., as observed by James Bradley and
Samuel Molyneux.



What was the result of Airy's experiment? Exactly the opposite outcome
to that predicted in the rotating-World scenario. (Note that the
experiment is usually referred to as "Airy's failure" for this reason.)



Just like Arago before him, George Airy proved that the World was
stationary and the stars are moving. It does not matter whether there
exists a luminiferous aether or not, because the dragging of starlight,
as demonstrated initially by Arago, is real, irrespective of how we try
to explain it. Both Arago and Airy showed that it is the stars, and not
the World, which move (although Airy did not actually go so far as to
admit this). In addition, we can say that Michelson-Morley,
Trouton-Noble and many, many others have consistently demonstrated no
motion of the World.


Airy's experiment thus does not confirm the World to be just a piece of rock that hurtles through infinite space in who knows how many contorted motions, as Mikolaj Kopernik (aka 'Copernicus'), Johannes Kepler, Carl Sagan, et al., so zealously maintained.


"Airy's failure" (Reference - Proc. Roy. Soc. London v 20 p 35). Telescopes have to be very slightly tilted to get the starlight going down the axis of the tube because of the earth's "speed around the sun". Airy filled a telescope with water that greatly slowed down the speed of the light inside the telescope and found that he did not have to change the angle of the telescope. This showed that the starlight was already coming in at the original measured angle so that no change was needed. This demonstrated that it was the stars moving relative to a stationary earth and not the fast orbiting earth moving relative to the comparatively stationary stars. If it was the telescope moving he would have had to change the angle.

(Imagine the telescope like a tube, sloped so that the light from one star hits the bottom of the tube. Even if the starlight is slowed down inside the tube (using water), it will still hit the bottom of the tube because its direction is already determined. If it were the tube that was moving, slowing down the starlight would mean that the angle of the tube would have to change for the light to hit the bottom of the tube.)


Airy's experiment proved that the starlight was already coming into the earth at an angle, being carried along by the rotating aether.

http://www.geocentricuniverse.com/Airy.htm


Rotating Earth: Theory or Fiction?

http://web.archive.org/web/20090209060811/http://sites.google.com/site/abafte/geo



NOW, we take into account the shape of the earth...

(http://img367.imageshack.us/img367/3350/figuratangentaew0.gif)

We need to find the segment BD; first, by using the law of cosines, we get:

ED^2 = OE^2 + OD^2 - 2(OE)(OD)(cos s/R)

Then, immediately, we obtain:

BD = (R + h)/{RAD[2Rh + h^2](sin s/R)(1/R) + cos s/R} - R

RAD = SQUARE ROOT OF []

R = 6378.164 km

h = AE = height of observer/photographer

s = distance at the surface, for example 34 km between England and France across the English Channel

BD = height of observable visual target on a round earth


NO CURVATURE ACROSS THE ENGLISH CHANNEL:

The original webpages as they appeared on flickr.com about four years ago:

(http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/9423/cap1rp.jpg)
(http://img684.imageshack.us/img684/2548/cap2q.jpg)

The photographers are located right on the Cap Gris Nez beach, at an altitude of about 2-3 meters...the small rectangle in the photo is Cap Blanc Nez:

(http://img827.imageshack.us/img827/8526/doverbest2.jpg)

SHIPSPOTTING ON CAP GRIZ NEZ, ZERO CURVATURE ALL THE WAY TO ENGLAND, WHITE CLIFFS, DOVER:

(http://img685.imageshack.us/img685/6801/doverbest.jpg)

No curvature whatsoever, a completely flat surface of the English Channel

(http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1051/4726849923_389dba2176.jpg)
white cliffs dover


Another photograph taken from Cap Gris Nez:

http://www.expedition360.com/journal/archives/2007/09/

(http://www.expedition360.com/journal/white_cliffs.jpg)

To meet the requirements of the RE, here are the numbers for different altitudes (we will go all the way to 20 meters, that is, the height of a five-story building):


h = 3 m BD = 60.6
h = 5 m BD = 53
h = 10m BD = 40.4
h = 20m BD = 25.5

That is, from an altitude of 20 meters, we would not see anything below 25.5 from the other side; the White Cliffs are in full view...





Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 14, 2011, 01:57:38 AM
ORIGINAL MAP REGNUM NEAPOLITANUM (THEATRUM ORBIS) SIGNED ABRAHAM ORTELIUS, OFFICIAL CHRONOLOGY 1570 AD:

http://www.bergbook.com/images/22775-01.jpg (using zoom-in we can clearly see Pompeia right next to mount Vesuvius)

(http://www.bergbook.com/images/22775-01.jpg)

All the maps created by Ortelius:

http://www.bergbook.com/cgi-bin/demo10.cgi/Search

REGNUM NEAPOLITANUM WITH IMAGE NAVIGATOR:

http://www.antiquarius-sb.com/Catalogue_c.asp?page=4&area=115&subarea=27

http://www.antiquarius-sb.com/Details_c.asp?ID=8669 (with image navigator, we can zoom-in on any portion of the map, including Pompeii/Pompeia, right next to mount Vesuvius)


(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_mVSVlQXoXaQ/S3vPdnkdpPI/AAAAAAAAAmY/dlKMqtcNFlo/s320/Immagine2.jpg) (Campania region, mount Vesuvius)

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_mVSVlQXoXaQ/S3vPMSZ8QQI/AAAAAAAAAmQ/xYuaLXK5ry4/s320/Immagine1.jpg)

POMPEII, CITY IN FULL ACTIVITY IN THE YEAR 1570 AD, OFFICIAL CHRONOLOGY

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_mVSVlQXoXaQ/S3vPojv0RaI/AAAAAAAAAmg/kuovyl4UdLA/s320/Immagine3.jpg)

http://bloggingpompeii.blogspot.com/2010/02/review-features-of-domenico-fontanas.html


Abraham Ortelius' biography, the most famous cartographer of the Renaissance:

http://www.answers.com/topic/abraham-ortelius


MEDIEVAL ARMOURS (HELMETS WITH MOBILE VISORS) FOUND IN POMPEII GRAFITTI (HELMETS WITH MOBILE VISORS WERE INVENTED, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL CHRONOLOGY, IN THE XVth CENTURY):

(http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/3043/vez3.jpg)
(http://img200.imageshack.us/img200/4948/vez4.jpg)
(http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/2386/vez5.jpg)
(http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/7121/vez6.jpg)
(http://img139.imageshack.us/img139/9718/vez7.jpg)
(http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/7686/vez8.jpg)

ALL THE ARTIFACTS FOUND AT POMPEII BELONG TO THE RENAISSANCE:

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=de&tl=en&u=http://www.ilya.it/chrono/pages/pompejigallerydt.htm


As we saw earlier, the flat glass technology used at Herculaneum was first used in history at St. Gobain, in 1688 ad.


In view of these proofs, to talk about Alexander the Great and other Latin cosmographers is both silly and a sign of ignoring the clear evidence presented here.

Please read the first two volumes of History: Fiction or Science? that can be found on www.books.google.com (includes the fact that the Parthenon was built during the Renaissance)

Earlier I presented volume 3 of the same work, in which the most precise proofs were presented which do show that Almagest by Ptolemy was created in fact at least after the year 1350 ad...

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 15, 2011, 12:59:14 AM
Let us examine now some of the consequences of the fact that both Pompeii and Herculaneum were destroyed by the eruption of the volcano Vesuvius at least after 1700 AD:


Eusebius is an admirer of Josephus...

According to my mind Eusebius, who first cites this passage, was its author. Eusebius himself was a historian who admired Josephus very much and made a thorough study of him...
Eusebius mentions Plinius the Elder:

Eusebius tells us in the name of Tertullian that when Pliny the Younger, governor of Bithynia, wrote to Trajan asking for instructions about the Christian race...

But according to the official chronology, Pliny the Elder (uncle of Pliny the Younger) died in the year 79 AD, at Misenum, right next to mount Vesuvius...

http://www.christianorigins.com/zeitlin.html


Josephus mentions clearly the fact that the eruption which destroyed Pompeii occurred in the year 79 AD:

According to Josephus, the temple was destroyed in August of 70 CE and Vesuvius destroyed Pompeii in August of 79 CE.

 
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/71712928/DrusilladaughterofHerodAgrippaI

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drusilla_(daughter_of_Herod_Agrippa_I)

Their son perished together with his mother Drusilla, along with noted Roman historian Pliny the Elder plus most of the populations of Pompeii and Herculaneum in the AD 79 eruption of Mount Vesuvius.

Drusilla, eruption of Vesuvius mentioned by Josephus in Antiquities, xx 7.2

http://sacred-texts.com/jud/josephus/index.htm#aoj (Jewish Antiquities by Josephus)

Chapter XX, section 7:

http://sacred-texts.com/jud/josephus/ant-20.htm (Agrippa, Drusilla, eruption of Vesuvius)


Josephus was a fictional character invented at least after the year 1750 AD (see also http://www.revisedhistory.org/classical.htm )


Plutarch mentions the destruction of both Pompeii and Herculaneum in the year 79 a.d.:

http://www.lacma.org/eduprograms/EvesforEds/PompeiiandtheRomanVillaEssay.pdf

In the aftermath of the eruption, Greek historian and biographer Plutarch wrote: “Those who went there by daylight felt ignorance and uncertainty as to where Pompeii and Herculaneum had been situated.”

Isaac Newton mentions Plutarch:

http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/fomenko/inewton.htm (A SHORT
CHRONICLE From the First Memory of things in Europe to the Conquest of Persia by Alexander the great, paragraf 3)


Georgius Syncellus based his Extract of Chronography on Historia Ecclesiastica and Chronicles written by "Eusebius"..
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06463a.htm

http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2004/2004-10-27.html


The work of Eusebius written and invented at least after the year 1500 AD:

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm


J. Kepler in the work De Vero Anno (chronology of antiquity), is following the works of Josephus:

http://www.agapebiblestudy.com/documents/Dating%20the%20Birth%20of%20Jesus%20of%20Nazareth.htm

http://books.google.ro/books?id=0r68pggBSbgC&pg=PA228&lpg=PA228&dq=kepler+de+vero+anno+chronology&source=bl&ots=UvGKnxjzKK&sig=eNKCwN2jvlP19kP8-zNo50nbr5g&hl=ro&ei=JIwqTvq0BcbDtAa2x8yGDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=kepler%20de%20vero%20anno%20chronology&f=false (pg. 228)


Letters between Galilei and Kepler:

http://www.catholicintl.com/noncatholicissues/personal_lives.htm


Letters between Galilei and F. Bacon (disciple of John Dee):

http://www.sirbacon.org/mcompeer2.htm


Galilei, Kepler, and Newton were fictional characters invented at least after 1750 AD...


And here you can find the rest of the proofs that Handel, Monteverdi, Telemann, Bach, Mozart, Haydn, Munster were invented in the period 1750 - 1800 AD:

The first mathematicians we can believe in are Cauchy, Gauss and Weierstrass, with some minor modifications of their dates of birth, and first musicians who really lived in the XIXth century are Schumann, Wagner and Brahms)

The music attributed to Bach, Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven was actually created using special formulas requiring Fibonacci numbers and number sequences...

Bach, Mozart and the Golden Section:

http://www.artofrecordproduction.com/content/view/195/22/

http://whosemusicisit.blogspot.com/2009/07/fibonacci-sequence-in-music-is-music.html


Evidence suggests that classical music composed by Mozart, Beethoven, and Bach embraces phi.


In a 1996 article in the American Scientist, for example, Mike Kay reported that Mozart’s sonatas were divided into two parts exactly at the Golden Mean point in almost all cases. Inasmuch as Mozart’s sister had said that Amadeus was always playing with numbers and fascinated by mathematics, it appears that this was either a conscious choice or an intuitive one. Meanwhile, Derek Haylock noted that in Beethoven’s Fifth Symphony (possibly his most famous one), the famous opening “motto” appears in the first and last bars, but also at the Golden Mean point (0.618) of the way through the symphony, as well as 0.382 of the way (i.e., the Golden Mean squared). Again, was it by design or accident? Keep in mind that Bartók, Debussy, Schubert, Bach and Satie may have also deliberately used the Golden Mean in their music.


Exploding the Myth of Mozart:
http://www.rense.com/general45/mozrt.htm

http://www.shoshone.k12.id.us/greek/fibo1.htm#mozart


Biography of Claudio Monteverdi:

http://www.answers.com/topic/claudio-monteverdi


Relationship between Galileo Galilei and Monteverdi:

Monteverdi and Galileo were exact contemporaries and near the end of their lives Galileo arranged for Monteverdi to procure a beautiful Cremonese violin (probably built by Nicolo Amati) for his nephew Alberto Galilei, the son of Galileo’s brother Michelangelo who composed the lute solo in the first half of our program.
http://www.ljms.org/Performances-and-Tickets/Program-Notes/Tafelmusik.html


The same people who falsified the official history and chronology are actually the very ones who invented the round earth concept and heliocentrical planetary system...

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 11, 2011, 01:24:16 AM
(http://www.salem-news.com/stimg/june302008/asteroidx.jpg)

At around 7:15 a.m., Tungus natives and Russian settlers in the hills northwest of Lake Baikal observed a column of bluish light, nearly as bright as the Sun, moving across the sky. About 10 minutes later, there was a flash and a loud "knocking" sound similar to artillery fire that went in short bursts spaced increasingly wider apart.

http://www.salem-news.com/articles/june302008/tunguska_day_6-30-08.php (http://www.salem-news.com/articles/june302008/tunguska_day_6-30-08.php)

That is when Tungus natives and others living in the hills northwest of Russia's Lake Baikal reported seeing a column of bluish light, that they described as being almost as bright as the Sun, moving across the sky.

A few minutes later they reported a flash and a sound that many said resembled artillery fire. The accompanying shock wave broke windows thousands of miles away from the impact zone, and knocked countless numbers of people to the ground.


Even if we take a 560 km distance to Tunguska, and a 1 km altitude (although Lake Baikal is located at some 435 meters in elevation), the visual obstacle will measure 15.5 km, no way for anybody located at Lake Baikal to have seen the explosion itself.

Let us ascend to 1,6 km in altitude at Lake Baikal; even then, the visual obstacle will measure 13.66 km.


The authors of the very well documented work on Tunguska mention:

http://www.icr.org/research/index/researchp_sa_r05/ (http://www.icr.org/research/index/researchp_sa_r05/)

The inhabitants of Central Siberia saw the fall and explosion of the meteorite over an area with a radius of 600-1000 km.


Another eyewitness account:

Nizshne-Karelinskoye (465 km). Extremely bright (it was impossible to look at it) luminous body was seen rather high in the north-western sky soon after 8 a.m. It looked like a tube (cylinder) and for 10 minutes moved down to the ground. The sky was clear, but only in the side, where the body was seen, a small dark cloud was present low above the horizon. While coming to the ground, the body dispersed (flattened) and at this place a large puff of black smoke appeared. Then a flame emanated from this cloud.

500 meter altitude - 11.6 km visual obstacle
800 meter altitude - 10.4 km visual obstacle
1000 meters altitude - 9.7 km visual obstacle


http://www.halexandria.org/dward232.htm (http://www.halexandria.org/dward232.htm)

Herdsman in the Gobi desert to the south described a fireball streaking across the sky along a flight path (based on a later reconstruction) at about 10o, just slightly east of true north.  Along this direction, the object approached Keshma from the south.  Then the object was observed by others moving very nearly due east toward Preobrazhenka.  This was followed by the object moving slightly north of due west toward Vanavara.  The explosion itself was oval shaped, suggesting a prior motion in the westerly direction.     

With a distance of 2000 km, and an altitude of 2 km, the visual obstacle will measure 275 km, nothing could have been seen from that distance (the explosion itself occurred at an altitude of 7 km).


The object, nearly "as bright as the Sun", caused the following reports from Europe:

In London on the night of June 30th the air-glow illuminates the northern quadrant of the heavens so brightly that the Times can be read at midnight. In Antwerp the glare of what looks like a huge bonfire rises twenty degrees above the northern horizon, and the sweep second hands of stopwatches are clearly visible at one a.m. In Stockholm, photographers find they can take pictures out of doors without need of cumbersome flash apparatus at any time of night from June 30th to July 3rd.

In Berlin, the New York Times of July 3rd reported unusual colors in the evening skies thought to be Northern Lights:
"Remarkable lights were observed in the northern heavens ... bright diffused white and yellow illumination continuing through the night until it disappears at dawn."

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/esp_ciencia_tunguska02.htm (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/esp_ciencia_tunguska02.htm)

http://www.nuforc.org/GNTungus.html (http://www.nuforc.org/GNTungus.html)


The visual obstacle from Tunguska measures 7463 km; we are told that the rays of light from the Sun (and it was morning over Siberia on June 30, at 7:20 am) cannot reach, for example, London, at the same time, due to the curvature; then NOTHING could have been observed/seen from Tunguska as well on a globe; an explosion on one side of a globe could not possibly influence in any way visual observations on the other side of the same globe; the visual range limit for the Tunguska explosion, on that cloudless day, is just 400 km.

Newspapers could be read at midnight in London, photographs could be taken outdoors in Stockholm without flash apparatus; no other meteorological/astronomical phenomenon occurred at that time in the world, no such records exist.

That is why this is the very best proof that the surface of the Earth is actually flat.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 15, 2011, 02:41:26 AM
TELLURIC CURRENTS - GYROSCOPES ANTIGRAVITATIONAL EFFECTS (HARNESSING TORSIONAL ETHER WAVES BY ROTATION)

Aether = universal, cosmic fluid pervading all space (Cymatics - activating the latent line forces of the aether through the application of sound / Airy's experiment of 1871)

Ether = dextrorotatory and laevorotatory waves which travel through the aether

Existence of ether waves proven by the Dayton-Miller ether drift experiments:


http://www.orgonelab.org/miller.htm


"The effect [of ether-drift] has persisted throughout. After considering all the possible sources of error, there always remained a positive effect." Dayton Miller (1928, p.399)

"My opinion about Miller's experiments is the following. ... Should the positive result be confirmed, then the special theory of relativity and with it the general theory of relativity, in its current form, would be invalid. Experimentum summus judex. Only the equivalence of inertia and gravitation would remain, however, they would have to lead to a significantly different theory."

Albert Einstein, in a letter to Edwin E. Slosson, 8 July 1925 (from copy in Hebrew University Archive, Jerusalem.) See citations below for Silberstein 1925 and Einstein 1926.

"I believe that I have really found the relationship between gravitation and electricity, assuming that the Miller experiments are based on a fundamental error. Otherwise, the whole relativity theory collapses like a house of cards."

Albert Einstein, in a letter to Robert Millikan, June 1921 (in Clark 1971, p.328)


A closely related subject is gps time deformation frame dragging; the real cause, is, of course, called aether frame dragging, here are best works:


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

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

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

http://www.wbabin.net/weuro/agathan5.pdf


Ether waves proven by the existence of telluric batteries:

http://www.icehouse.net/john1/stublefield1.html


Hans Coler's device, confiscated by the British Secret Service after 1945, which runs on ether waves:

http://www.intalek.com/Index/Projects/Research/HansColer/HansColer.htm

http://www.rexresearch.com/coler/colerb~1.htm


Telluric currents discovered by two of the greatest scientists of the 20th century: Gustave Le Bon and T. Henry Moray:

http://johnbedini.net/john34/eternal%20lanterns.htm (one of the best works ever written on the subject of telluric currents)

T. Henry Moray:

"I started my experiments with the taking of electricity from the ground, as I termed it, during the summer of 1909. By fall of 1910 I had sufficient power to operate a small electrical device, and I made a demonstration of my idea to two friends... This demonstration in the early stages consisted of operating a miniature arc light... It soon became evident that the energy was not static and that the static of the universe would be of no assistance to me in obtaining the power I was seeking...

During the Christmas Holidays of 1911, I began to fully realize that the energy I was working with was not of a static nature, but of an oscillating nature. Further I realized that the energy was not coming out of the earth, but instead was coming to the earth from some outside source. These electrical oscillations in the form of waves were not simple oscillations, but were surgings --- like the waves of the sea --- coming to the earth continually, more in the daytime than at night, but always coming in vibrations from the reservoir of colossal energy out there in space. By this time I was able to obtain enough power to light the old 16-candlepower carbon lamp for about one half capacity, and I did not seem to make any further improvement until the spring of 1925."

These peculiar waves did not arrive with "clock precision". Just like ocean waves, they arrived in schedules of their own. Dr. Moray was convinced that these were world-permeating waves. He came to believe that they represented the natural "cadence of the universe". This intriguing characteristic suggested that small amounts of pulsating electrostatic charge might be used to induce large oscillations in a large "tank" of charge. The resultant oscillating power would be applied to industrial use.

The idea of obtaining and using "ground energy" is covered in secrecy. What would happen to fossil fuel companies were it even suspected that vast electrical energy could be simply pulled from the ground at specific points? These energies began "making their appearance" during the years of telegraphy. Well placed telegraphic ground plates were able to operate with energy simply taken from the ground. Several early telegraph lines historically continued signaling among stations, though their batteries had been "dry and dead" for several years! I spoke to an engineer who saw this kind of system operation when yet a teenager. Seeing this strange system in full working order so impressed him that, developing that rare taste, he forever sought such anomalies as a lifelong passion. Numerous articles from the last century retell exact details concerning these phenomena.

Tesla defined true cosmic rays as an entrant light-like effluve having incredible penetrating power. These were in no way similar to the conventional cosmic rays detected by Gockel (1910), Hess (1912), Kohlhorster (1913) or Robert Millikan (1925). Tesla viewed his discovery of these light-like effluves as holding the only promise for energy application. According to Tesla, the energy of these effluves greatly exceeded those of cosmic ray "particles".



Dr. Gustav Le Bon, a Belgian physicist, examined and compared ultraviolet rays and radioactive energies with great fascination. Concluding from experiments that energetic bombardments were directly responsible for radioactivity, he was able to perform manipulations of the same. He succeeded in diminishing the radioactive output of certain materials by simple physical treatments. Heating measurably slowed the radioactive decay of radium chloride, a thing considered implausible by physicists.

In each case, Le Bon raised the radium temperature until it glowed red-hot. The same retardation of emanations were observed. He found it possible to isolate the agent, which was actually radioactive in the radium lattice, a glowing gaseous "emanation" which could be condensed in liquid air. Radium was thereafter itself de-natured. Being exposed to the external influence of bombarding rays, the radium again became active. The apparent reactivation of radium after heating required twenty days before reaching its maximum value.

Dr. Le Bon was utterly dumbfounded when; forcing theory into fact, other colleagues announced the "immutability of radioactive decay". He also perceived where their erroneous logic would ultimately lead when they cited "internal instability" as the source of radioactivity. Separating themselves once more from the external world of energy, they would lose more than they imagined themselves gaining.

Le Bon disagreed when physicists began isolating the heavy metals as "the only radioactive elements. He had already distinctly demonstrated for them that "all matter was to a degree radioactive". He was first to write books on the conversion of ordinary matter into rays, an activity he claimed was constant. He showed that this flux from ordinary matter could be measured. Le Bon stated that the reason why all matter was spontaneously emanating rays was not because they were contaminated with heavy radioactive elements. Ordinary matter was disintegrating into rays because it was being bombarded by external rays of a peculiar variety.


TORSION ETHER PHYSICS

NIKOLAI KOZYREV'S GYROSCOPE EXPERIMENTS

http://www.rexresearch.com/torsion/torsion1.htm

Theoretical results were obtained that let spin-spin interactions be considered as the manifestation of an independent fundumental characteristic of matter. These investigations showed that numerous phenomena which were hard or impossible to explain, had a rigorous theoretical interpretation in the framework of torsion field theory. The convincing theoretical results which allowed understanding of the mechanism of Tam-Happer effect were first obtained by P.C.Naik and T.Pradhan in the USA [43] and then by P.I.Pronin, Yu.N.Obukhov and I.V.Yakushin in the USSR. Later De Sabbata and C.Sivaram in Italy [44] and then E.A.Gubarev, A.N.Sidorov and G.I.Shipov in Russia [45] with the use of torsion theories, gave a theoretical interpretation of experimental results obtained by A.D.Krish [32,33] and others [42].

Probably the first researcher to establish that the behaviour of gyroscopic systems cannot be explained in the frame work of Newton's mechanics was russian astrophysicist N.A.Kozyrev. In the 50s, N.A.Kozyrev cunducted a large series of experiments with gyroscopes and found that variations of the gyroscope's weight exists depending on the angular velocity and the direction of rotation [1,2]. Later, Kozyrev's results were completely confirmed by a member of the Belarus Academy of Sciences A.I.Veinik, who in the 60s - 80s conducted a major research of the anomalies demonstrated by gyroscopic systems [8]. In 1989 H.Hayasaka and S. Takeuchi published results of their experiments in which the fall-time of freely falling spinning gyroscope was measured. These experiments showed that the fall-time varies depending on the angular velocity and the direction of rotation [48]. The unusual behaviour of spinning gyroscopes was observed by S.M.Polyakov in the USSR [24] and many others, and basically was interpreted as a manifestation of antigravitation. In 1991, G.I.Shipov showed that the violation of Newton's mechanics demonstrated by gyroscopic systems was caused by the appearance of torsion fields generated by spinning masses [49].


http://www.soulsofdistortion.nl/tors1a.html

Torsion fields are generated by spin (considering classical spin [22,23]) or by angular momentum. There exist both right and left torsion fields (depending on the spin orientation). Since all substances (except amorphous materials) have their own stereochemistry which determines not only the location of atoms in molecules but also determines their mutual spin orientation, then the superposition of torsion fields generated by the atomic and nuclear spins of each molecule determines the intensity of torsion field in the space surrounding each molecule. The superposition of all these torsion fields determines the intensity and spatial configuration of the characteristic torsion field of that substance. Thus each substance possesses its own characteristic torsion field.


The structure of the torsion field of every object can be changed by the influence of an external torsion field. As a result of such an influence, the new configuration of the torsion field will be fixed as a metastable state (as a polarized state) and will remain intact even after the source of the external torsion field is moved to another area of space. Thus torsion fields of certain spatial configuration can be "recorded" on any physical or biological object.


KOZYREV TORSION BALANCE EXPERIMENTS:

http://www.chronos.msu.ru/EREPORTS/levich_substan_inter/levich_substan_inter.htm


Francis Crick, codiscoverer of the DNA structure, describes this strange characteristic of the molecules of living organisms:

    It has been well known for many years that for any particular molecule only one hand occurs in nature.  For example the amino acids one finds in proteins are always what are called the L or levo amino acids, and never the D or dextro amino acids.  Only one of the two mirror possibilities occurs in proteins.

Living tissue (with the exception of some bacteria) contains only L-amino acids (laevorotatory-left handed); dead tissue only D-amino acids (dextrorotatory-right handed).


Linus Pauling, Nobel laureate in chemistry:

        This is a very puzzling fact . . . . All the proteins that have been investigated, obtained from animals and from plants, from higher organisms and from very simple organisms bacteria, molds, even viruses are found to have been made of L-amino acids.

Ether waves of the dextrorotatory kind cause decay/decomposition/inertia; the laevorotatory waves provide antigravitational effects.


BRUCE DEPALMA SPINNING BALL EXPERIMENT

Bruce DePalma graduated from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1958. He attended graduate school in Electrical Engineering and Physics at M.I.T. and Harvard University. At M.I.T. he was a lecturer in Photographic Science in the Laboratory of Dr. Harold Edgerton and directed 3-D color photographic research for Dr. Edwin Land of Polaroid Corporation. He commenced his work in Free Energy through his studies on the gyroscope and the nature of motion.

http://www.evert.de/eft907e.htm

Throwing Experiments
DePalma and his assistants were experts for photograph recording of high speed motions. In 1974 they studied parabolic curves of bodies thrown upward, using ball bearings and catapults. Ball bearings were put into rotation before start and also not-rotating likely objects were used for comparison. In 1977 these experiments were repeated by most precisely working equipment and Bruce DePalma published paper entitled ´Understanding the Dropping of the Spinning Ball Experiment´. His astonishment clearly is expressed, e.g. by this section:

Actually the experiment has two parts, the spinning ball going up, and the spinning ball falling. Since I would be rather thought a fool than misrepresent results of experiments I only attempted to analyze the portion of the experiment I thought I understood. Basically the spinning object going higher than the identical non-rotating control with the same initial velocity, and, then falling faster than the identical non-rotating control; present a dilemma which can only be resolved or understood -- on the basis of radically new concepts in physics -- concepts so radical that only the heretofore un-understood results of other experiments, (the elastic collision of a rotating and an identical non- rotating object, et al.), and new conceptions of physics growing out of the many discussions and correspondence pertaining to rotation, inertia, gravity, and motion in general.

A ball spinning at 27,000 RPM and a non-spinning ball were catapulted side-by-side with equal momentum and projection angle. In defiance of all who reject the ether as unrealistic, the spinning ball actually weighed less, and traveled higher than its non-spinning counterpart. Those who attribute this to an aerodynamic or atmospheric effect, please note that it works just as well in a vacuum. Also note, this effect has since been verified by other [enlightened] researchers. The decrease in weight of the spinning ball - anti-gravity - can
explain why the spinning object goes higher and falls faster than the identical non-rotating control. Current thinking is that there is no special interaction between rotation and gravity. The behavior of rotating objects is simply the addition of ether energy to whatever motion the rotating object is making.

Is this a harnessing of torsional ether waves by rotation? Both balls draw energy into themselves from an unseen source, but the rotating ball absorbs more of this ethereal energy than its counterpart - energy that would be manifest as gravity, moving down into the Earth. With a decrease in torsional ether above the ball, there is a slight decrease in gravity, the ball gets slightly lighter. Needless to say, this effect defies standard theories.

(http://www.evert.de/eft907a.jpg)


ASPDEN GYROSCOPE EFFECT

http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEN_4_8_1.html

The aether was detected some years earlier by Sagnac in France and is detected in modern navigation technology by the ring laser gyro. How can the speed of a laser beam traveling around a closed path inside an optical instrument detect rotation of that instrument if the beam is not keeping a fixed speed relative to something inside that instrument that does not share its rotation? That something is the aether! No amount of book learning or mathematics can avoid that simple truth, and even though the word aether is seen as something magical, it is that something that delivers free energy once we have decoded the combination of the magnetic lock which restrains its release. Note also, that the aether reveals its existence when we have rotation and we have rotation in the Adams motor.



(http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/7857/africabrazil.gif)

Northern/Southern circumpolar and Regular constellation orbits FLAT EARTH MAP

In order to avoid situations like this ( http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=38120.0 ) the FAQ must be modified to include the latest and best proofs provided in the alternative FAQ, re: flat earth maps, orbit/size of the sun, movements of the satellites, and much more.

As I have mentioned before, S. Rowbotham made several mistakes when discussing the secondary (supporting) flat earth theory (earth-sun distance, solar eclipse, circumpolar constellations)...

There are three kinds of stellar orbits: southern/northern circumpolar and regular.

Here is the photograph to prove it:

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0903/5hOHPsanterne900.jpg

See the following links for complete explanations:

http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?p=33520#p34143
http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?p=33520#p33509
http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?p=33520#p33520

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 01, 2011, 02:23:23 AM
Regarding the Cavendish experiment...

http://web.archive.org/web/20071021071531/http://www.s-line.de/homepages/keppler/elot.htm

Sometime prior to 1901, the French Government, wishing to determine more accurately the actual size of the Earth, so that they could revise and refine their calculations regarding the distance to the sun, hit on a way to measure the difference in distance apart at the top of two lines perpendicular to the surface of the Earth and the bottom of those same two lines. They wanted a pair of lines long enough to give them an appreciable measurement . Obviously they could not erect two parallel poles a mile high, but they did feel they could suspend two plumb bobs a mile deep into a mine shaft, and thus be able to measure the distance apart at the top and the distance apart at the bottom, which would be slightly less. They wanted to know exactly how much less.

The result of these tests was very strange. So strange that the French Geodetic scientists contacted the scientists of the American Geodetic Survey and conveyed their results to them, with the request that similar tests be conducted in this country. Officially, nothing was done for some years. But in 1901, one of the Geodetic surveyors happened to be working in the vicinity of the Tamarack mines near Calumet, Michigan. He contacted the chief engineer at Tamarack, and informed him of the information transmitted by the French government.

Two mine shafts were selected, and plumb lines exactly 4,250 feet long were suspended in each mine. At the end of these lines a sixty pound bob was hung. In order to prevent movement through a horizontal direction, each bob was suspended in a tank of oil placed at the bottom of the mine shafts.
In this way, it was reasoned, magnetic forces could not effect them. The lines used to suspend the bobs were No. 24 piano wires. For twenty-four hours the lines were allowed to hang, so that there would be no possibility of movement from putting them in place still remaining in the lines.
The measurements were begun.

It was then that it was discovered that the French Geodetic engineers had not made a mistake.
Careful re-checking proved that the lines, contrary to expectations, were farther apart at the bottom than at the top!

There can be only one implication to such strange result – the center of gravity is not, as previously believed, at the center of the Earth, but in fact, it must be above the surface of the Earth, somewhere in Space! If these two lines, formed by the suspended plumb lines, were to be extended upward, they would meet somewhere in the void away from the Earth, and that point, by all the rules of gravitational attraction, should be the center of gravity of this planet!



http://www.davidpratt.info/aethergrav.htm (aetherometry, gravity)


http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_gravity01.htm (aether and gravity experiments)


http://milesmathis.com/caven.html (about the errors in the Cavendish experiment)


http://www.rexresearch.com/nipher/nipher1.htm (the extraordinary experiments of Dr. Francis Nipher; how to modify gravity by applying electrical tension)

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 02, 2011, 01:40:50 AM
HISTORY: FICTION OR SCIENCE? VOLUME 3 - A. FOMENKO/G. NOSOVSKY



http://new-chrono-book.livejournal.com/ (http://new-chrono-book.livejournal.com/)

HISTORY: FICTION OR SCIENCE? VOLUME 3, DATING PTOLEMY'S ALMAGEST

mediafire.com 2ljuudrjdnt

Pg. 209 - 214

Tycho Brahe = N. Copernicus


Pg. 248 - 259

Who actually wrote the works attributed to Hipparchus, T. Brahe and C. Ptolemy


Pg. 302 - 327

J. Kepler = N. Copernic = T. Brahe = C. Ptolemy the most extraordinary analysis

The other pages include one of the best ever discussion on the new chronology of the times of J. Kepler, C. Ptolemy, T. Brahe, N. Copernicus, who were actually one and the same person.


Dating Ptolemy's Almagest (a more technical work):

mediafire.com qnmmdljvxkm

The coverings of the stars, and the lunar eclipses described in Almagest, could have occurred ONLY during the period 800 - 1350 a.d. and not one thousand years earlier. Archimedes' Palimpsest was also forged after 1750 AD.

HIPPARCHUS = TYCHO BRAHE




THE WORKS OF COPERNICUS WRITTEN AT LEAST AFTER 1600 E.N.; HISTORICAL FIGURE J. KEPLER AUTHOR OF DE REVOLUTIONIBUS ORBIUM COELESTIUM


ANCIENT GREEK ASTRONOMERS: INVENTED DURING THE RENAISSANCE



SEE - http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1643860#msg1643860 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1643860#msg1643860)



New address for the alternative faq:

http://web.archive.org/web/20100418162809/http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/ (http://web.archive.org/web/20100418162809/http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/)



Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Username on December 04, 2011, 09:30:59 PM
I'll put back up the forums in the next few weeks levee so your posts are preserved outside of the archive.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 07, 2011, 03:36:17 AM
Your forum, the .net website, includes many other valuable discussions, in addition to some of my messages...many topics which actually were discussed in more details than it was done here.



Eric Clapton, Jimi Hendrix's only competition, the most talented of the British guitarists, did not play much of a role in the seventies, musically speaking. Which is a bigger mystery than the Beach Boys' never released Smile album.

Here is the real Eric Clapton:

cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/a5a27cb0a20e59c2662dd9a960198d83-970-80.jpg.webp

cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3cfdf482b08c5e022429003915c8f873-970-80.jpg.webp

It seems that after 1970-1971 he was replaced for years to come by someone else.

The Blind Faith project never got off the floor since it lacked the Adorno songs which made stars out of Cream and Jimi Hendrix. What Eric should have done at that point in time, is to approach several classical music composers, to write songs from him.

Led Zeppelin and Deep Purple were 60s groups, and could not make it beyond the early 70s. Had it not been for Kashmere (a modified Scheherezade theme by Korsakov), Led Zeppelin would not be remembered as a group in the same league with the other great rock bands. The Rolling Stones themselves could not survive beyond the early 70s either. They had a few Adorno songs left (Can't you hear me knocking, Brown Sugar and Angie, and It's only rock'n'roll which is a modified Bang a gong given to Trex), and they were forced to switch gears with Start me up which is a modified Street fighting man. Actually AC/DC copied most of the songs on the Powerage album and their hit album from 1979, from two Rolling Stones songs: Street fighting man and Jumping jack flash. You shook me up all night is a modified Honky tonk woman. Virtually the only rock band to have survived the 70s unscathed, was Kiss.

Culturally, what the music industry wanted is Led Zeppelin and not Eric Clapton or Jimi Hendrix, that is why both projects were put on hold (possibly with Hendrix still being alive).

A Smile album in 1966, featuring Surfs Up and California girls, Good vibrations, Darlin', would certainly have been a competitor to Sgt. Pepper. That is why the bosses of the music industry hit the brakes on the Smile album. People think that the Beach Boys had a better sound than the Beatles; Because is as almost good a song as Surfs Up, and the Beach Boys were not a straight rock'n'roll band, they always sounded different, but were it not for Adorno's Pet Sounds and Smile albums they would not be remembered as competitors to the Beatles and the Rolling Stones. With the Beach Boys, Adorno was able to experiment, a progressive sound which to this day has not been matched by anyone else. However, without further songs signed Adorno, the Beach Boys could not survive the 60s, musically.

Surfs Up was an incredible song, at least the first two minutes or so, certainly Beach Boys best along with God only knows:



Imagine a rock band with Eric Clapton as lead guitarist in the 70s, with big hits written by classical music composers, it would have stolen the limelight from all of the other groups; imagine Jimi Hendrix on stage 1970-1978.

Iron Butterfly, the most promising rock band in 1969, were given In a da gadda vita, a modified Bach's toccata, but without more songs signed Adorno, they could not go beyond 1970.


"Singer Terry Reid set the scene: “We were all hanging out at The Bag O’ Nails, Keith [Richards], Mick [Jagger], Brian [Jones] come skipping through, all happy about something. Paul McCartney walks in, Jeff Beck. I thought, ‘What’s this? A bloody convention or something?’



“Here comes Jimi, wearing one of his military jackets, hair all over the place, pulls out his left-handed Stratocaster, beats it to hell, looks like he’s been chopping wood with it. He gets up all soft spoken and, all of a sudden, Whooor-raaawwrr! and he breaks into Wild Thing… and it was all over.



“There were guitar players weeping, they had to mop the floor up. He was piling it on, solo after solo. I could see everyone’s fillings dropping out. When he finished there was silence. Nobody knew what to do, everyone was dumbstruck, completely in shock.”



Jeff Beck was similarly devastated. “It wasn’t just his amazing blues playing I noticed, but his physical assault on the guitar; it was an explosive package. He hit me like an earthquake. I had to think long and hard about what I should do next."

In 1968, Cream disbanded, Eric Clapton later confessing: “My overall feeling is that it was a glorious mistake, and although it ended up being a wonderful thing, it was nothing like it was meant to be.



“But with Jimi, part of me wanted to run away and say, ‘Oh no - this is what I want to be,’ and part of me fell in love. But I just had to surrender and say, ‘This is fantastic.’”"


Surfs Up, the best song on the Smile album, is a modified Sanctus by Faure:



Then, Adorno altered Surfs Up, which became Time of the season for the Zombies.

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Username on December 08, 2011, 01:19:36 PM
Your forum, the .net website, includes many other valuable discussions, in addition to some of my messages...many topics which actually were discussed in more details than it was done here.
It was never my intention to remove the site completely and will have the forums up for archive purposes.  I humbly apologize.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 14, 2011, 04:48:35 AM
Confirmation of the vortex/tachyon model of the atom:

Preons = quarkels

An advanced knowledge of Quantum Gravity indicated in 1995, quarks and *quarkels would be found to comprise of the electric particle energy of gravity photons. Robert Wood-Smith (RWS) discussed this with Albert Mantiziba who, in July 1995 and with indirect help from Max Planck, established:-
the proton comprised of 2.2674 x 10^23 gravity photons:
the neutron comprised of 2.2705 x 10^23 " "
the electron comprised of 1.2349 x 10^20 " " .
These combine to form respectively the quarks of the proton and neutron, and the quarkels of the electron.

[*Quarkels: the term is applied by the Partners to the components of the electron: which RWS predicted in 1994/95, together with their values. Note. The 1998 Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to three scientists for their discovery of "quasiparticles" that carry an impossible amount of charge: the reference was to the fractional charges of the electron.]

Chris Hill, theorist at Fermilab, indicated the view in “New Scientist” | 11 May 1996 | page 29 | “It would suggest that whatever lies inside the quarks is incredibly tightly bound, in a way that theory can’t yet accommodate.”


https://web.archive.org/web/20110116175908/https://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/44784


http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1998/press.html (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1998/press.html)

https://www.llnl.gov/str/Laughlin.html (https://www.llnl.gov/str/Laughlin.html) (fractional quantum effect)


Preon-quarkel structure of the electronS:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=quarter-electrons-may-enable-quantum-computer (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=quarter-electrons-may-enable-quantum-computer)


Every science student is taught that the indivisible unit of charge is that of the electron. But 2 years ago, scientists found that charge sometimes shatters into "quasi-particles" that have one-third the fundamental charge. And in this week's issue of Nature, researchers announce they have spotted one-fifth-charge quasi-particles--a decisive finding suggesting that its time to change any physics textbooks still claiming that electron charge is indivisible.

https://web.archive.org/web/20130621182913/http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/1999/05/19-01.html


http://prd.aps.org/abstract/PRD/v55/i5/pR2521_1 (http://prd.aps.org/abstract/PRD/v55/i5/pR2521_1)

https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-ph/9608279.pdf

http://web.ihep.su/library/pubs/tconf99/ps/teraz.pdf (http://web.ihep.su/library/pubs/tconf99/ps/teraz.pdf)

It can be taken as an exciting and already intriguing historical
discovery of the substructure of quarks (and leptons), which has been long predicted, or as the first evidence for the composite model of quarks (and leptons), which has been long proposed since the middle of 1970’s [3, 4, 5, 6, 7]. It may dramatically change not only the so-called “common sense” in physics or science but also that in philosophy, which often states that quarks (and leptons) are the smallest and most fundamental forms (or particles) of matter in the “mother nature”.



All these results confirm the information presented over a century ago in the Occult Chemistry:


http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_09_4_phillips.pdf (http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_09_4_phillips.pdf)

See also:
http://www.esotericscience.org/article5a.htm (http://www.esotericscience.org/article5a.htm)

Occult Chemistry, first chapter:

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr01.htm (http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr01.htm)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 15, 2011, 02:39:35 AM
PARTHENON = TEMPLE DEDICATED TO THE  VIRGIN MARY, CONSTRUCTED DURING THE RENAISSANCE

http://books.google.ro/books?id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=history+science+or+fiction&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=AD2lU_WyLrDa0QWLrYEo&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=parthenon&f=false (http://books.google.ro/books?id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=history+science+or+fiction&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=AD2lU_WyLrDa0QWLrYEo&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=parthenon&f=false)

HISTORY: FICTION OR SCIENCE? VOLUME 1, ANATOLY FOMENKO

PAGES 415-421 * 425-434


Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 12, 2012, 06:18:25 AM
Hiroshima: Before and After

http://www.scribd.com/doc/78516104/Liberty-Forum

During the period 2004-2006, on libertyforum.org (deleted from the internet), cactus/no name presented the most extraordinary facts pertaining to the fact that the "nuclear" explosion at Hiroshima was faked; I was able to save some of the pages.

An outline of the main points:

It seems hard to believe that less than 60 years ago we were naive enough to believe everything our government told us without question. It is even harder to imagine that today forces still exist in Washington who will stop at nothing to prevent the dissemination of pure, unadulterated Truth. It is time for the outrageous lies propagated for the past half century to be put to rest, and time for the real story behind one of the United States' greatest cover-ups to be told.

http://web.archive.org/web/20050303172300/www.temple.edu/history/hiroshima.html

Here is a model of the general disposition of the blast area. Observe the water access (if someone wanted to import thousands of tons of TNT quietly) and the structures standing. The second model shows you a representation (I hope they were doing this to exact scale-down) of the damage after the blast. Compare the epicentre of the blast as shown with a red flag in the second model with the blast effects as depicted in the first black and white after photo at the top of this thread. The center is way off and it would be interesting to understand why each model seems to make a point of not showing the structures BEHIND the blast. Take the circle of smoke on the black and white photo on top and transpose it where the blast flag is located on the after model in this set and ask yourself where 40% of the destruction went and why are the blast depicted with such contradiction from one official model to the next?

Also recall that this Allied genocide masquerading as liberation firebombed Desden in February of 1945, firebombed Tokyo in March (100,000) 1945 and wrapped things up with the massive FIREBOMBING masquerading as atomic bomb of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Did you know that Nagasaki was one of the biggest Catholic stronghold in Japan at the time?

Keep an eye on the epicenter of the blast and the radius of damage. Both those models are missing about 40% of the overall blast area. Take another look at the devastation photos, the original black and white I mean, look at the roads.
Do you see what I mean, THEY ARE ALL HIGHLY VISIBLE, how is this possible when debris has been catapulted all over the place? The roads should have been covered in debris. The hoaxsters became negligent and thought they would control the flow of information forever.

Look at the photos depicting the blast. You see a nice column of smoke rising into the sky with a pretty musroom photoshop on top. How do you get such a cloud from an airburst 2000 (1850 to be precise) feet above the ground? Where is the big crater, so characteristic of the hype used to open the cah funnel, in the center of Hiroshima. According to the models you would think they were burning autumn grass or something. I am not prepared to say that the hoax was fabricated entirely, I think those poor people really got the rabbinical lessons GOOD. And I will bet it smarted too. Funny how most of the burn victims photos I have seen never have burnt hair. I someone has a picture something like that award winning picture of that small girl running from US napalm carrying her brother or sister in her arms. You could tell THAT was real because the hair was burned in a way one might think is consistent with intense heat. The Hiroshima survivors have such an astonishing array of burn marks and burn patterns that one could be forgiven for wondering what it was that exploded there. Did the rig the city like a synchronized demolition with conventional fuel bombs spread throughout the buildings.

I invite the curious to examine the buildings in the BEFORE model and see what size buildings would have been suitable storage places to set the charges of such large amounts of fuel explosive.

Also note with regards to the mushroom cloud. Most people were blinded and in shock. Most survivors would agree with whatever the skunk had photoshopped to portray the configuration of the blast and agreed with it. Making people believe the bomb was real was most important, the skunks thought that the world would never believe a test shot with experts. The first choice for the use of the atomic bomb was determined to be Kyoto by the Target Committee. It was believed that the highly literate and intellectual residents there would convey the sophisticated terror and people would believe them MORE, It is my contention that they DID NOT BOMB Kyoto for THAT very REASON. They feared the intellectuals would be believed if they detected clues that it was a hoax. People (did not need to be too smart to display terror) were ritually sacrificed by fire as described in the definition of the word holocaust. The Allies were great at killing holocaust-style, especially if there are zillions of dollars at stake..think about it.

The damage is severely inconsitent with linear shock waves. The damage inspires me to believe the fuels were spread by explosive dispersion and ignited much like the moderbn DAISEYCUTTER incendiary cluster the Army has now. Hiroshima may have been a testing ground for the Daiseycutter, like a scaled down version of the vapour/fuel nightmare they mounted in Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Desden, Tokyo and later in Vietnam. Fire is a big preoccupation with these superstitous skunks. Their has to be a big fire componant in the ritual killing. Like 9/11, the Ford Pinto.

The Nuclear Weaponeer narrating parts of the Trinity movie said that the most devastation comes from the low altitude blasts because the pre-cursor wave effect lifts everything off the ground. The simulation offered in T2 judgement day whereby the bomb is going off, you can see the precursor wave lift everything up into the air, cars, busses. You can see in this simulation, a great deal of care in accurately portraying the forces at work. Unlike the Hiroshima model, I find the T2 model more believable. You may have see some of the airbursts tested in the US proving grounds. They don't have much of a mushroom cloud. The mushroom cloud becomes more distinct as the charge gets low to the ground. In Hiroshima the smoke was everywhere. Smoke without wind. Look at the photos of the city after the explosion and ask why the roads are so clear. They never said anything about the bomb they used on Hiroshima as NOT having a wind componant. Look at the depicted damage and ask if this appears more consistant with firebombing then with atomic armaggeddon.

What is the same about Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki is that they were ALL firebombed (incendiary/holocaust-style).

TriNitroToluene and liquid gas incendiary devices radiate like hell too. The evidence supporting actual radiation sickness in Hiroshima looks more like evidence of cancers and burns consistent with conventional explosions.

I have examined before and after aerial reconnaissance photographs of the damage inflicted on Dresden and Tokyo. I have examined mushroom clouds from napalm bombs.

You see concrete extremely damaged in Dresden and Tokyo and Grozny, Chechnya but you don't see as much concrete in Hiroshima. Which brings me to include building configurations and volatility amongst the Target Committee's priorities. Most of the theatre for the Hiroshima bombing was to be razed to the ground to simulate A-bomb design parameters.They did a very crappy job but the public bought it anyways. For a while that is. Kyoto may have had too many hard targets and hard targets mean high survival rates and more chances for noisy and embarassing leaks. These, I would think, are critical considerations when pulling a hoax of this magnitude.



Neutrons WERE NOT the magic bullet, near-absolute synchronicity in the discharge of the shape charge plastiques HAD to be the cornerstone of that game of numbers.

And guess what happens after that? The chain reaction, if successful at all, consumes the fissionable mass before it can become critical and contribute to the exponential and very rapid expansion of the release of thermonuclear energy. Recall the experts explaining that BARELY ONE GRAM of the so-called weapon's grade uranium in Little Boy was converted to useful energy. In the VERY HEAVY load of 'lead' in Little Boy bomb ONLY ONE GRAM DID ALL THAT DAMAGE. One gram of fissionable uranium converts to 10 million degrees and million pound winds and the equivalent of 20KT of TriNitroToluene. They really wanted to play the Greek Gods.

Here are my reasons for believing the atom bomb and the rest of those clusters are bogus lies and illusions.

Item 1)

The historical seismograms of Hiroshima and Nagasaki have mysteriously vanished. If not only for the sake of war-era memorabilia, that information should have been everywhere in the museums and in the press. Hiroshima is located in a highly volcanic zone called the Honshu Arc and those active volcanoes were under constant seismographic surveillance during that period and log before that. The so-called atomic blast at hiroshima was estimated to be the equivalent of 6.2 on the Richter Scale but no seismological outpost in the world appears to have noted it. The Russians said they exploded the biggest atomic bomb ever made (50 megatons) at Novaya Zemlya in northern Russia. That is hundreds of thousands of times more powerful than what they say exploded over Hiroshima yet again, not one seismic needle moved at all. How is that possible I ask?

Item 3)

The so-called nuclear industry, be it weapons or so-called commercially viable nuclear reactors is the hoaxster's paradise. The whole ripoff scheme is shrouded in national security protocols and security bonding which means you can't discuss your work outside the plant if you don't want to incur the wrath of the NSA and risk jailtime for attempted so-called nuclear terrorism. The whole scam is compartmentalized so Sam doesn't know what George is up to.

Item 5)

The mushroom cloud thermodynamics of the atom bomb hoax have also been examined. The first problem the competant examiner notices with the mushroom cloud photographed on the day Hiroshima was attacked is that the sun is shining brightly overhead at the noon position. The bombing was said to have been at 8:15 am. I have heard it argued that this was the Nagasaki cloud but it has been used by the hoaxsters themselves for Hiroshima and Justin Raimondo had this exact cloud for his essay, Hiroshima, Mon Amour. Why would the jews want to say it is Nagasaki if they have nothing to hide? I went to the public library in downtown Montreal as a youth and I looked at microfilm of newspapers for that day in 1945 and the picture I enlarged taken from the microfilm was the cloud at noon and it was Hiroshima indeed. So, more evidence of a hoax?

Item 6)

The firebombing of Tokyo March 9-10, 1945-100,000 dead. M-69 aimable cluster firebombs reduced 26 square kilometers of that city to ash using a few hundred U.S. Air Force B-29 bombers. Aside the cost of the aircraft when initially built the cost of destroying all that section of Tokyo was a little more than a million dollars. So, why build anything that costs billions to destroy a fraction of the land those B-29 bombers could have destroyed in under less than a million dollars? Because the atom bomb was a lie and those cities reduced to ash by M-69 firebombs and that also explains the mysterious vanishing of the historical seismograms of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Are they hiding the fact that there was no shock wave? Is that why the trees were still standing charred and many building facades still standing?

Item 7)

Hiroshima was not evacuated and life came back to normal very quickly. This is inconsistent with the models presented by the experts that said nothing would grow for 70 years and nobody could live there for a very long time. One week after the so-called atom bomb, oleanders were growing everywhere. The hoaxsters started stories of a miracle. More contradiction and nonsense from the jewish hoaxsters.

Item 8-

The pilot of the B-29 they said dropped the so-called atom bomb on Hiroshima is a known Hollywood insider and his B-29 crew was totally segregated on an island with the pilot Commander Tibbits fully in charge of security and everything. He had full autonomy and discretion. I believe his crew of talmudic cowards was near 200 aircraft when they sortie'd on Hiroshima then later on Nagasaki. Another brilliant example of the secrecy and security shroud of compartmentalization over the whole hoax. Why would this dumbass put his mother's name on an instrument of utter genocide if it were not that his mother gloats without end at the hoax accomplishments and mass murder that she would be pleased to figure prominently on the nose of that beast of destruction and mass murder. How can anyone believe such a mess of contradictions when it is obvious they would have been nuts not to exploit the means they had at their disposal under those circumstances. They pulled it off while everyone on earth was in a state of shock and would have believed anything these conspirators said just to stop the ignited gasoline showers?

Item 9)

Items said to be radioactive have in fact been doped with x-ray radiation for periods of time corresponding to the hoax expectations. At the Pantex assembly plant in Amarillo Texas they have a very powerful x-ray machine they say they use to look inside decomissioned so-called atom bombs before they open them up. That is totally rediculous because why would anything be wrong inside a bomb watched by the military night and day. I say the x-ray machine is there to dope the materials they assemble so that the x-ray detectors they call rad meters can read something expected from the mathematical models. When a rad meter is picking up x-ray radiation it is seemlessly and logarithmically converting this sampled energy and reporting the results as rads instead of x-ray energy that it is. When a student examines a sample said to be radioactive it is a sample irradiated prior using a high intensity x-ray machine. Again compartmentalization plays a key role here at the Pantex plant. Coincidentally they are the only plant in the US authorized to make the final assemblies of so-called nuclear bombs. What else could they be using that huge x-ray machine at Pantex if it is not to create illusions of atomic radioactivity?

Item 19)

Mushroom clouds do not grow out of radial airbrust explosions. The mushroom cloud needs to be seeded from the ground. The thermodynamic conditions caused by a circumferential airburst explosion would superheat the air all around and send radial shock waves emanating from the center outwards like the popular festivity fireworks and that would negate the conditions required for a mushroom cloud to grow normally. A mushroom cloud grows from the ground up in a predictable circular pattern that develops and flows through a relatively cool and stable upper air mass because the explosion was at the ground level. Who can deny that mushroom clouds can't grow out of radial airburst explosions?


The people who projected the ILLUSION THEY HAD THIS AWFUL WEAPON hoped they had imagined a weapon that would SELECTIVELY put an end to HUMANITY'S HOPES FOR THE FUTURE. This HOAX, it was hoped, would reap untold treasures for it's authors.

Just ponder the MINDBOGGLING ARRAY of possibilities if one accepts that the ABOMB IS A HOAX. When you accept the idea that it was a HOAX you can fully understand how it changed the world and our lives. Seeing it for the hoax it is gives one a feeling of freedom and understanding. One thing SEEING THE HOAX will not do is MAKE CONVENTIONAL WARFARE GO AWAY.

This confusion on the part of the Japanese was NO CONFUSION AT ALL.

They had been firebombed thousands of times by B-29s raids before, during, and after the HIRO/NAGA combination blasts. The reason the Japanese did not understand the difference IS THAT THERE WAS NO DIFFERENCE. Hiroshima and Nagasaki had both likely wreaked the odor of spent gasoline and napalm fumes. I think the Japanese people WERE CONFUSED BY THE A BOMB STORIES, they could not distinguish the damage of Hiroshima and Nagasaki with that of the thousands of other cities bombed to saturation with flammable ordinance. The confusion WAS NOT WITH THE FIREBOMBING, people could SEE THAT, it was the weird ATOM BOMB twist to these stories they could not understand.

Israel is PLAYING DUMB to cover the fact that THE ISRAELI ATOMIC PROGRAM IS NOTHING MORE THAN AN EXPANSION OF THE HOAX ALREADY WELL ROOTED IN THE PUBLIC PSYCH WORLDWIDE. Just opening the HOAX CASH FUNNEL valve a little more and to ACCESS MORE PUBLIC FUNDS AND LUCRATIVE INSECURITY. People NEED TO BE REALLY AFRAID before you can expect them to BUY TONS OF PSYCHIATRIC DRUGS. You can't swell the coffers of drug company predators without creating SOME KIND OF INSECURITY.



Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 12, 2012, 06:22:29 AM
Hiroshima: Before and After (continued part 2)

It's nearly 8:15 a.m. American B-29 bombers appear overhead. The sirens wail, but Mitsuo and his coworkers ignore them, as usual. The planes are headed in the direction of Tokyo. Then, for the first time ever, Mitsuo sees the planes reappear over Hiroshima. They're in position now. Looking in the sky, Mitsuo sees an object. In the instant it takes for the bomb to drop, he feels no fear, only curiosity about this thing that glistens in the sun.

Mitsuo watches the object fall behind a mountain, Mount Hiji. The exact spot where the bomb explodes is called 'ground zero.' Mitsuo is about two miles away, with the mountain in between. At the moment of explosion, he sees a blinding flash of light. Then the shock wave hits. Mitsuo is blown several feet into the air and knocked briefly unconscious. He awakens to see a giant mushroom cloud rising into the air. Mitsuo is a witness to the first atomic bombing in history. And Mount Hiji, which shields him from the radiation, will help him live to tell about it.

How is this testimonial possible? Mitsuo is 2 miles away from the so-called blast with Mount Hiji in between and Mount Hiji is part of the 1000 meter ranges. 1000 meters is 3280 feet. The so-called atom bomb is reported to have detonated at around 1800 feet. How could Mitsuo feel or see such a blast if the mountain range was blocking the view? How could he feel so-called blast waves if the mountain was shielding him from radiation? One contradiction after the other is what makes up the story that serves as evidence of the existance of atomic bombs. The hallmark of a hoax.

(some of you may recall the first US nuclear tests, which were recreated/forged (because of security fears) using conventional explosives for the media - the classic nuclear mushroom cloud that many websites show is just a conventional TNT explosion.)


The Hiroshima mushroom cloud was actually fabricated in the New Mexico desert by using TNT/liquid gas explosives.

In 1944 the Allies captured a very remarkable weapon from the Germans called Wirbelringkanone, which accounts for the air blasts observed in nuclear tests explosions...


By late 1944 the quantum electron, proton neutron theorist quacks had not
figured out how to build it. Fermi dropped hints to Edward Teller about
Einstien's impact device for disks and spheres. Teller relayed the advice to
Oppenhiemer.

After the war, in a public announcement, the government gave the credit for the
succesful testing of the atomic bomb to Quantum physists and made up a quack
theory containg electrons, protons and neutrons, chain reaction and phony
critical mass information to satisfy the public's curiosity and to convince
them they know about atomic power and so would look no further into fission or
fusion.

Fermi got together with a German scientist and together they fabricated false
cloud chamber drawings showing that they were working on splitting the atom.

Chadwick's Neu(t)rons:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=61446.msg1604716#msg1604716


The Oranur experiment of W. Reich showed what the source of the radiation is: the aether.

Reich moved from New York to an area just outside the town of Rangeley in rural southern Maine in the early nineteen fifties. Here he built a new home and laboratory personally designed to integrate home and laboratory into a single, brilliantly practical building, now the home of the Wilhelm Reich Museum. Another laboratory was added soon after for students. This structure was the setting for the so-called Oranur Experiment, a chilling example of the accumulator’s undeniable ability to concentrate energy. The experiment called for the placing of a very small amount of radium in an accumulator, the unexpected result of which was to toxify a surprisingly large area of southern Maine surrounding his home and laboratory, one that took several months to dissipate.

A nuclear reactor is nothing more than a gigantic Reich/Tesla aether box; see the message posted here about telluric currents: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1255899#msg1255899 (the actual cause of "global warming"; the intensity of the dextrorotatory currents has increased greatly, the ice sheets are NOT melting faster, they are disintegrating more swiftly).


R. Khomeini, secret biography:

http://www.venusproject.net/ecs/mullahs_legitimacy.html

Both Ahmadinejad and Khamenei know very well that there are no nuclear weapons, as both are MI6 spies, while the Iranian people have no idea what is going on.


Abiotic Origin of Oil

“The suggestion that petroleum might have arisen from some transformation of squashed fish or biological detritus is surely the silliest notion to have been entertained by substantial numbers of persons over an extended period of time.”
Fred Hoyle 1982

http://www.rense.com/general63/staline.htm (best description and facts presented in this article)

http://freeenergynews.com/Directory/Theory/SustainableOil/

http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=63&contentid=2819&page=2

http://ranprieur.com/crash/abiotic.html

http://web.archive.org/web/20100103095143/http://the7thfire.com/peak_oil/peak_oil_is_a_known_fraud.htm

http://www.radford.edu/~wkovarik/oil/

http://www.oilempire.us/peakoil.html
http://www.hubbertpeak.com/summary.htm










Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 01, 2012, 03:13:15 AM
Faint Young Sun Paradox

The complete demonstration that the age of the Sun cannot exceed some ten million years (that is, we find ourselves right at the beginning of the main-sequence lifetime of the Sun, when no fluctuations in luminosity could have taken place); over the past 25 years there have been several attempts made to try to explain the paradox, all such efforts have failed, see the six links below.

There is no way a round/spherical earth could have formed within this timespan of some ten million years (best case scenario); without attractive gravity, a spherical earth cannot be explained at all.


http://www.clim-past.net/7/203/2011/cp-7-203-2011.pdf

http://www.clim-past.net/7/203/2011/cp-7-203-2011.html

http://asterisk.apod.com/viewtopic.php?t=19684&p=149581

http://asterisk.apod.com/viewtopic.php?t=19684&p=149581#p149562

http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/06dat4.htm

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v474/n7349/full/nature09961.html



Supposedly the Sun has been a main-sequence star since its formation about 4.6 billion years ago. This time represents about half the assumed ten-billion-year main-sequence lifetime of the Sun, so the Sun should have used about half its energy store. This means that about half the hydrogen in the core of the Sun has been used up and replaced by helium. This change in chemical composition changes the structure of the core. The overall structure of the Sun would have to change as well, so that today, the Sun should be nearly 40% brighter than it was 4.6 billion years ago.

This obviously has consequences for the temperatures of the planets. It is generally believed that even small fluctuations in the Sun's luminosity would have devastating consequences on Earth's climate. A 40% change in solar luminosity should have produced dramatic climatic changes.

According to evolution, about four billion years ago when life supposedly first arose on Earth, the temperature had to have been close to what the temperature is today. But if that were the case, the subsequent increase in the Sun's luminosity would have made Earth far too hot for life today. One could naively suggest that Earth began cooler than it is today and has been slowly warming with time. But this is not an option because geologists note that Earth's rock record insists that Earth's average temperature has not varied much over the past four billion years, and biologists require a nearly constant average temperature for the development and evolution of life. This problem is called the early faint Sun paradox.

Evolution proposes that the early atmosphere contained a greater amount of greenhouse gases (such as methane) than today. This would have produced average temperatures close to those today, even with a much fainter Sun. As the Sun gradually increased in luminosity, Earth's atmosphere is supposed to have evolved along with it, so that the amount of greenhouse gases have slowly decreased to compensate for the increasing solar luminosity.

The precise tuning of this alleged co-evolution is nothing short of miraculous. The mechanism driving this would have to be a complex system of negative feedbacks working very gradually, though it is not at all clear how such feedbacks could occur. At any point, a slight positive feedback would have completely disrupted the system, with catastrophic consequences similar to those of Venus or Mars. For instance, the current makeup of Earth's atmosphere is in a non-equilibrium state that is maintained by the widespread diversity of life. There is no evolutionary imperative that this be the case: it is just the way it is. Thus the incredibly unlikely origin and evolution of life had to be accompanied by the evolution of Earth's atmosphere in concert with the Sun.

The implausibility of such a process has caused Lovelock to propose his Gaia hypothesis. According to this, the biosphere (consisting of Earth's oceans, atmosphere, crust, and all living things) constitutes a sort of super organism that has evolved. Life has developed in such a way that the atmosphere has been altered to protect it in the face of increasing solar luminosity. Lovelock's hypothesis has not been generally accepted, largely because of the spiritual implications. Indeed, it does seem to lead to a mystical sort of view.


If billions of years were true, the sun would have been much fainter in the past. However, there is no evidence that the sun was fainter at any time in the earth's history. Astronomers call this the faint young sun paradox.

Evolutionists and long-agers believe that life appeared on the earth about 3.8 billion years ago. But if that timescale were true, the sun would be 25% brighter today than it was back then. This implies that the earth would have been frozen at an average temperature of -3 C. However, most paleontologists believe that, if anything, the earth was warmer in the past. The only way around this is to make arbitrary and unrealistic assumptions of a far greater greenhouse effect at that time than exists today, with about 1,000 times more CO2 in the atmosphere than there is today.

The physical principles that cause the early faint Sun paradox are well established, so astrophysicists are confident that the effect is real. Consequently, evolutionists have a choice of two explanations as to how Earth has maintained nearly constant temperature in spite of a steadily increasing influx of energy. In the first alternative, one can believe that through undirected change, the atmosphere has evolved to counteract heating. At best this means that the atmosphere has evolved through a series of states of unstable equilibrium or even non-equilibrium. Individual living organisms do something akin to this, driven by complex instructions encoded into DNA. Death is a process in which the complex chemical reactions of life ceases and cells rapidly approach chemical equilibrium. Short of some guiding intelligence or design, a similar process for the atmosphere seems incredibly improbable. Any sort of symbioses or true feedback with the Sun is entirely out of the question. On the other hand, one can believe that some sort of life force has directed the atmosphere's evolution through this ordeal. Most find the teleological or spiritual implications of this unpalatable, though there is a trend in this direction in physics.

A much higher concentration of carbon dioxide in Earth's atmosphere has been suggested to maintain a proper temperature. This is an inferrence supported by no geological evidence whatsoever. Studies of iron carbonates by Rye et al. conclusively show that Earth had at most 20 percent the required amount of CO2. We have evidence that Mars also had temperatures suitable for liquid in its distant past. It is unlikely that CO2 would custom-heat both planets.


Conditions on the very early earth that permit the appearance and early evolution of life seem to be achievable without invoking too many improbabilities. As the sun then became hotter, however, we have a problem; if the greenhouse atmosphere is maintained for too long, as the sun brightens, a runaway greenhouse effect may result from positive feedback, creating a Venus-like situation and rendering the earth uninhabitable. A compensating negative feedback is required.

Some geochemical feedback may be possible, but it appears unlikely to be sufficient. Living organisms, too, started converting carbon dioxide into oxygen and organic matter, substantially decreasing the greenhouse effect as soon as photosynthesis got going. There is, however, no obvious reason for this process to keep exactly in step with the sun's increasing luminosity. It may be that we have simply been lucky, but as an explanation that is not entirely satisfactory. If the tuning did need to be very precise, Faulkner would have a point in calling it 'miraculous'.


As a result of a fainter Sun, the temperature on ancient Earth should have been some 25 C lower than today. Such a low temperature should have kept large parts of Earth frozen until about one to two billion years ago. The case for Mars is even more extreme due to its greater distance from the Sun. Yet there is compelling geologic evidence suggesting that liquid water was abundant on both planets three to four billion years ago.

Earth's oldest rocks, which are found in northern Canada and in the southwestern part of Greenland, date back nearly four billion years to the early Archean eon. Within these ancient rock samples are rounded 'pebbles' that appear to be sedimentary, laid down in a liquid-water environment. Rocks as old as 3.2 billion years exhibit mud cracks, ripple marks, and microfossil algae. All of these pieces of evidence indicate that early Earth must have had an abundant supply of liquid water in the form of lakes or oceans.

This apparent contradiction, between the icehouse that one would expect based upon stellar evolution models and the geologic evidence for copious amounts of liquid water, has become known as the 'faint young sun paradox.'


See also: http://grazian-archive.com/quantavolution/vol_03/chaos_creation_03.htm (collapsing tests of time)

Electrical Sun: http://www.electric-cosmos.org/sun.htm

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 31, 2012, 02:46:08 AM
BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT

During the period 1919 - 1923,  Professor Paul Alfred Biefeld outlined to his student, Thomas Townsend Brown, certain experiments which led to the discovery of the phenomenon now known as the Biefeld-Brown effect. Further, these experiments helped to define the inter-relationship of electrical and gravitational fields. This coupling effect parallels electricity and magnetism.

The original experiments concerned the behavior of a condenser when charged with electricity. The first startling result was that if placed in a free suspension with the poles horizontal, the condenser, when electrically charged, showed a forward thrust toward the positive pole !!! When the polarity was reversed, it caused a reversal of the direction of thrust.

The intensity or magnitude of the effect is determined by five known factors, namely:

1) The separation of the plates of the condenser - the closer the plates, the greater the effect.

2) The ability of the material between the plates to store electrical energy in the form of elastic stress. A measure of this ability is called the 'K' factor of the material. The higher the 'K', the greater the Biefeld-Brown effect.

3) The area of the condenser plates - the greater area giving the greater effect.

4) The voltage difference between the plates - the greater the voltage, the greater the effect.

5) The mass of the material between the plates - the greater the mass, the greater the effect.

http://montalk.net/science/84/the-biefeld-brown-effect

Dr. Brown experimented with umbrella and disk shaped gravitators. The umbrella devices consisted of two electrodes, one positive and one negative, with one electrode shaped like a large bowl and the other like a smaller bowl. Overall, this formed an open-air capacitor but with asymmetric electrodes, whose asymmetric electric fields generated unbalanced gravitational divergences and increased acceleration. The disk gravitators, described earlier, did the same except one electrode formed the leading edge of the disk, while the other electrode formed the body and trailing edge.

Nevertheless, for those wishing to debunk the Biefeld-Brown effect by attributing it entirely to ion wind, it must be pointed out that closed capacitors, the cellular gravitators, also self-accelerate without any ion wind effects. Electrogravity arises primarily from the gravitational component of the electric field, harnessed for propulsion via the asymmetrical gravitational field of electric dipoles. Brown also experimented with disk gravitators in vacuum chambers and observed them accelerating nearly as quickly as when run at atmospheric pressure.

The Biefeld-Brown effect demonstrates a link between electricity and gravity.


Dr. Townsend Brown patents:

http://www.rexresearch.com/gravitor/gravitor.htm



Video of the Biefeld-Brown effect:

(at least 27KV used in the experiment)


High voltage Biefeld-Brown experiments (very well documented):

http://jnaudin.free.fr/lifters/main.htm


Dr. Townsend Brown and his Gravitor:

(http://danielkingma.com/sites/danielkingma.com/files/Brown%20Disc.jpg)



http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Thomas_Townsend_Brown

http://www.doctorkoontz.com/Antigravity/Townsend_Brown/page90.html



Dr. Francis Nipher experiments of 1917: electricity can alter gravitation attraction -

http://www.rexresearch.com/nipher/nipher1.htm


Dr. Charles Brush experiments of 1922: weight depends on the atomic structure of the substance -

http://www.rexresearch.com/brush/brush.htm

Dr. Charles Brush, in a series of reports in the PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY around 1922 found, in some well-thought-out experiments, that weight was not only proportional to mass, but was affected by the atomic structure of the substances. For example, he found that for a given unit of mass and shape, BISMUTH falls faster than zinc or aluminum.


Furthermore, the Biefeld-Brown effect shows immediately that the Earth is absolutely stationary, that is, it does not rotate around its own axis. The antigravitational effect means that gravity is annulled for the duration of the experiments: we are told that the Earth orbits through space, around the Sun, at a speed of approximately 29 km/s, since an experiment lasts for at least 5 seconds, the metal object subjected to the Biefeld-Brown effect should smash itself against one of the four walls of the laboratory in no time at all (29 x 5 = 145 km).


Another experiment which could be used to prove the Earth is stationary involves a vertically fired projectile (for the Biefeld-Brown effect, the Coriolis force formula does not apply of course; gravity is annulled completely, as can be seen from the videos above and the description of the effect itself):

(http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/7656/formula3a.jpg)


T = period of rotation, 24h x 3600x/h = 86,400 s

g = 32 ft/s^2

t = time spent in the air (the projectile)

cos@ (cosine of latitude of experiment)


To understand the physics behind the Biefeld-Brown effect:

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr01.htm

http://www.alliancesforhumanity.com/matter/matter.htm

And especially:

http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_09_4_phillips.pdf


Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 10, 2012, 01:52:55 AM
I feel it is of some relevance to the principles of Zeteticism and the ideals of our Society.

Preface to the Critique of Pure Reason:

I have, writes Kant, therefore found it necessary to deny knowledge, in order to make room for faith.


I. Kant (official chronology - or the writers who created the works attributed to him at the end of the 18th century, radical new chronology) is the father of anti-Zeteticism, anti-science, anti-reason, nihilism, and much more, please read the Ominous Parallels, chapters: The Totalitarian Universe, Ethics of Evil, Kant versus America, The Culture of Hatred, America Reverses Direction, Convulsion and Paralysis.


The following excerpts are from chapter 2, The Totalitarian Universe:

Kant places his primary emphasis on epistemological issues. His method of attack is to wage a campaign against the human mind. Man's mind, he holds, is unable to acquire any knowledge of reality.

In any process of cognition, according to Kant, whether it be sense experience or abstract thought, the mind automatically alters and distorts the evidence confronting it.

The world that men perceive, therefore--the world of orderly, spatiotemporal, material entities--is essentially a creation of man's consciousness. Reason cannot discover anything about reality; if it tries, it can only bog down in impenetrable contradictions. Logic is merely a subjective human device, devoid of reference to or basis in reality.



Christoph Pfister archive:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg998158#msg998158 (other works signed C. Pfister, including Matrix of Ancient History: http://www.dillum.ch/html/dillum_buecher_von_christoph_pfister.htm )
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 23, 2012, 09:51:15 AM
It is very easy to prove that the Earth is absolutely stationary; that is, it does not rotate around its own axis. Perhaps then the RE will be asking themselves the question: if the Earth is indeed stationary, what is its real shape?

Of course it would really help if the official faq would be replaced completely with the data I have amassed here; ISS/Atlantis do really orbit, as do the satellites, the sun rises and sets, the real sun-earth distance, the heavenly body which actually causes the solar eclipses, the northern/southern stellar circumpolar constellations/regular stellar paths and the REAL FE map, and much more.


http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1143#p34382

The most complete, up-to-date demonstration of the fact that the trajectories of the clouds are absolutely incompatible with an Earth that would rotate around its own axis; it includes the data from the freelists archive on the angular momentum, boundary layer and much more.


http://www.realityreviewed.com/Restoring%20forces.htm

Restoring Forces Paradox by Dr. Neville Jones, one of the most superb arguments for the fact that the Earth is actually stationary.


From Cosmos without Gravitation:

The ingredients of the air—oxygen, nitrogen, argon and other gases—though not in a compound but in a mixture, are found in equal proportions at various levels of the atmosphere despite great differences in specific weights. The explanation accepted in science is this: “Swift winds keep the gases thoroughly mixed, so that except for water-vapor the composition of the atmosphere is the same throughout the troposphere to a high degree of approximation.”

This explanation cannot be true. If it were true, then the moment the wind subsides, the nitrogen should stream upward, and the oxygen should drop, preceded by the argon. If winds are caused by a difference in weight between warm and cold air, the difference in weight between heavy gases high in the atmosphere and light gases at the lower levels should create storms, which would subside only after they had carried each gas to its natural place in accordance with its gravity or specific weight. But nothing of the kind happens.

When some aviators expressed the belief that “pockets of noxious gas” are in the air, the scientists replied:

“There are no ‘pockets of noxious gas.’ No single gas, and no other likely mixture of gases, has, at ordinary temperatures and pressures, the same density as atmospheric air. Therefore, a pocket of foreign gas in that atmosphere would almost certainly either bob up like a balloon, or sink like a stone in water.”

Why, then, do not the atmospheric gases separate and stay apart in accordance with the specific gravities?


The atmospheric pressure does not obey an attractive gravitational law:

SEMIDIURNAL CHANGES IN BAROMETRIC PRESSURE

The weight of the atmosphere is constantly changing as the changing barometric pressure indicates. Low pressure areas are not necessarily encircled by high pressure belts. The semidiurnal changes in barometric pressure are not explainable by the mechanistic principles of gravitation and the heat effect of solar radiation. The cause of these variations is unknown.

“It has been known now for two and a half centuries, that there are more or less daily variations in the height of the barometer, culminating in two maxima and two minima during the course of 24 hours. The same observation has been made and puzzled over at every station at which pressure records were kept and studied, but without success in finding for it the complete physical explanation. In speaking of the diurnal and semidiurnal variations of the barometer, Lord Rayleigh says: ‘The relative magnitude of the latter [semidiurnal variations], as observed at most parts of the earth’s surface, is still a mystery, all the attempted explanations being illusory.’”

One maximum is at 10 a.m., the other at 10 p.m.; the two minima are at 4 a.m. and 4 p.m. The heating effect of the sun can explain neither the time when the maxima appear nor the time of the minima of these semidiurnal variations. If the pressure becomes lower without the air becoming lighter through a lateral expansion due to heat, this must mean that the same mass of air gravitates with changing force at different hours.

The lowest pressure is near the equator, in the belt of the doldrums. Yet the troposphere is highest at the equator, being on the average about 18 km. high there; it is lower in the moderate latitudes, and only 6 km. high above the ground at the poles.


Foucault's Pendulum explained:

http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?p=11374#p11374


Geocentric Coriolis force:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg953747#msg953747


G.B. Airy experiment, stellar parallax/aberration:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1231580#msg1231580

"Airy's failure" (Reference - Proc. Roy. Soc. London v 20 p 35). Telescopes have to be very slightly tilted to get the starlight going down the axis of the tube because of the earth's "speed around the sun". Airy filled a telescope with water that greatly slowed down the speed of the light inside the telescope and found that he did not have to change the angle of the telescope. This showed that the starlight was already coming in at the original measured angle so that no change was needed. This demonstrated that it was the stars moving relative to a stationary earth and not the fast orbiting earth moving relative to the comparatively stationary stars. If it was the telescope moving he would have had to change the angle.

(Imagine the telescope like a tube, sloped so that the light from one star hits the bottom of the tube. Even if the starlight is slowed down inside the tube (using water), it will still hit the bottom of the tube because its direction is already determined. If it were the tube that was moving, slowing down the starlight would mean that the angle of the tube would have to change for the light to hit the bottom of the tube.)


Airy's experiment proved that the starlight was already coming into the earth at an angle, being carried along by the rotating aether.



Ring Laser Gyroscopes and the Telluric Currents/Ether:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1255899#msg1255899





Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 09, 2012, 05:31:39 AM
Cosmic Serpent by Jeremy Narby (best work on genetics, molecular biology and the fact that life could not have appeared by chance in a "prebiotic soup").

http://www.indybay.org/uploads/2011/04/17/cosmicserp.pdf (http://www.indybay.org/uploads/2011/04/17/cosmicserp.pdf)

Robert Wesson (Beyond Natural Selection): "By Mayr's calculation, in a rapidly evolving line an organ may enlarge about 1 to 10 percent per million years, but organs of the whale-in-becoming must have grown ten times more rapidly over 10 million years. Perhaps 300 generations are required for a gene substitution. Moreover, mutations need to occur many times, even with considerable advantage, in order to have a good chance of becoming fixed.
Considering the length of whale generations, the rarity with which the needed mutations are likely to appear, and the multitude of mutations needed to convert a land mammal into a whale, it is easy to conclude that gradualist natural selection of random variations cannot account for this animal" (p. 52). Wesson’s book is a catalogue of biological improbabilities—-from bats' hypersophisticated echolocation system to the electric organs of fish—and of the gaping holes in the fossil record.

"By what devices the genes direct the formation of patterns of neurons that constitute innate behavioral patterns is entirely enigmatic. Yet not only do animals respond appropriately to manifold needs; they often do so in ways that would seem to require something like forethought" (p. 68). R. Wesson adds: "An instinct of any complexity, linking a sequence of perceptions and actions, must involve a very large number of connections within the brain or principal ganglia of the animal. If it is comparable to a computer program, it must have the equivalent of thousands of lines. In such a program, not merely would chance of improvement by accidental change be tiny at best. It is problematic how the program can be maintained without degradation over a long period despite the occurrence from time to time of errors by replication" (p. 81).


Antoine Tremolilre (La vie plus tetue que les etoiles): "We know that more than 90% of the changes affecting a letter in a word of the genetic message lead to disastrous results; proteins are no longer synthesized correctly, the message loses its entire meaning and this leads purely and simply to the cell’s death. Given that mutations are so frequently highly unfavourable, and even deadly, how can beneficial evolution be attained?" (p. 43).


M. Frank-Kamenetskii (Unraveling DNA): "It is clear, therefore, that you need a drastic refitting of the whole of your machine to make the car into a plane. The same is true for a protein. In trying to turn one enzyme into another, point mutations alone would not do the trick. What you need is a substantial change in the amino acid sequence. In this situation, rather than being helpful, selection is a major hindrance. One could think, for instance, that by consistently changing amino acids one by one, it will eventually prove possible to change the entire sequence substantially and thus the enzyme's spatial structure. These minor changes, however, are bound to result eventually in a situation in which the enzyme has ceased to perform its previous function but it has not yet begun its 'new duties.' It is at this point that it will be destroyed—together with the organism carrying it" (p. 76).

In the early 1980s, researchers discovered that certain RNA molecules, called "ribozymes,"
could cut themselves up and stick themselves back together again, acting as their own
catalysts. This led to the following speculation: If RNA is also an enzyme, it could perhaps
replicate itself without the help of proteins. Scientists went on to formulate the theory of the "RNA world," according to which the first organisms were RNA molecules that learned to synthesize proteins, facilitating their replication, and that surrounded themselves with lipids to form a cellular membrane; these RNA-based organisms then evolved into organisms with a genetic memory made of DNA, which is more stable chemically. However, this theory is not only irrefutable, it leaves many questions unsolved. Thus, to make RNA, one must have nucleotides, and for the moment, no one has ever seen nucleotides take shape by chance and line up to form RNA. As microbiologist JamesShapiro writes, the "experiments conducted up until now have shown no tendency for a plausible prebiotic soup to build bricks of RNA. One would have liked to discover ribozymes capable of doing so, but this has not been the case. And even if one were to discover any, this would still not resolve the fundamental question: where did the first RNA molecule come from?". He adds: "After ten years of relentless research, the most common and remarkable property of ribozymes has been found to be the capacity to demolish other molecules of nucleic acid. It is difficult to imagine a less adapted activity than that in a prebiotic soup where the first colony of RNA would have had to struggle to make their home".


The contents of this famous soup are problematic. In 1952. Stanley Miller and Harold Urey
did an experiment that was to become famous; they bombarded a test tube containing water, hydrogen, ammonia, and methane with electricity, supposedly imitating the atmosphere of the primitive earth with its permanent lightning storms; after a week, they had produced 2 of the 20 amino acids that nature uses in the construction of proteins. This experiment was long cited as proof that life could emerge from an inorganic soup. However, in the 1980s, geologists realized that an atmosphere of methane and ammoniac would rapidly have been destroyed by sunlight and that our planet’s primitive atmosphere most probably contained nitrogen, carbon dioxide, water vapor, and traces of hydrogen. When one bombards the latter with electricity, one does not obtain biomolecules. So the prebiotic soup is increasingly considered to be a "myth".

Microbiologist James Shapiro writes: "In fact, there are no detailed Darwinian accounts for the evolution of any fundamental biochemical or cellular system, only a variety of wishful speculations. It is remarkable that Darwinism is accepted as a satisfactory explanation for such a vast subject—evolution—with so little rigorous examination of how well its basic theses work in illuminating specific instances of biological adaptation or diversity."

During the 1980s, it became possible to determine the exact sequence of amino acids in given proteins. This revealed a new level of complexity in living beings. A single nicotinic receptor, forming a highly specific lock coupled to an equally selective channel, is made of five
juxtaposed protein chains that contain a total of 2,500 amino acids lined up in the right order. Despite the improbability of the chance emergence of such a structure, even nematodes, which are among the most simple multicellular invertebrates, have nicotinic receptors.
Confronted by this kind of complexity, some researchers no longer content themselves with the usual explanation. Robert Wesson writes in his book Beyond natural selection: "No simple theory can cope with the enormous complexity revealed by modern genetics."
Other researchers have pointed out the improbability of the mechanism that is supposed to be the source of variation — namely, the accumulation of errors in the genetic text. It seems
obvious that "a message would quickly lose all meaning if its contents changed continuously in an anarchic fashion." How, then, could such a process lead to the prodigies of the natural
world, of which we are a part?


Another fundamental problem contradicts the theory of chance-driven natural selection.
According to the theory, species should evolve slowly and gradually, since evolution is caused by the accumulation and selection of random errors in the genetic text. However, the fossil record reveals a completely different scenario. J. Madeleine Nash writes in her review of recent research in paleontology: "Until about 600 million years ago, there were no organisms more complex than bacteria, multicelled algae and single-celled plankton.... Then, 543 million years ago, in the early Cambrian, within the span of no more than 10 million years, creatures with teeth and tentacles and claws and jaws materialized with the suddenness of apparitions. In a burst of creativity like nothing before or since, nature appears to have sketched out the blueprints for virtually the whole of the animal kingdom.
Since 1987, discoveries of major fossil beds in Greenland, in China, in Siberia, and now in Namibia have shown that the period of biological innovation occurred at virtually the same instant in geological time all around the world.
Throughout the fossil record, species seem to appear suddenly, fully formed and equipped with all sorts of specialized organs, then remain stable for millions of years. For instance, there is no intermediate form between the terrestrial ancestor of the whale and the first fossils of this marine mammal. Like their current descendants, the latter have nostrils situated atop their heads, a modified respiratory system, new organs like a dorsal fin, and nipples surrounded by a cap to keep out seawater and equipped with a pump for underwater suckling. The whale represents the rule, rather than the exception. According to biologist Ernst Mayr, an authority on the matter of evolution, there is "no clear evidence for any change of a species into a different genus or for the gradual origin of an evolutionary novelty."


In the middle of the 1990s, biologists sequenced the first complete genomes of free-living
organisms. So far, the smallest known bacterial genome contains 580,000 DNA letters. This
is an enormous amount of information, comparable to the contents of a small telephone
directory. When one considers that bacteria are the smallest units of life as we know it, it
becomes even more difficult to understand how the first bacterium could have taken form
spontaneously in a lifeless, chemical soup. How can a small telephone directory of information
emerge from random processes?
The genomes of more complex organisms are even more daunting in size. Baker’s yeast is a
unicellular organism that contains 12 million DNA letters; the genome of nematodes, which are rather simple multicellular organisms, contains 100 million DNA letters. Mouse genomes, like human genomes, contain approximately 3 billion DNA letters.


The book also includes several flat earth maps, such as this one:

(http://www.oneism.org/images/createzoom.jpg)

(http://www.oneism.org/images/INCA_TREE_OF_LIFE.jpg)

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 25, 2012, 01:46:37 AM
GYRO DROP EXPERIMENT - inexistence of attractive gravity, UA acceleration

http://www.depalma.pair.com/gyrodrop.html (http://www.depalma.pair.com/gyrodrop.html)

In this experiment a fully enclosed, electrically driven gyroscope is released to fall freely under the influence of gravity. The elapsed time taken to fall a measured distance of 10.617 feet was measured, with the rotor stopped and also with the rotor spinning at approximately 15,000 RPM.

Data was gathered on a Chronometrics Digital Elapsed Dime Clock measuring 1/10,000 second, actuated by two phototransistor sensors placed in the paths of two light beams which were consecutively interrupted by the edge of the casing of the falling gyroscope.

The gyroscope, of total weight 7.23 lbs (rotor weight 4.75 lbs, case weight 2.48 lbs) was released to fall along its axis. Electrical leads supplying power to the 41/4" diameter rotor were disconnected just prior to release.


Conclusion: a fully encased, spinning gyroscope drops faster than the identical gyroscope non-spinning, when released to fall along its axis.



A.N. KOZYREV GYROSCOPE EXPERIMENTS - inexistence of attractive gravity, UA acceleration

According to the theory developed by N.A.Kozyrev, the greatest astrophysicist of the former Soviet Union, time and rotation are closely interconnected.

In order to verify his theory, N.A.Kozyrev conducted a series of experiments with spinning gyroscopes. The goal of these experiments was to make a measurement of the forces arising while the gyroscope was spinning.

N.A.Kozyrev detected that the weight of the spinning gyroscope changes slightly depending on the angular velocity and the direction of rotation. The effect he discovered was not large, but the nature of the arising forces could not be explained by existing theories. N.A.Kozyrev explained the observed effect as being the manifestation of some "physical properties of time".

The results were published in the work The Pendulum of the Universe.

Kozyrev torsion fields: http://www.soulsofdistortion.nl/tors1a.html (http://www.soulsofdistortion.nl/tors1a.html)


Aether, time, Kozyrev torsion fields:

http://web.archive.org/web/20081010174600/http://divinecosmos.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=334&Itemid=30 (http://web.archive.org/web/20081010174600/http://divinecosmos.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=334&Itemid=30)


More information on the existence of telluric currents (ether), here:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1255899.html#msg1255899 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1255899.html#msg1255899) (includes Dr. Bruce DePalma spinning ball experiment)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 11, 2012, 02:28:34 AM
One of the very best proofs that the surface of the Earth is actually flat:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x42v7ip

Between 38:28 and 38:35, no curvature whatsoever across the strait of Gibraltar (on a round earth, the curvature would measure some 3.35 meters, with a visual obstacle of some 5 meters on the other side of the strait), no ascending slope, just a perfectly flat surface of the water.


From the same spot, we even have a photograph to go along with the video, zero curvature across a distance of 13 km:

(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/55/130948289_44854d63fa_b.jpg)


And of course there is the explosion of Tunguska, which was seen all the way from London...
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: 17 November on July 12, 2012, 11:22:50 AM
Hiroshima: Before and After

http://www.scribd.com/doc/78516104/Liberty-Forum (http://www.scribd.com/doc/78516104/Liberty-Forum)

During the period 2004-2006, on libertyforum.org (deleted from the internet), cactus/no name presented the most extraordinary facts pertaining to the fact that the "nuclear" explosion at Hiroshima was faked; I was able to save some of the pages.

This is good stuff.  Thanks for preserving it.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Lord Wilmore on July 12, 2012, 07:26:30 PM
Sandokhan, I am doing some research at the moment, and I was wondering if you would give me some of your time. What are your views of the Templars, and what role (if any) do you assign them within your revised historiography?
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 13, 2012, 02:09:08 AM
There are three secret societies at the present time which control all governments: the Jesuits, the worshippers of Akhenaton, and the descendants of Canaan.

The legend of the Templars has been invented to somehow demonstrate that there was some historical basis to these secret societies.

Read the Dating of the Nicaea Council and how we have been led to believe that this Council took place in the year 325 AD, when it could not have taken place at all before the year 876-877 AD.  The dating of the Council is crucial in D. Brown's The Da Vinci Code...

There was no Inquisition, no Galilei, no Copernicus, or Kepler; a falsified history has been constructed in order to make us believe in heliocentrism.

Is there something specific re: the Templars' history you wanted to know?
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Lord Wilmore on July 13, 2012, 10:08:16 AM
Not really, though I am doing a bit of reading on the subject. I was mostly just curious to know what you thought of them. My own views are very much in the formative stage; at this point I am just collecting information.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Ski on July 13, 2012, 05:11:38 PM
It is an interesting aside that the Templars received a large portion Supplinburg at the bequest of Lothair III of the Holy Roman Empire.

Lothair acquired the throne only after Henry "the Black", Duke of Bavaria switched sides in the dispute between Fredrik/Conrad  and Lothair III after the death of (heirless) Henry V of the Holy Roman Empire. Henry the Black received the betrothal of the daughter of Lothair III to a son as his price. Later, Henry's grandson through another child (Judith) became the Emperor -- Fredrick I, Barbarossa. Henry the Black and his progeny, of course, trace through the house of Welf-Este.

Lothair was instrumental in maintaining the papacy of Innocent II against Roger II of Sicily. Innocent was hand picked by his predecessor Honorius II who as pope had firtst officially recognized the Templar. Innocent entrenched the Templar movement with his Omne Datum Optimum, a papal bull giving the Knights an unusual array of powers and essentially making them an instrument of- and answer able only to-  the church.

So we again see the hand of Welf-Este through the history of both the Templar movement and the later Illuminati movement. And of course, the trenchhold of Bavaria is also the hot bed of early european globe making.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 14, 2012, 12:36:41 AM
There are authors, such as C. Knight and R. Lomas (The Hiram Key) who would have us believe that Christ and the apostles themselves were Templars. And they do not stop there: Akhenaton  was the first Templar.

Here is an unofficial biography of the Templars:

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/biggestsecret/biggestsecretbook/biggestsecret07.htm (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/biggestsecret/biggestsecretbook/biggestsecret07.htm)


http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/biggestsecret/biggestsecretbook/biggestsecret08.htm (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/biggestsecret/biggestsecretbook/biggestsecret08.htm)

In the section, Science of Manipulation, you will find that all major globuralists, in the official chronology, were Templars.



But, none of these things ever happened, this is what I am trying to demonstrate.

History: Fiction or Science? volume I: history is at most 1200 years old; each and every detail in the official chronology has been forged/falsified prior to 1500 AD.

http://books.google.ro/books?id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=history+science+or+fiction&hl=en&sa=X&ei=phwBUIL6LsHNhAeJzqD7Bw&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=history%20science%20or%20fiction&f=false (http://books.google.ro/books?id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=history+science+or+fiction&hl=en&sa=X&ei=phwBUIL6LsHNhAeJzqD7Bw&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=history%20science%20or%20fiction&f=false)



History: Fiction or Science? volume III: Almagest was written during the Renaissance, N. Copernic and his works invented at least 100 years later in time.

http://new-chrono-book.livejournal.com/2125.html (http://new-chrono-book.livejournal.com/2125.html)


The greatest of all British historians, Edwin Johnson, demonstrates how the official history of England has been falsified at least after 1530 AD; how the four Gospels and the Pauline epistles were written during the Renaissance:

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm (http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm)


Christoph Pfister demonstrates that before 1700 AD there was no human presence in Switzerland, how the official history of that country has been falsified, how all the cathedrals and castles were actually built during the 18TH century:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg998158.html#msg998158 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg998158.html#msg998158)



The complete demonstration that Pompeii and Herculaneum were destroyed by the volcano Vesuvius at least after 1700 AD:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1243234.html#msg1243234 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1243234.html#msg1243234)

And the follow-up:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1243598.html#msg1243598 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1243598.html#msg1243598)


And, of course, the Council of Nicaea could not have taken place before the year 876-877 AD:

Despite the fact that no original Easter edicts of the Nicaean council remain, it is said that the Council issued its edicts in the alleged year 325 AD, when the the actual methods of calculating the Easter dates had already been well developed, and the Easter date table that had been used for centuries had been compiled. The latter is quite natural, since every 532 years, the Christian Easter cycle repeats from the very start the Paschalian tables for each year of 532 were in existence.



THE NICAEAN COUNCIL OF 325 AD CONTRADICTS THE PASCHALIA

There is a traditional consensual opinion according to which the Paschalia church calendar was canonized during the first Ecumenical Council in Nicaea. Nobody seem to be aware, however, that all of this blatantly contradicts Scaliger's dating of the Nicaean council 325 AD, and the epoch of the IV century AD in general.

The matter here is that the Paschalia consists of a number of calendarian and astronomical tables. The time of their compilation can be calculated from their contents qv below. In other words, the Paschalia can be dated by its astronomical contents. We see that the resulting dating of the Paschalia contradicts the dating of the Nicaean Council as the IV century AD.

The contradiction had been discovered a long time ago, and it was mentioned in the beginning of the XX century by Easter table specialists. However, to this day, there has been no comprehensive explanation of this phenomenon given.

Let us turn to the canonical mediaeval ecclesial tractate - Matthew Vlastar's Collection of Rules Devised by Holy Fathers, or The Alphabet Syntagma. This rather voluminous book represents the rendition of the rules formulated by the Ecclesial and local Councils of the Orthodox Church.

Matthew Vlastar is considered to have been a Holy Hierarch from Thessalonica, and written his tractate in the XIV century. Today's copies are of a much later date, of course. A large part of Vlastar?s Collection of Rules Devised by Holy Fathers contains the rules for celebrating Easter. Among other things, it says the following:

The Easter Rules makes the two following restrictions: it should not be celebrated together with the Judaists, and it can only be celebrated after the spring equinox. Two more had to be added later, namely: celebrate after the first full moon after the equinox, but not any day it should be celebrated on the first Sunday after the equinox. All of these restrictions, except for the last one, are still valid (in times of Matthew Vlastar  the XIV century  Auth.), although nowadays we often celebrate on the Sunday that comes later. Namely, we always count two days after the Lawful Easter (that is, the Passover, or the full moon Auth.) and end up with the subsequent Sunday. This didn't happen out of ignorance or lack of skill on the part of the Elders, but due to lunar motion.

Let us emphasize that the quoted Collection of Rules Devised by Holy Fathers is a canonical mediaeval clerical volume, which gives it all the more authority, since we know that up until the XVII century, the Orthodox Church was very meticulous about the immutability of canonical literature and kept the texts exactly the way they were; with any alteration a complicated and widely discussed issue that would not have passed unnoticed.

This means that we can hope for Matthew Vlastar's text to give us a precise enough account of the opinions held by the Constantinople scientists of the XIV century, in regard to the Easter issue. As we can see, Matthew Vlastar tells us the following:

In addition to the two Apostolic Easter rules, namely:

1) Not celebrating Easter together with the Judaists.

2) Only celebrating Easter after the spring equinox.

The Elders of the Council that introduced the Paschalia added two more rules for certainty, since the previous two do not define Easter day explicitly enough:

3) Only celebrating Easter after the first full moon in a given spring. That is, after the Passover that is often called Lawful Easter in Christian clerical literature that is, Easter celebrated in accordance with the Law of Moses or, alternatively, that of the 14th Moon.

4) Easter cannot be celebrated on any weekday; the celebration is to occur on the first Sunday following this full moon, or the Passover.


THE FOURTH RULE BROKEN

The first three rules of four were still quite valid in the XIV century, according to Vlastar, whereas the 4th rule of Easter Sunday being the first Sunday after the full moon was already broken.

Furthermore, Matthew Vlastar gives a perfectly valid astronomical explanation of why the rule was broken. The reason is that the Circle for Moon (Methon's Cycle) isn?t completely precise. There is a very slow shift of real full moon dates in relation to the ones stated by the Circle for Moon that the Elders of the Council may have been unaware of. However, in the age of Matthew Vlastar, knowledge of the shift already existed. Vlastar was aware of it and gave its correct value about 24 hours in 300 years.

This is why no less than two days should pass between the full moon and Easter (according to Vlastar, and applicable to his age). The matter is that the calculations of the Christian Easter are based on the calendar with its Circle for Moon values, as opposed to real full moon dates given by astronomy.

When, over the passage of time, a two-day discrepancy between the Paschalian Circle for Moon and the real full moon schedule had evolved, this could not fail to impact the distance between the astronomical spring equinox and Easter Sunday. If the previous distance equalled zero or more (so that Easter could not come before the full moon), it became equalling two or moreso that the Easter could not come earlier than two days after the full moon.

However, most often the amount of days separating the full moon and Easter Sunday, exceeded two, anyway, since the rules have it so that one had to wait for the Easter's advent from the vernal full moon and until the closest Sunday, that is, about three days (half a week) in average, and more than two days in most cases.

So the two-day gap that had accumulated by the age of Vlastar did not always manifest, and no rules were broken in the years when several days had to pass between the full moon and Easter.

However, in certain years, when the distance proved less than two days, the 4th Easter rule was broken, namely, Easter Sunday fell on the second Sunday after the vernal full moon. For example, if the Passover falls on a Saturday, Easter has to be celebrated the next day, on Sunday.


Thus, we know a lot, almost everything, about the Paschalia. So, why the astronomical context of the Paschalia contradicts Scaliger's dating (alleged 325 AD) of the Nicaean Council where the Paschalia was canonized?

This contradiction can easily be seen from the roughest of calculations.

1) The difference between the Paschalian full moons and the real ones grows at the rate of one day in 300 years.

2) A two-day difference had accumulated by the time of Vlastar, which is roughly dated 1330 AD.

3) Ergo, the Paschalia was compiled somewhere around 730 AD, since

1330 - (300 x 2) = 730.

It is understood that the Paschalia could only be canonized by the Council sometime later. But this fails to correspond to Scaliger's dating of its canonization as 325 AD in any way at all!

Let us emphasize, that Matthew Vlastar himself, doesn't see any contradiction here, since he is apparently unaware of the Nicaean Council's dating as the alleged year 325 AD. A natural hypothesis: this traditional dating was introduced much later than Vlastar's age. Most probably, it was first calculated in Scaliger's time.


The conclusion we came to:

FIRST STATEMENT:

The Council that introduced the Paschalia according to the modern tradition as well as the mediaeval one, was the Nicaean Council  could not have taken place before 784 AD, since this was the first year when the calendar date for the Christian Easter stopped coinciding with the Passover full moon due to slow astronomical shifts of lunar phases.

The last such coincidence occurred in 784 AD, and after that year, the dates of Easter and Passover drifted apart forever. This means the Nicaean Council could not have possibly canonized the Paschalia in IV AD, when the calendar Easter Sunday would coincide with the Passover eight (!) times ? in 316, 319, 323, 343, 347, 367, 374, and 394 AD, and would even precede it by two days five (!) times, which is directly forbidden by the fourth Easter rule, that is, in 306 and 326 (allegedly already a year after the Nicaean Council), as well as the years 346, 350, and 370.

Thus, if we're to follow the consensual chronological version, we'll have to consider the first Easter celebrations after the Nicaean Council to blatantly contradict three of the four rules that the Council decreed specifically for this feast! The rules allegedly become broken the very next year after the Council decrees them, yet start to be followed zealously and in full detail five centuries (!) after that.

Let us note that J.J. Scaliger could not have noticed this obvious nonsense during his compilation of the consensual ancient chronology, since computing true full moon dates for the distant past had not been a solved problem in his epoch.

A satisfactory coincidence of calendarian Passover full moons with the astronomical ones had only existed between 700 AD and 1000 AD (by which we mean their occurrence within the range of 24 hours from each other). Prior to that, the calendarian full moons have always taken place after the Passover ones, and after 1000 AD, the opposite started to happen. The beginning of the 13th Great Indiction (877 AD) falls on the period of ideal coincidence of Passover and astronomical full moons.

This means the Paschalia could only have been compiled in the period between the IX and XI centuries AD.

Propter hoc, the dating of the Nicaean Council (as the Council that had introduced the Paschalia) is only possible, within the timeframe of the VII-XI centuries, the most probable one being the epoch of the X-XI centuries, after the year 877 AD.

SUMMING UP THE DATINGS OF THE NICAEAN COUNCIL

The Paschalia could have been compiled in the following timeframe:

- not any earlier than 784 AD by the actual definition of Easter;
- not any earlier than 700 AD by the coincidence of Paschalian and astronomical full moons;
- not any earlier than 700 AD by the Palm of Damascenus;
- not any earlier than 743 AD according to Matthew Vlastar;

Hence, the Paschalia was first compiled earliest around the second half of the VIII century AD. The Paschalia was canonized at the Nicaean Council that took place in the XI-XIV centuries. The Paschalia might well have contained certain astronomical concepts of the VII-XI centuries that had already been a part of the ecclesial tradition by that time.


The entire file here:
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,52083.0.html (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,52083.0.html)

That is why the impressive historical facts posted by ski are just fabrications invented during the last 250 years.


The so-called fortresses attributed to the Templars, Tartos, Ruad, Knights Hall in Acre, were actually built at the end of the 18TH century...

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1b/SiegeOfAcre1291.jpg/431px-SiegeOfAcre1291.jpg)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 16, 2012, 01:38:43 AM
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=52077.msg1277205#msg1277205 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=52077.msg1277205#msg1277205)

The axial precession thread can be addressed only by using the results from the new radical chronology.


A summary of the best work done for the new chronology of history:

http://de.geschichte-chronologie.de/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=83:chronological-revolution-part-1&catid=2:2008-11-13-21-58-51&Itemid=90

http://de.geschichte-chronologie.de/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=85:chronological-revolution-part-3&catid=2:2008-11-13-21-58-51&Itemid=90


Pantheon, constructed during the Rennaisance:

http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dillum.ch%2Fhtml%2Fpantheon_rom_chronologie.htm (http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dillum.ch%2Fhtml%2Fpantheon_rom_chronologie.htm)


(https://s24.postimg.org/5prv059ud/tizian2.jpg)

(https://s10.postimg.org/womppuddl/tizian.jpg)

Abbildung 11: Italienische oder pompejanische Renaissance:
Tizian: Liegende Kurtisane (oben) und liegende Mänade aus
Pompeji (unten)
Abbildung der Mänade aus: Pietro Giovanni Guzzo: Pompei, Ercolano, Stabiae, Oplontis;
Napoli 2003, 75

Figure 11: Italian Renaissance and Pompeian:
Titian: Horizontal courtesan (top) and from lying maenad
Pompeii (below)
Figure out the maenad: Pietro Giovanni Guzzo: Pompei, Ercolano, Stabia, Oplontis;
Napoli 2003, 75

The well-known painting by Titian copied perfectly at Pompeii...



You might never believe again in the legend of Napoleon Bonaparte...

Historic Doubts Relative to Napoleon Buonaparte de R. Whately

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Historic_Doubts_Relative_to_Napoleon_Buonaparte (http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Historic_Doubts_Relative_to_Napoleon_Buonaparte)


http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dillum.ch%2Fhtml%2Fnapoleon_maystre_uebersetzung_09.htm (http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dillum.ch%2Fhtml%2Fnapoleon_maystre_uebersetzung_09.htm) (the biography of Napoleon Bonaparte copied after the biography of Napoleon III)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 07, 2012, 01:09:39 AM
1939 - Tibetan Acoustic Levitation - Stationary Earth


(http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/antigravityworldgrid/images/antigravitywg106.gif)


Tibetan Monks levitate stones by using an acoustic levitation technique with the aid of drums in this 1939 sketch by Swedish aircraft designer Henry Kjellson.




The following extracts are translations taken from the German article: 'We know from the priests of the far east that they were able to lift heavy boulders up high mountains with the help of groups of various sounds... the knowledge of the various vibrations in the audio range demonstrates to a scientist of physics that a vibrating and condensed sound field can nullify the power of gravitation. Swedish engineer Olaf Alexanderson wrote about this phenomenon in the publication.


The following report is based on observations which were made only 20 years ago in Tibet. I have this report from civil engineer and flight manager, Henry Kjelson, a friend of mine. He later on included this report in his book, The Lost Techniques. This is his report:


A Swedish doctor, Dr Jarl, a friend of Kjelsons, studied at Oxford. During those times he became friends with a young Tibetan student. A couple of years later, it was 1939, Dr Jarl made a journey to Egypt for the English Scientific Society. There he was seen by a messenger of his Tibetan friend, and urgently requested to come to Tibet to treat a high Lama.


After Dr Jarl got the leave he followed the messenger and arrived after a long journey by plane and Yak caravans, at the monastery, where the old Lama and his friend who was now holding a high position were now living.


Dr Jarl stayed there for some time, and because of his friendship with the Tibetans he learned a lot of things that other foreigners had no chance to hear about, or observe.


One day his friend took him to a place in the neighborhood of the monastery and showed him a sloping meadow which was surrounded in the north west by high cliffs. In one of the rock walls, at a height of about 250 meters was a big hole which looked like the entrance to a cave. In front of this hole there was a platform on which the monks were building a rock wall. The only access to this platform was from the top of the cliff and the monks lowered themselves down with the help of ropes.


In the middle of the meadow, about 250 meters from the cliff, was a polished slab of rock with a bowl like cavity in the centre. The bowl had a diameter of one meter and a depth of 15 centimeters. A block of stone was maneuvered into this cavity by Yak oxen. The block was one meter wide and one and one-half meters long. Then 19 musical instruments were set in an arc of 90 degrees at a distance of 63 meters from the stone slab. The radius of 63 meters was measured out accurately. The musical instruments consisted of 13 drums and six trumpets.


Eight drums had a cross-section of one meter, and a length of one and one-half meters. Four drums were medium size with a cross-section of 0.7 meter and a length of one meter. The only small drum had a cross-section of 0.2 meters and a length of 0.3 meters. All the trumpets were the same size. They had a length of 3.12 meters and an opening of 0.3 meters. The big drums and all the trumpets were fixed on mounts which could be adjusted with staffs in the direction of the slab of stone.
 
The big drums were made of 3mm thick sheet iron, and had a weight of 150 kg. They were built in five sections. All the drums were open at one end, while the other end had a bottom of metal, on which the monks beat with big leather clubs. Behind each instrument was a row of monks. The situation is demonstrated in the following diagram:


(http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/antigravityworldgrid/images/antigravitywg108.gif)




When the stone was in position the monk behind the small drum gave a signal to start the concert. The small drum had a very sharp sound, and could be heard even with the other instruments making a terrible din. All the monks were singing and chanting a prayer, slowly increasing the tempo of this unbelievable noise. During the first four minutes nothing happened, then as the speed of the drumming, and the noise, increased, the big stone block started to rock and sway, and suddenly it took off into the air with an increasing speed in the direction of the platform in front of the cave hole 250 meters high. After three minutes of ascent it landed on the platform.


Continuously they brought new blocks to the meadow, and the monks using this method, transported 5 to 6 blocks per hour on a parabolic flight track approximately 500 meters long and 250 meters high. From time to time a stone split, and the monks moved the split stones away. Quite an unbelievable task.


Dr Jarl knew about the hurling of the stones. Tibetan experts like Linaver, Spalding and Hue had spoken about it, but they had never seen it. So Dr Jarl was the first foreigner who had the opportunity to see this remarkable spectacle. Because he had the opinion in the beginning that he was the victim of mass-psychosis he made two films of the incident. The films showed exactly the same things that he had witnessed.


The English Society for which Dr Jarl was working confiscated the two films and declared them classified.




http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/antigravityworldgrid/ciencia_antigravityworldgrid08.htm (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/antigravityworldgrid/ciencia_antigravityworldgrid08.htm)






Until now, no one has even attempted to explain this carefully documented levitation of the block of stone (the author the article, B. Cathie, does not seem to understand the fact, that during the levitation itself, the block was not subject to any gravitational force, and therefore had the Earth been orbiting the Sun at a speed of 107,000 km/hr or some 29 km/s, it would have disappared instantly from the sight of the monks and the witnesses, not to mention the speed of the rotating Earth).




63.5 meters distance = 100 sacred cubits (1 sc = 0.6356 meters)


1 sacred inch = 0.02542 m = 2,542 cm




The sacred cubit is designated in the form of a horseshoe projection, known as the "Boss" on the face of the Granite Leaf in the Ante-Chamber of the Pyramid. By application of this unit of measurement it was discovered to be subdivided into 25 equal parts known now as: Pyramid inches.




180 monks - OM chanting - OM frequency = 136.1 Hz


6 trumpets = 53,4 Hz (length of each trumpet = 3.178 m = 6 sc)


8 drums = 106.6 Hz


4 drums = 160 Hz


1 drum = 534,3 Hz




Speed of sound = OM frequency x 2.5


Speed of sound/distance = frequency of the 6 trumpets


534.3 x 1 sc = speed of sound


Dimensions of the cavity resonator: 6 sacred inches height , 40 sacred inches diameter




Gizeh Pyramid


Distance from Campbell's chamber apex to top = 63.5 meters




It is obvious that the monks did not have at their disposal a trumpet with a length of 6.36 meters, that is why their doubled the first three frequencies, which should have measured 26.66 ,  53,4 ,  80 Hz respectively, to match the measurements of the heights of the chambers of the Gizeh Pyramid.






Matter has a sound aspect, and when a vibration is caused it generates an acoustical wave which travels through the air working with it concurrently and resulting in oscillations of particles in the air and this causes the intermolecular space of the air to rise in vibrations and causes the atoms to eventually work into the first state of the ether.




https://web.archive.org/web/20141027125332/http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_09_4_phillips.pdf (for a complete description of the atom - and how the concepts of quarks, antimatter, higgs boson/field were simply copied from the pages of the Occult Chemistry)


http://www.alliancesforhumanity.com/matter/matter.htm (http://www.alliancesforhumanity.com/matter/matter.htm) (diagrams of the etheric atom)




http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr01.pdf (http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr01.pdf) (first chapter from Occult Chemistry, The Nature of Matter)




The design of the tibetan levitation is similar to that of the Ptah/Osiris/Horus staff:


(http://img713.imageshack.us/img713/9573/ankhwas.jpg)


(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/42/Relief_of_Ptah.jpg/397px-Relief_of_Ptah.jpg)




Tibetan levitation video:


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/07/01/scitech/main20076209.shtml (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/07/01/scitech/main20076209.shtml)

Denis Terwagne of the University of Liège in Belgium and John Bush, a mathematician at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology have come up with quite an interesting finding concerning a ceremonial instrument used by generations of Tibetans.




Sonic levitation - cymatics




# (http://#)]


#ws (http://#ws)]


# (http://#)]








Now, we can understand exactly how the blocks of granite from Baalbek were moved from one place to another.


(http://c21553.r53.cf1.rackcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/ballom.jpg)


Weight: 2000 tons




(http://ancientmystery.info/Baalbek-old-photo.jpg)


(http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/imagenes_misterios/baalbek_3.jpg)


(http://c21553.r53.cf1.rackcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/batrilit.jpg)


(http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/imagenes_misterios/baalbek_4.gif)


Three blocks, weight 1000 tons each


Seven blocks, each weighing 400 tons


Fourteen blocks, each weighing 300 tons




http://www.eridu.co.uk/Author/Mysteries_of_the_World/Baalbek/Baalbek6/baalbek6.html (http://www.eridu.co.uk/Author/Mysteries_of_the_World/Baalbek/Baalbek6/baalbek6.html)

http://www.eridu.co.uk/Author/Mysteries_of_the_World/Baalbek/Baalbek7/baalbek7.html (http://www.eridu.co.uk/Author/Mysteries_of_the_World/Baalbek/Baalbek7/baalbek7.html)

Here is a fascinating question. Why did the builders of the Trilithon struggle with 800-ton weights when it would have been far easier to split the giant monoliths into smaller blocks? Why not use 4 x 200-ton stones rather than a cumbersome 800-tonner?


According to my engineer-friends, it was very risky to use 800-ton blocks in the way seen at Baalbek. This is because any vertical defects running lengthwise through the stone might have led to a critical structural weakness. In contrast, a similar fault in a smaller block would not have affected the overall construction. Either the builder was incompetent and just plain lucky or he was competent and supremely confident in his materials.


 
 
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 25, 2012, 07:15:01 AM

Consider what a prism does:
http://www.educationalelectronicsusa.com/p/light-XV.htm (http://www.educationalelectronicsusa.com/p/light-XV.htm)
Quote
(http://www.educationalelectronicsusa.com/p/images/light-XVa.gif)
The splitting of a ray into its component colours is known as dispersion of light and the band of colours is known as a spectrum.



A ray of light DOES NOT split into any component colours.


This is another subject of science where the official dogma is trying to hide the truth.


https://web.archive.org/web/20140305015809/http://home.earthlink.net/~johnrpenner/Articles/GoetheColour.html

Newton surmised that when we see a colour spectrum emerge from a prism, it is due to 'the splitting of light into its component colours'.


What Newton failed to do, was to take a look through the prism. If you actually do this, the white areas do not split into a rainbow of colour as might be expected -- you only see colour at the edges of objects.


(https://web.archive.org/web/20130116025123im_/http://home.earthlink.net/~johnrpenner/Images/ColourProjection.jpeg)


The physicists explain it thus - the colourless light already contains the seven colours within itself - and when we make the light go through the prism, the prism really does no more than to fan out and separate what is already there in the light, - the seven colours, into which it is thus analyzed.

A look through the prism shows that we do not see the light in seven colours. The only place you can see any colour is at some edge or border-line.

If we let light pass through the space of the room, we get a white circle on a screen. Put a prism in the way, and the cylinder of light is diverted, (Figure IIc), but what appears is not the series of seven colours at all, only a reddish colour at the lower edge, passing over into
yellow, and at the upper edge a blue passing over into greenish shades. In the middle it stays white.

(https://web.archive.org/web/20150406161136im_/http://home.earthlink.net/~johnrpenner/Images/prisma-lightSpectrum-goethe.gif)




Also, we have been taught the wrong information about magnets, and the magnetic field.


The most thorough investigation of magnets belongs to H. Johnson, in the classic Spintronics:

Spintronics -The Secret World of Magnets (2006 by Howard Johnson) (http://www.scribd.com/doc/34317/Spintronics-The-Secret-World-of-Magnets-2006-by-Howard-Johnson#)


Here are the images obtained: each magnet has FOUR vortices of particles streaming in/out of it:

(https://s14.postimg.org/mr9pyuxjl/ma1.jpg)

(https://s23.postimg.org/vgqj6s13f/ma2.jpg)

(https://s13.postimg.org/ui6a29lgn/ma3.jpg)

(https://s16.postimg.org/f0mmdfznp/ma4.jpg)


The graphic drawn by E. Leedskalnin: two currents of particles (each current is actually made up of two vortices) make up a magnet's field, both running N - S and S - N:

http://www.electricitybook.com/magnetricity/hojo-leed.jpg (http://www.electricitybook.com/magnetricity/hojo-leed.jpg)



The particles that make up the magnetic field are subquarks (also called omegans, tachyons, preons).

A subquark (tachyon, anu, omegan) is made up of vortices which consist of bosons and antibosons (strings of bosons).

Ether (telluric currents) consists of double vortices of subquarks also; in a conductor, the atoms made up of subquarks will align themselves to let bosons pass from a subquark to another, that is, electricity.

An electric current brought to bear upon the Anu checks their proper motions, i.e., renders them slower; the Anu exposed to it arrange themselves in parallel lines, and in each line the heart-shaped depression receives the flow, which passes out through the apex into the depression of the next, and so on. The Anu always set themselves to the current. Fig. 4. In all the diagrams the heart-shaped body, exaggerated to show the depression caused by the inflow and the point caused by the outflow, is a single Anu.

Here is how a subquark looks like (emissive and receptive vortex):

(http://www.alliancesforhumanity.com/matter/matter_files/image007.jpg)

http://www.alliancesforhumanity.com/matter/matter.htm (http://www.alliancesforhumanity.com/matter/matter.htm) (string, subquark, quark, meson, proton vortex theory)


A boson consists of the smallest vortices of matter: they are called aparabindu and parabindu in vedic physics.

The Great Pyramid of Gizeh is nothing else than a huge scale representation of an emissive aparabindu; its missing apex is the parabindu.


Terrestrial gravity is represented by the dextrorotatory strings of receptive subquarks; antigravity comes into play once we can activate the laevorotatory strings of emissive subquarks (by torsion, sound, applying high electrical tension).



Living tissue (with the exception of some bacteria) contains only L-amino acids (laevorotatory-left handed); dead tissue only D-amino acids (dextrorotatory-right handed).

That is, living tissue receives the antigravitational supply of laevorotatory strings of subquarks.

Francis Crick, codiscoverer of the DNA structure, describes this strange characteristic of the molecules of living organisms:

    It has been well known for many years that for any particular molecule only one hand occurs in nature.  For example the amino acids one finds in proteins are always what are called the L or levo amino acids, and never the D or dextro amino acids.  Only one of the two mirror possibilities occurs in proteins.


Linus Pauling, Nobel laureate in chemistry:

        This is a very puzzling fact . . . . All the proteins that have been investigated, obtained from animals and from plants, from higher organisms and from very simple organisms bacteria, molds, even viruses are found to have been made of L-amino acids.

Ether waves of the dextrorotatory kind cause decay/decomposition/inertia/gravity; the laevorotatory waves provide antigravitational effects.

N. Kozyrev realized that gravity = time = dextrorotatory strings.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 16, 2012, 02:22:41 AM
There is a 100% accurate proof of the existence of ether; this in turn means that terrestrial gravity is due to the pressure of the telluric currents, thus providing another FET proof.


https://web.archive.org/web/20120128042636/http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_09_4_phillips.pdf (https://web.archive.org/web/20120128042636/http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_09_4_phillips.pdf)


A century-old claim by  two early leaders of  the Theosophical
Society to have used a form of ESP to observe subatomic particles is evaluat-
ed. Their observations  are  found  to be consistent with  facts  of  nuclear
physics and with the quark model of particle physics provided that their as-
sumption that they saw atoms is rejected.  Their account of the force binding
together the fundamental constituents of  matter is shown to agree with the
string model.  Their description of these basic particles bears striking similar-
ity to basic ideas of superstring theory.  The implication  of  this remarkable
correlation between ostensible paranormal  observations of subatomic parti-
cles and facts of nuclear and particle physics is that quarks are neither funda-
mental nor hadronic states of superstrings, as many physicists  currently as-
sume, but, instead, are composed of three subquark states of a superstring.


Given that the gaps in the periodic table represented by these anticipated un-
stable elements were known to Besant & Leadbeater, how can we be sure that
their descriptions were based upon real  objects and were not fabricated  ac-
cording  to their expectations?  Knowing which  groups of  the periodic  table
these  undiscovered  elements belong  to could  have  enabled them  to  deduce
what shape their atoms ought to have, having decided upon a rule to link atom-
ic shapes to groups. But the values of  the atomic weights of  these elements
were unknown to science at the time when Besant and Leadbeater published
observations of them and yet the "number weights" (defined shortly) that they
calculated for  these  elements  agree with  their  chemical atomic  weights  to
within one unit.
It is highly implausible that this measure of agreement could
have  come about by  chance in  every case. Furthermore, analysis (Phillips,
1994) of the particles reported to have been observed in the supposed atoms of
these elements undiscovered by science at the time reveals such a high degree
of agreement with the theory presented in this paper to explain micro-psi ob-
servations of atoms that neither deliberate fabrication nor hallucinations influ-
enced by knowledge of the gaps in the periodic table are realistic explanations
of these elements being examined before their scientific discovery.  These two
considerations strongly suggest that the descriptions by Besant and Leadbeat-
er of the supposed atoms of these elements must have been based upon physi-
cal objects, for there is simply no more plausible alternative that can explain
such a measure of agreement.



The fact that elements in the same subgroup of a group of the periodic table do not always
occur in the same subgroup of the micro-psi  version of this table is inconsis-
tent with what one would expect if  Besant and Leadbeater  had been merely
guided by their knowledge of chemistry to fabricate the correlation.  Secondly,
how could hallucinations, whose cause was located entirely inside their brains
and not outside amongst the trillions of atoms in all the chemicals they exam-
ined, generate UPA populations in MPAs that always turned out to be about 18
times the correct atomic weights of their elements?  This is true, remarkable,
even for elements like francium and astatine, whose atomic weights must have
been unknown to Besant and Leadbeater because science discovered them in,
respectively,  1939  and  1940,  about seven years  after the deaths of  the two
Theosophists.  How, if  MPAs  are not atoms, could they have anticipated  in
1908 - five years before scientists suspected the existence of isotopes - the
fact that an element such as neon could have more than one type of  atom, an
MPA, moreover, whose calculated number weight of 22.33 is consistent with
their having detected with micro-psi the neon-22 nuclide before the physicist
J. J. Thomson discovered it in  1913? One must turn to particle physics for an-
swers.



This paper has presented evidence (summarized in Table 3) of how facts of
nuclear and particle physics are consistent with purported psychic descriptions
of subatomic particles.  It is because Besant and Leadbeater finished their ob-
servations many years before pertinent scientific knowledge became available
that their work cannot be rejected  as fraudulent once this consistency is ac-
cepted.  Nor can critics plausible interpret their observations as precognitive
visions of future ideas and discoveries of  physics.  If  this had been the case, Besant and Leadbeater might reasonably have been expected to describe atoms
according to the Rutherford-Bohr model.
The nuclear model of the atom was
formulated by Rutherford in 1911, two years after they concluded their main
investigation of MPAs. Yet none of its features can be found in their publica-
tions. Instead of being atoms, as would be expected if micro-psi faculty were
actually precognition, MPAs are more exotic objects which, as Figure 5 shows,
have  compositions and  UPA  populations indicating  that  they consist of  the
constituent quarks and subquarks or two atomic nuclei of  an element.  This
makes  them more  akin  to what  nuclear physicists  call  "compound nuclei,"
which are formed in high-energy physics laboratories by the collision and brief
fusion  of  two  very  fast-moving  nuclei. Moreover, precognition would  not
have led Besant and Leadbeater to portray some chemical molecules such as
methane and benzene in a way that conflicts with chemistry.  If they had used
merely  precognition, they  would never have observed four MPAs for which
atomic theory can provide no corresponding element; they would have record-
ed only MPAs of known elements.

The fact that most of their descriptions of MPAs were  published  several  years  before  physicists even suspected  that atoms had nuclei excludes the possibility  of their fraudulent use of scientific knowledge about the composition of nuclei in terms of protons, neutrons and
mass numbers because no such information existed then, Chadwick discover-
ing  the  neutron  in  1932, twenty-four years  after  the first  edition  of  Occult
Chemistry  appeared.  No normal or alternative paranormal explanation  of the
correlation between modern physics and their ostensible 100-year old obser-
vations  of  subatomic  particles appears  to exist  other  than that  Besant  and
Leadbeater genuinely described aspects of the microscopic world by means of
ESP, albeit one disturbed by the act of paranormal observation.


The following sections of the article by Dr. Stephen Phillips provide a complete and correct model of the atom, up to boson/antiboson level:


Micro-psi Atoms
Quark Model
A Statistical Test
Quantum Chromodynamics
The String Model
Micro-psi Confirmation of the String Model
Structure of the UPA (Subquark)
Superstrings
UPA as Subquark State of Superstring


Detection of subquarks/preons:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1278981.html#msg1278981 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1278981.html#msg1278981)


Biography of Dr. Stephen Phillips:

DR STEPHEN PHILLIPS earned his Ph.D. at the University of California, where he also taught mathematics and physics. In 1979 one of his scientific papers was published, proposing a theory that unified particle interactions and predicted that quarks are not fundamental (as most physicists currently believe) but are composed of three more basic particles ('subquarks') which, may have since been detected at FermiLab, high-energy physics laboratory near Chicago in America. He has lectured on his research at the Cavendish Laboratory of Cambridge University.



In the Occult Chemistry (copied by Murray Gell-Mann, P. Dirac, and P. Higgs), A. Besant described correctly EACH AND EVERY element of the periodic table (including isotopes); moreover, the atom is shown to be made up of vortices (ether/subquarks/tachyons).

A 100% statistical proof of the correctness of the ether model (see also the graphs in the article of Dr. Phillips).



OCCULT CHEMISTRY TABLE OF CONTENTS:

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/ocindex.htm (http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/ocindex.htm)

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr01.htm (http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr01.htm)


(http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/fig003.gif)

Laevorotatory and dextrorotatory subquarks (tachyons/preons/omegans) - first state of ether E1


(http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/fig007.gif)

Second state of ether: E2 - QUARKS and other types of combinations



(http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/fig008.gif)

Third state of ether: E3 - MESONS and other types of combinations


(http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/fig009.gif)

Fourth state of ether: E4 - BARYONS and other types of combinations


(http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/fig010.gif)

Seven fundamental forms of the elements (subquark vortices)


(http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/fig001.gif)

HYDROGEN ATOM: 18 SUBQUARKS - 9 LAEVOROTATORY AND 9 DEXTROROTATORY subquarks

A proton is made up of NINE laevorotatory subquarks - an electron is actually comprised of NINE dextrorotatory subquarks (called now preons).

However, modern science has mistakenly named a SINGLE dextrorotatory subquark as an electron and has ascribed THE TOTAL charge of the NINE corresponding subquarks as the total negative charge of a single electron, thus confusing the whole matter.


TELLURIC CURRENTS are represented by double torsion waves of BOTH laevorotatory (antigravity) and dextrorotatory (terrestrial gravity) subquarks.

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 12, 2012, 12:15:36 AM
Egyptian Pteranodon

http://s8int.com/WordPress/tag/was-scepter-was-sceptre/ (http://s8int.com/WordPress/tag/was-scepter-was-sceptre/)

(http://s8int.com/images7/pteranodon-0.jpg)

(http://s8int.com/images7/pteranodon-1-small.jpg)

(http://s8int.com/images7/pteranodon-1-compare-small.jpg)

(http://s8int.com/images7/pteranodon-4-small.jpg)

(http://s8int.com/images7/pteranodon-4-compare-small.jpg)


A. Fomenko proved that the pharaohs did live during the Renaissance:

http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/freebooks/history/Zodiacs.html (http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/freebooks/history/Zodiacs.html)

Table of contents of the Mysteries of Egyptian Zodiacs:

(https://s3.postimg.org/u3ldppt9f/fom11.jpg)
(https://s21.postimg.org/ak6e76ccn/fom22.jpg)
(https://s1.postimg.org/5o85l1rzj/fom33.jpg)
(https://s4.postimg.org/ouhoj5ir1/fom44.jpg)

And as we saw earlier both Pompeii and Herculaneum were destroyed by the eruption of the volcano Vesuvius at least after 1700 AD.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 14, 2012, 02:02:03 AM
Pompeii, House of the Physician mosaic, Lexovisaurus depicted

http://s8int.com/phile/dinolit56.html (http://s8int.com/phile/dinolit56.html)

(http://s8int.com/images4/pompeii-2.jpg)(http://s8int.com/images4/pompeii-3.jpg)

Both of the images above are from the "Hunt" mosaic discovered in the House of the physician in Pompeii, Rome. When the images are discussed, it is within academia, not with the general public. The apology given for the oversized reptiles is that they are simply nile crocodiles. This is not the case.  The crocodiles on these Nile works were rendered realistically and accurately as shown in this rendering from the Nile Mosaic below:

(http://s8int.com/images4/nile-croc.jpg)

Note that in the first two images, and in the complete mural below a man is battling a reptile taller than himself with a shield and a spear. Compare the man, the dinosaur and the building at the center of the image.

(http://s8int.com/images4/pompeii-4.jpg)

(http://s8int.com/images4/pompeii-8.jpg)

The creature on the right has a dermal ridge, unlike a crocodile but exactly like certain dinosaur types.

(http://s8int.com/images4/pompeii-5-large.jpg)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 25, 2012, 08:57:27 AM
Two of the very best papers published by Dr. Anatoly Fomenko and Dr. G. Nosovsky on the new chronology subject, both appeared in the Acta Applicandae Mathematicae (17 - 1989 and 29 - 1992):


When was Ptolemy's star catalogue in Almagest compiled in reality?

http://hbar.phys.msu.ru/gorm/fomenko/fomenko3.pdf (http://hbar.phys.msu.ru/gorm/fomenko/fomenko3.pdf)



The dating of Ptolemy's Almagest based on the coverings of the stars and on lunar eclipses

http://hbar.phys.msu.ru/gorm/fomenko/fomenko4.pdf (http://hbar.phys.msu.ru/gorm/fomenko/fomenko4.pdf)



A rigorous and extraordinary demonstration that the works attributed to Ptolemy (90 - 168 AD) were actually written at least 1000 years later, in fact at least after 1350 AD.


In an earlier message, the link to the best work published by Fomenko and Nosovsky: volume III of History: Fiction or Science?: Dating the Almagest.




Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 31, 2012, 10:44:29 AM
(http://www.seasky.org/solar-system/assets/images/comet07_sk12.jpg)

When the Earth sees the fingers of Spearfinger strike Jupiter, when the ages of the Rings and wheels tell it is the ending of the ages of cycles of 5, this will be the sign for the whole earth, for all the earth will see this thing, to wake up from sleep.

Spearfinger = one of the former satellites of Saturn (currently named the Shoemaker-Levy comet)

Origin of long period comets (from Velikovsky’s unpublished Saturn and the Flood):

http://www.varchive.org/itb/satcom.htm (http://www.varchive.org/itb/satcom.htm)



Saturn and the Flood – Jupiter of the Thunderbolt by I. Velikovsky:

http://www.varchive.org/itb/index.htm (http://www.varchive.org/itb/index.htm)   


More on the mysterious origins of short and long period comets: Worlds in Collision by Velikovsky:

http://openeye.99k.org/Books/Worlds%20In%20Collision.pdf (http://openeye.99k.org/Books/Worlds%20In%20Collision.pdf)

Velikovsky Worlds in Collision (http://www.scribd.com/doc/21746049/Velikovsky-Worlds-in-Collision#)



Earth in Upheaval by I. Velikovsky:

Velikovsky Earth in Upheaval (http://www.scribd.com/doc/21746106/Velikovsky-Earth-in-Upheaval#)


Velikovsky did not realize, unfortunately, that the “ancient” Greek, Roman, Egyptian, Mayan, Babylonian bibliographical sources were all forgeries of the 18th Century, as demonstrated with ample proofs in the new radical chronology subject.

Moreover, the sudden extermination of the mammoths was caused by enormous tides that swept over continents. The leaves and twigs found in their stomachs did not grow in the area where the animals died, but far to the south, a thousand or more miles away. In the RE theory presented by Velikovsky, a hemisphere travelled southward (the immediate subsequent movement of the Siberian continent into the polar region): that is, a tilting of Earth’s axis due to the slowing down/stoppage of the Earth in its diurnal “rotation”.

The only sources we can trust for a description of  past planetary collisions (FE theory) in Worlds in Collision are as follows: Polynesia, Maoris of New Zealand, Samoan tribes, Tahiti, Hawaii, Loanga, Kanga, Wanyoro tribes in Africa, Oraibi, Kaska, Choctaw and Pawnee tribes in North America, Lapland tribes (all described in Worlds in Collision – use the index/search functions), and, of course, the greatest of all works on cosmology, the Bundahis.

http://azargoshnasp.net/Din/astrologybundahishn.pdf (http://azargoshnasp.net/Din/astrologybundahishn.pdf)

http://zoroastrianastrology.blogspot.ro/p/world-horoscope.html (http://zoroastrianastrology.blogspot.ro/p/world-horoscope.html)


An in-depth knowledge and understanding of past planetary cataclysms allows us to find out when future collisions between planets and future extended solar eclipses will take place with precision.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 31, 2012, 12:29:30 PM
German antigravitational secret weapons, best documentation by Nick Cook ( Aviation Editor of Jane's Defence Weekly), Hunt For The Zero Point:

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/archivos_pdf/hunt_zeropoint.pdf (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/archivos_pdf/hunt_zeropoint.pdf)



A Guide to German Flying Discs of the Second World War:

https://web.archive.org/web/20110812193422/http://www.tiono.com/model/FlyingSaucers.pdf



SS Brotherhood of the Bell (Joseph Farrell):

http://books.google.ro/books?id=ycsmUU0DXhIC&redir_esc=y (http://books.google.ro/books?id=ycsmUU0DXhIC&redir_esc=y)


Reich of the Black Sun (Joseph Farrell):

google search with: whale reich of the black sun pdf


Thule Tachyonator Mercury Gyro (double torsion applied to mercury, described in The Hunt for the Zero Point):

(https://s9.postimg.org/e1dn5s3nz/Bellgramreduced.jpg)


Haunebu flying disk:

http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/HAUNEBU.htm (http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/HAUNEBU.htm)


German UFOs - superb documentation:

https://web.archive.org/web/20110501121137/www.zamandayolculuk.com/cetinbal/HTMLdosya1/NaziUFO3.htm


Die Gloke - Torsion Aether Field Physics:

https://web.archive.org/web/20130319201844/http://iqxs.posterous.com/the-secret-history-of-the-most-secret-nazi-sc

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 01, 2013, 12:34:56 AM


Vril society Antarctica expeditions, UFO technology, R. Byrd's Operation High-Jump, Piri Reis map: best documentation
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Username on January 24, 2013, 06:39:11 AM
Good work!
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 27, 2013, 02:42:54 AM
The FE wiki should be based totally on this "good work".

John, if you have read my messages carefully, you should be able to predict when the next total solar eclipse which will last for more than 30 minutes (the disk of Sun is fully obscured) will occur. It has happened three times in the past, the geological consequences being described in Earth in Upheaval by Velikovsky.

(http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-akhenaton-sun-symbol.jpg)

You will also find the reason why Venus (Aten/Aton/Athene) was worshipped by Akhenaton, more details in the chapter Venus in Velikovsky's Worlds in Collision. The new radical chronology helps us understand who really built the monuments at Tenochtitlan, Monte Alban, Tiahuanaco, Chichen Itza and much more...and how the "mayan" stelae were falsified.


Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 29, 2013, 01:57:09 AM
Like most official ‘thinking’ the historical and archaeological establishment makes up its own stories, calls them proven facts, and simply ignores the overwhelming evidence that they are wrong. The idea is not to educate, but to indoctrinate. Anyone who doesn’t conform to the official line of history is isolated by their fellow historians and archaeologists who either know their jobs, reputations and funding are safer when they stick to the official version, or, frankly, they cannot see beyond the end of their noses. The same can be said of most people in the teaching and ‘intellectual’ professions.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 01, 2013, 06:54:26 AM
In addition to the faint young paradox, the inexistence of attractive gravity (experiments performed by Dr. B. DePalma and Dr. N. Kozyrev), the galactic orbit paradox, the cloud trajectories paradox (stationary earth), the Tunguska explosion seen all the way from London, we have, for the most skeptical RE supporter, the most precise proof of them all: the fact that prior to 1800 AD, there are no astronomical/historical records/data whatsoever which would prove the precessional movement of the Earth.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,52083.0.html#.UQvTp2FK5Qg (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,52083.0.html#.UQvTp2FK5Qg)

It is assumed that the First Ecumenical Nicaean Council (Nicaea is a town in Bythinia, Asia Minor) had compiled and sanctioned a church calendar in the year 325 AD. The Christian church has deemed this Easter Book (in the West), also known as Paschalia (in the East), to be of the greatest importance ever since.


The Council that introduced the Paschalia – according to the modern tradition as well as the mediaeval one, was the Nicaean Council – could not have taken place before 784 AD, since this was the first year when the calendar date for the Christian Easter stopped coinciding with the Passover full moon due to slow astronomical shifts of lunar phases.



The last such coincidence occurred in 784 AD, and after that year, the dates of Easter and Passover drifted apart forever. This means the Nicaean Council could not have possibly canonized the Paschalia in IV AD, when the calendar Easter Sunday would coincide with the Passover eight (!) times – in 316, 319, 323, 343, 347, 367, 374, and 394 AD, and would even precede it by two days five (!) times, which is directly forbidden by the fourth Easter rule, that is, in 306 and 326 (allegedly already a year after the Nicaean Council), as well as the years 346, 350, and 370.



Thus, if we’re to follow the consensual chronological version, we’ll have to consider the first Easter celebrations after the Nicaean Council to blatantly contradict three of the four rules that the Council decreed specifically for this feast! The rules allegedly become broken the very next year after the Council decrees them, yet start to be followed zealously and in full detail five centuries (!) after that.


A satisfactory coincidence of calendarian Passover full moons with the astronomical ones had only existed between 700 AD and 1000 AD (by which we mean their occurrence within the range of 24 hours from each other). Prior to that, the calendarian full moons have always taken place after the Passover ones, and after 1000 AD, the opposite started to happen. The beginning of the 13th Great Indiction (877 AD) falls on the period of ideal coincidence of Passover and astronomical full moons.



This means the Paschalia could only have been compiled in the period between the IX and XI centuries AD.



Propter hoc, the dating of the Nicaean Council (as the Council that had introduced the Paschalia) is only possible, within the timeframe of the VII-XI centuries, the most probable one being the epoch of the X-XI centuries, after the year 877 AD.


Papal Bull, Gregory XIII, 1582:

Therefore we took care not only that the vernal equinox returns on its former date, of which it has already deviated approximately ten days since the Nicene Council, and so that the fourteenth day of the Paschal moon is given its rightful place, from which it is now distant four days and more, but also that there is founded a methodical and rational system which ensures, in the future, that the equinox and the fourteenth day of the moon do not move from their appropriate positions.


According to the official chronology and astronomy, the direction of Earth's rotation axis executes a slow precession with a period of approximately 26,000 years.

Therefore, in the year 325 e.n., official date for the Council of Nicaea, the winter solstice MUST HAVE FALLEN on December 21 or December 22; in the year 968 e.n., on December 16; and in the year 1582, on December 11.

We are told that the motivation for the Gregorian reform was that the Julian calendar assumes that the time between vernal equinoxes is 365.25 days, when in fact it is about 11 minutes less. The accumulated error between these values was about 10 days (starting from the Council of Nicaea) when the reform was made, resulting in the equinox occurring on March 11 and moving steadily earlier in the calendar, also by the 16th century AD the winter solstice fell around December 11.


But, in fact, as we see from the superb work The Easter Issue, the Council of Nicaea could not have taken place any earlier than the year 876-877 e.n., which means that the winter solstice in the year 968 e.n., for example must have fallen on December 21.

And, of course, in the year 1582, the winter solstice would have arrived on December 16, not at all on December 11.


Let us imagine the protests which would have followed if the Vatican would have dared to say that the winter solstice in 1581-1582 occurred on December 11, given the precise fact that IT MUST HAVE TAKEN PLACE ON DECEMBER 16. This means, of course, that the Papal Bull, dated 1582, was created much later in time, in fact at least after 1700 e.n., to give the impression of a "historical proof" of the axial precession hypothesis.

There is no other way around it: the most precise proofs that the Council of Nicaea could not have taken place any earlier than the year 876-877 e.n., which means that the entire medieval and even ancient chronology was invented by both "Scaliger" and "Petavius" some centuries later (that is, the conspirators who faked/forged the official chronology during the second half of the XVIII century).


No European countries (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregorian_calendar#Adoption_in_Europe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregorian_calendar#Adoption_in_Europe) ) could have possibly adopted the Gregorian calendar reformation in the period 1582-1800, given the absolute fact that the winter solstice must have falled on December 16 in the year 1582 AD, and not at all on December 11 (official chronology) - a difference of a full five days would have destroyed the credibility of Vatican's astronomers.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 07, 2013, 07:31:46 AM
Dating the Council of Nicaea, more details

Dionysius Exiguus could not possibly have lived in the 6th century AD

(Dr. G. Nosovsky, 1994)



(https://s15.postimg.org/fp895wfvf/sky19.jpg)
(https://s8.postimg.org/fmg8h0dsl/sky20o.jpg)
(https://s15.postimg.org/ci71hmqmz/sky21v.jpg)
(https://s1.postimg.org/4nhwrkzen/sky22.jpg)
(https://s3.postimg.org/dy3rh17oj/sky23.jpg)
(https://s1.postimg.org/z30wy31pr/sky24.jpg)
(https://s12.postimg.org/5qg47u5m5/sky25.jpg)
(https://s8.postimg.org/6jaau9ij9/sky26.jpg)
(https://s13.postimg.org/3vg7icdaf/sky27.jpg)
(https://s15.postimg.org/lntryjvzv/sky28.jpg)



The Council of Nicaea, therefore, could not have possibly taken place before the year 876-877 AD.



The Council of Laodicea was a regional synod of approximately thirty clerics from Asia Minor that assembled about 363–364 AD in Laodicea, Phrygia Pacatiana.

The major concerns of the Council involved regulating the conduct of church members. The Council expressed its decrees in the form of written rules or canons.


However, the most pressing issue, the fact that the calendar Easter Sunday would coincide with the Passover eight (!) times – in 316, 319, 323, 343, 347, 367, 374, and 394 AD, and would even precede it by two days five (!) times, which is directly forbidden by the fourth Easter rule, that is, in 306 and 326 (allegedly already a year after the Nicaean Council), as well as the years 346, 350, and 370 was NOT presented during this alleged Council of Laodicea.


Neither was this issue presented during the Councils of Antioch (341AD), OR during the Councils of Carthage (397AD, 411AD, 418AD) - a fact which is impossible given the extraordinary proofs discovered by Dr. Nosovsky.



Amazingly, both Galileo and Kepler AGREE with the changes in the calendar proposed by pontiff Gregory XIII.


In 1613, the Emperor Matthias asked Kepler to attend the Reichstag at Regensburg to counsel on the issue of adopting the Gregorian calendar reform in Germany. In Germany, the Protestant princes had refused to accept the calendar on confessional grounds. Kepler believed that the new calendar was sufficiently exact to satisfy all needs for many centuries. Thus, he proposed that the Emperor issue a general imperial decree to implement the calendar.

Clavius was the senior mathematician on the commission for the reform of the calendar that led, in 1582, to the institution of the Gregorian calendar.
 
From his university days, Galileo was familiar with Clavius's books, and he visited the famous man during his first trip to Rome in 1587. After that they corresponded from time to time about mathematical problems, and Clavius sent Galileo copies of his books as they appeared.


But, as we have seen, in the year 1582, the winter solstice would have arrived on December 16, not at all on December 11, a clear fact which could not have been missed by T. Brahe, or G. Galilei, or J. Kepler - thus we can understand the fiction at work in the official chronology.


Newton agrees with the date of December 11, 1582 as well; moreover, Britain and the British Empire adopted the Gregorian calendar in 1752 (official chronology); again, more fiction at work: no European country could have possibly adopted the Gregorian calendar reformation in the period 1582-1800, given the absolute fact that the winter solstice must have falled on December 16 in the year 1582 AD, and not at all on December 11 (official chronology).

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 10, 2013, 01:06:17 AM
The author of Revelation 11:8 tells us that Christ was not crucified in Jerusalem.

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)

And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.


King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)

And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication. (Rev. 14:8 )


Here is the mind which has wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits (Rev. 17:9 )

The woman whom you saw is the great city, which reigns over the kings of the earth. (Rev. 17:18 )



Great city on seven hills - either Rome or Constantinopole (also built in seven hills - http://www.istanbulguide.net/insolite/english/seven_hills.htm (http://www.istanbulguide.net/insolite/english/seven_hills.htm) )


"Furthermore, the crucifixion did not even take place in Jerusalem! According to the book of Revelations, Jesus was crucified in Rome:

And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. (Revelations 11:8, KJV)

The Christians would probably argue that the “great city” refers to Jerusalem, yet the renowned Bible scholar John Gill disagrees:

And their dead bodies [shall lie] in the street of the great city,.... Not Jerusalem, which was destroyed when John had this vision, and which will not be rebuilt at the time it refers to; nor is it ever called the great city, though the city of the great King; however, not in this book, though the new Jerusalem is so called, Revelation 21:10; but that can never be designed here; but the city of Rome, or the Roman jurisdiction, the whole empire of the Romish antichrist, which is often called the great city in this book; see Revelation 16:19."


Jerusalem = Constantinopole - original quote from the epistle to the Galatians - Christ in Constantinopole:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,45731.msg1131078.html#msg1131078 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,45731.msg1131078.html#msg1131078)


----
The best book about  Kant's philosophy (epistemology and ethics) is, by far, The Ominous Parallels by L. Peikoff (http://www.peikoff.com/lr/excerpts.htm (http://www.peikoff.com/lr/excerpts.htm) )

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 14, 2013, 08:19:12 AM
http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm (http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm)

This 100-page book from 1894 shows that:
·         The Paul figure was a literary invention from the 1500's
·         The purportedly early Church Father writings were literary inventions of the 1500's
·         Eusebius' Church History was written in the 1500's.
·         The Gospels were written in the 1500's.


For those who follow the list of "St. Malachy" (list of pontiffs)...

Benedict - Olivetans - Gloria Olivae

Francis of Assisi - Franciscan Order - Peter


http://www.catholicpreaching.com/peter-francis-october-4-1999/ (http://www.catholicpreaching.com/peter-francis-october-4-1999/) (St. Peter and St. Francis, things in common)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 17, 2013, 03:20:11 AM
I'm not 100% sure of this, but I think this subject is not off-context. Then it should "fit" in Flat Earth General.

Ok, you all know that it is uncomfortable to express your opinions about earth's shape in our current society, where round earth is considered an absolute and unquestionable truth. I have did it in school, and that didn't went so well.

I'm in the first year of the High School, and here we are taught obviously that the world is round, this is a recurrent theme in Geography and Physics. But I will speak specifically about my discussions with my Physics teacher on earth's shape.

You know, we have to frequently "swallow" the idea that the earth is round and orbits the sun, as well that the sun is a star, space travel is possible, NASA doesn't lie etc. Some weeks ago, I was listening to these things told by my teacher and then I raised my hand and said: "Teacher, I know a group, a kind of organization, which believes that the earth is flat, and NASA fakes its images.". He answered: "Really? They're ignorant. It was proved that the earth is round. I can think about the possibility of geocentric models, maybe. But a flat earth is impossible."

Bring to the attention of your physics teacher the following undeniable facts:


The greatest champion of the flat earth theory is Newton himself (official chronology, or, in the new radical chronology theory, the group of persons who wrote the books which make up Newton's work, from alchemy to the private letters he sent to Oldenburg, Bentley and Halley...):

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,53879.msg1325217.html#msg1325217 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,53879.msg1325217.html#msg1325217)

His pressure terrestrial gravity can happen only on a flat surface of the Earth.


Show your teacher the entire Tunguska file, for example:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,3152.msg1401098.html#msg1401098 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,3152.msg1401098.html#msg1401098) (page 24 and also the next page from the thread gravity as it relates to the speed of light)


The classic experiments performed by Dr. Bruce DePalma and Dr. N. Kozyrev:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,55865.msg1393588.html#msg1393588 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,55865.msg1393588.html#msg1393588)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,55865.msg1394647.html#msg1394647 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,55865.msg1394647.html#msg1394647)


A ball spinning at 27,000 RPM and a non-spinning ball were catapulted side-by-side with equal momentum and projection angle. In defiance of all who reject the ether as unrealistic, the spinning ball actually weighed less, and traveled higher than its non-spinning counterpart. Those who attribute this to an aerodynamic or atmospheric effect, please note that it works just as well in a vacuum. Also note, this effect has since been verified by other [enlightened] researchers. The decrease in weight of the spinning ball - anti-gravity - can explain why the spinning object goes higher and falls faster than the identical non-rotating control. Current thinking is that there is no special interaction between rotation and gravity. The behavior of rotating objects is simply the addition of ether energy to whatever motion the rotating object is making.


Then, we move to the Faint Young Sun Paradox:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1312927.html#msg1312927 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1312927.html#msg1312927)


No elements could have formed in the big bang explosion (or in the failed/fake space time continuum):

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,55861.0.html#.UUWYVjd5ciI (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,55861.0.html#.UUWYVjd5ciI)


You might also bring up the barometric pressure paradox:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,55855.0.html#.UUWYcDd5ciI (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,55855.0.html#.UUWYcDd5ciI)


Using the search function (both here and in the .net website) your teacher can find out how ALL american/soviet/russian space missions were completely faked...


And last, but not least, show your teacher the photographs taken in Antarctica by Fred Brunjes, and also the Solar ISS/Atlantis transit videos...
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 21, 2013, 07:08:31 AM
That there was a darkness lasting three hours during the crucifixion is recorded in three of the Gospels. They read as follows:

Matthew 27:45 Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour.
Mark 15:33 And when the sixth hour was come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour.
Luke 23:44-48 And it was about the sixth hour, and there was a darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour.


The moon eclipse of April 3, 33 AD lasted for only a few minutes, and not for three hours (the eclipse must have been lunar, since we need a full Moon for the Passover).

The only lengthy eclipse which matches the biblical description occurred in the year 368 AD, March 21.


For obvious reasons, apologists are fond of claiming ancient pagan witnesses for the "darkness." Two names are banded about: Thallus and Phlegon. But the truth is we know next to nothing about either and our sources are all Christian scribes.

Apologists like to push Thallus into the 1st century to make him a "better witness" but all we can be sure of is that he wrote before Theophilus, a bishop in Antioch who mentions his name, at the end of the 2nd century. The probability is that Thallus is actually a 2nd century writer.

In any event, we have NO text written by Thallus himself. What we do have is a reference to Thallus in a 9th century work by Georgius Syncellus, a Byzantine churchman. Yet Syncellus doesn't quote the words of Thallus directly – he relies on a 2nd - 3rd century Christian writer called Julius Africanus (thought to be a Libyan). But Africanus himself has paraphrased Thallus, thus making the testimony of Syncellus no better than third-hand and unreliable.

Even allowing such dubious provenance for the "testimony of Thallus," just what does our pagan witness say? Africanus tells us that Thallus recorded a solar eclipse – and there is nothing at all unusual in an ancient observer recording such natural phenomena.

The twist is that Africanus says Thallus was mistaken, that he was really recording the darkness spoken of in the gospels! It is Africanus who makes the link to Jesus – not Thallus!

There is no doubt that Phlegon was a 2nd century writer, around the time of Hadrian. Phlegon merely recorded a great earthquake in Bithynia, which is on the coast of the Black Sea. Again, not Phlegon but the Christians who quote him make the link to Judaea and the crucifixion.

The Christian fraudsters concatenated Thallus' eclipse with Phlegon's earthquake (both "signs" planted in the gospels) to witness their fabulous nonsense, disregarding what was written, when it was written and which part of the world it referred to!




And yet no writer of that age or country, or any other age or country, mentions the circumstance but Matthew. A phenomenon so terrible and so serious in its effects as literally to unhinge the planets and partially disorganize the universe must have excited the alarm and amazement of the whole world, and caused a serious disturbance in the affairs of nations. And yet strange, superlatively strange, not one of the numerous historians of that age makes the slightest allusion to such an astounding event.

Even Seneca and the elder Pliny, who so particularly and minutely chronicle the events of those times, are as silent as the grave relative to this greatest event in the history of the world.



Therefore, the description concerning the lunar eclipse at crucifixion, accompanied by a darkness which lasted for a full three hours, is just fiction.


The New Testament: religion of Osiris, sun-worship, disguised in christianity:

http://web.archive.org/web/20110726031754/http://paganizingfaithofyeshua.netfirms.com/comparison_of_sungods_with_life_of_jc_concerned.htm (http://web.archive.org/web/20110726031754/http://paganizingfaithofyeshua.netfirms.com/comparison_of_sungods_with_life_of_jc_concerned.htm)

http://web.archive.org/web/20090604182324/http://paganizingfaithofyeshua.netfirms.com/raise_lazarus_truth_sun_myth.htm (http://web.archive.org/web/20090604182324/http://paganizingfaithofyeshua.netfirms.com/raise_lazarus_truth_sun_myth.htm)


They changed every word Christ originally said, in order to start a new religion, in which they would be at the very top.


In the new radical chronology, Christ was crucified at Constantinopole, approximately in the year 1770 AD.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 24, 2013, 01:45:25 AM
J. Scaliger (De Emendatione Temporum - 1583, Thesaurus Temporum - 1606), D. Petavius (De Doctrina Temporum, 1627), P. Crusius (Liber de Epochis - 1578) mention Pompeii and Herculaneum as having been destroyed in the year 79 AD (Vesuvius eruption).

And yet, in the SAME DECADE,  in the official chronology, the famed cartographer Abraham Ortelius depicts Pompeii as a city in full activity in his Regno de Napoli maps (published in several editions from 1570 to 1578):

http://www.antiquarius-sb.com/Catalogue_c.asp?page=4&area=115&subarea=27 (http://www.antiquarius-sb.com/Catalogue_c.asp?page=4&area=115&subarea=27)

http://www.bergbook.com/images/22775-01.jpg (http://www.bergbook.com/images/22775-01.jpg)



http://www.antiquarius-sb.com/Details_c.asp?ID=8669 (http://www.antiquarius-sb.com/Details_c.asp?ID=8669)


http://www.answers.com/topic/abraham-ortelius (http://www.answers.com/topic/abraham-ortelius) (biography of A. Ortelius)


(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_mVSVlQXoXaQ/S3vPMSZ8QQI/AAAAAAAAAmQ/xYuaLXK5ry4/s320/Immagine1.jpg)
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_mVSVlQXoXaQ/S3vPojv0RaI/AAAAAAAAAmg/kuovyl4UdLA/s320/Immagine3.jpg)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1243234.html#msg1243234 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1243234.html#msg1243234) (more details here, including the Pompeii Grafitti, gladiators with helmets which feature mobile visors, a XVth century invention)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1243598.html#msg1243598 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1243598.html#msg1243598) (Plutarch, Josephus, Dio Cassius, Pliny the Elder, Eusebius - fictional characters invented at least after 1700 AD)




http://www.vetrotech.com/us/eng/SAINT__1580.asp (http://www.vetrotech.com/us/eng/SAINT__1580.asp)

The first historical records of the glass rolling process in Saint Gobain date back to 1688.

This process involves pouring molten glass onto the rolling table, spreading it out and rolling it. It produces flat glass of an even thickness. Another advantage is that this process enables the production of glass sheets with the dimensions of 40 x 60 inches, which is ideal for mirror making.

And yet, perfectly flat glass at Herculaneum:

http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/gallery/pom15.jpg (http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/gallery/pom15.jpg)
http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/gallery/pom16.jpg (http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/gallery/pom16.jpg)

"The use of Renaissance artists of identical details, same colors decisions, motives, general composition plans, the presence in the Pompeian frescoes of the things that emerged in the 15 to 17 century, the presence in Pompeian paintings of genre painting, which is found only in the epoch of the Renaissance, and the presence of some Christian motifs on some frescoes and mosaics suggest that Pompeian frescoes and the works of artists of the Renaissance come from the same people who have lived in the epoch. "Vitas Narvidas," Pompeian Frescoes and the Renaissance: a comparison, "Electronic Almanac" Art & Fact 1 (5), 2007.


Here is an article which takes a very close look at the correct historical dating of the Vesuvius eruption which destroyed the city of Pompeii (translation from German):

http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ilya.it%2Fchrono%2Fpages%2Fpompejidt.htm&sl=de&tl=en (http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ilya.it%2Fchrono%2Fpages%2Fpompejidt.htm&sl=de&tl=en)


Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 02, 2013, 06:32:00 AM
In the Book of Jubilees, the Garden of Eden is described as being located to the WEST of the Nile river and NORTH of Egypt, and the land of Ham as being located to the right of the Garden, thus contradicting clearly the version in the Genesis chapters.


Let us follow the actual text very closely.

Book of Jubilees, chapter 8:

"And for Ham came out as the second portion, beyond the Gejon, toward the south, to the right of the garden, and it proceeds to all the fire mountains, and goes toward the west to the sea of Atil and goes west until it reaches the sea of Mauk  the one of which everything descends that is destroyed. And it proceeds to the north to the shore of Gadil and goes to the west of the water of the sea until it approaches the river Gejon, and the river Gejon goes until it approaches to the right of the Garden of Eden, and this land is the land which came forth for Ham as the portion he shall retain for himself and the children of his generations forever."

"And there came out of the lot for Shem the middle of the earth, which he and his children should have as an inheritance for the generations unto eternity, from the middle of the Mountain Rafu from the exit of the water of the river Tina, and his portion goes toward the west through the midst of this river, and they go until they approach to the abyss of the waters out of which comes this river, and this river empties and pours its waters into the sea Miot, and this river goes into the great sea: all that is toward the north of this is Japhet's, and all that is to the direction of the south is Shem's."

"And his (Ham/Khem's) portion reaches unto the great sea, and reaches straight until it approaches the west of the tongue which looks toward the south; for the sea is called the tongue of the Egyptian Sea (Red Sea). And it turns from there toward the south, toward the mouth of the great sea in the shore of the waters and proceeds toward Arabia and Ophra, and it proceeds until it reaches to the water of the River Gejon, along the shore of this same river. And it proceeds toward the north until it approaches the Garden of Eden, and toward the south thereof to the south, and from the east of the whole land of Eden, and toward the whole east , and it turns to the east, and proceeds until it approaches toward the east of the hills whose name is Rafa, and it descends toward the border of the outlet of the water of the river Tina."


If we can find out the exact location of the Riphath/Rafu mountains, the river Tina, the sea of Miot, and especially the sea of Atil, we immediately have at our disposal the exact place of the Garden of Eden (which IS NOT located anywhere near the Middle East).

Mountain Riphath/Rafu is easily seen to be the mountain range in the northern portion of Anatolia (ancient Paphlagonia/Mysia/Bithynia), namely the Temnus and the Olympus ranges/mountains (Riphath was given the portion of Anatolia, NORTH of river Tina and EAST of the land given to the first son of Noah).

Location of the sea of Atil:

His head [Ro-AT-SH] was at Roxolania/Rus, south of Belarus. Its name changed to the Ukraine (Gk kranion = cranium, not Slavic ukraina to/at the border). His throat [GaRGeret] is Georgia. His left shoulder [KaSaF] is the Caspian sea. His right shoulder [-AT-aTZiL] was Euxinus, now the Black Sea. His right arm/hand is being washed [NaTiLat] at Anatolia.

Therefore, the sea of Atil IS actually the Black Sea, or Pontus Euxinus. And the sea of Miot is the Sea of Marmara, which goes into the Great Sea (Mediterranean Sea).

River Tina is related to lake Arthynia (which discharges its waters into the Macestus River, which separates Asia from Bithynia), located next to the Sea of Marmara.

(http://holylandarchive.com/section_images/202_MarmaraMap031105.jpg)


http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#31 (http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#31)

From there I passed on above the summits of those mountains to some distance eastwards, and went over the Erythraean sea. And when I was advanced far beyond it, I passed along above the angel Zateel, and arrived at the garden of righteousness. In this garden I beheld, among other trees, some which were numerous and large, and which flourished there.

The original term used by Enoch was THE SEA OF ATIL, and NOT the Erythraean Sea (added later by translators who had no idea of the true location of the sea of Atil, the Black Sea).



All legends of the Arcadians, Greeks, Thracians point out that the first son of Noah was called Pelasg (and certainly not Shem); and Pelasg never set foot in Mesopotamia (a portion of land given to the descendants of the sons of Khem/Ham; namely, the northern part was given to Misraim and some of his sons, and the southern portion was taken over by Nimrod and his sons).

Christ, a direct descendant of Pelasg, lived right next to the Sea of Marmara (and not the sea of Galilee).


Christ entering Constantinopole:

http://img53.imageshack.us/img53/7923/jerustroia3.jpg (http://img53.imageshack.us/img53/7923/jerustroia3.jpg)


Pilate wearing a turban:

http://img83.imageshack.us/img83/3246/jerustroia4t.jpg (http://img83.imageshack.us/img83/3246/jerustroia4t.jpg)


Original quote from Galatians 3.1 :

http://img57.imageshack.us/img57/4643/jerustroia2.jpg (http://img57.imageshack.us/img57/4643/jerustroia2.jpg)
http://img682.imageshack.us/img682/669/jerustroia5.jpg (http://img682.imageshack.us/img682/669/jerustroia5.jpg)
http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/2841/jerustroia6.jpg (http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/2841/jerustroia6.jpg)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 03, 2013, 07:10:34 AM
(http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/1092/lunars.jpg)

http://www.sonoma.edu/users/v/vegalu/eschatology_files/Lunars.pdf (http://www.sonoma.edu/users/v/vegalu/eschatology_files/Lunars.pdf) (ignore the biblical fundamentalism and heliocentricity)


Shabuwa - masculine form = period of seven, heptad (Daniel 9:24,25,26)

Feminine form (normal) - 70 x (single weeks)
Masculine form (unusual) - 70 x (multiple weeks)

Shabuwa - plural form = feasts of weeks (Seventy Shabuwas or Shavuots are determined...)

Therefore the 70 x 7 years explanation is completely wrong.


The requirement of the 70 feasts of weeks is met by the following periods:

70 periods of 50 days (3500 days) - 7 sets of 7 days + 1 day

70 periods of 50 years (3500 years) - 7 sets of 7 years + 1 year

70 years
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 04, 2013, 03:27:49 AM
If you are an FET believer, reply with your best arguments and I will attempt to refute them. If I cannot refute them, I will be forced to accept FET.

The best proof (and the same time the simplest) that the surface of the Earth is actually flat is the explosion which occurred at Tunguska, 1908, June 30, 7:00 - 7:15 (London time, 0:00 - 0:15): the complete details for everyone -

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,3152.msg1404164.html#msg1404164 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,3152.msg1404164.html#msg1404164)]

(http://olkhov.narod.ru/tunguska_trajectory.gif)

The initial path approached Kezhma from the south - this constituted, most probably, the spherical earth measurement thought initially to be correct - but Tesla realized that something is definitely wrong in relation to the actual readings given by the true location of lake Baikal (telluric currents/ether influence on the trajectory of the ball lightning)

Therefore the path changed course to the east, to Preobrazhenka, and then west again to the actual site of the blast/shockwave.


LeMaire maintains the "accident-explanation is untenable" because "the flaming object was being expertly navigated" using Lake Baikal as a reference point. Indeed, Lake Baikal is an ideal aerial navigation reference point being 400 miles long and about 35 miles wide. LeMaire's description of the course of the Tunguska object lends credence to the thought of expert navigation:

The body approached from the south, but when about 140 miles from the explosion point, while over Kezhma, it abruptly changed course to the east. Two hundred and fifty miles later, while above Preobrazhenka, it reversed its heading toward the west. It exploded above the taiga at 60º55' N, 101º57' E (LeMaire 1980).


The same opinion was reached by Felix Zigel, who as an aerodynamics professor at the Moscow Institute of Aviation has been involved in the training of many Soviet cosmonauts. His latest study of all the eyewitness and physical data convinced him that "before the blast the Tunguska body described in the atmosphere a tremendous arc of about 375 miles in extent (in azimuth)" - that is, it "carried out a maneuver." No natural object is capable of such a feat.


Furthermore, the explosion was seen all the way from London, Antwerp, Stockholm, a distance which reaches across seven time zones (the first link includes the eyewitness accounts, a very good graphic, and many other details).



No curvature across the strait of Gibraltar (video + photograph):

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1370519.html#msg1370519 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1370519.html#msg1370519)


You can also read about the Galactic orbit paradox, the Faint Young Sun paradox, the fact that terrestrial gravity is a force caused by the pressure of the telluric currents, and not at all an attractive force.


There were no Copernicus, Galilei, or Kepler - the most precise proof available: the fact that the Council of Nicaea could not have taken place before the year 876 AD and the fact that the Gregorian calendar reformation is just a myth (see pages 7 and 8 on this thread).

Conclusion: there is no such thing as round earth theory...not now, not ever.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: bullhorn on April 04, 2013, 05:36:41 PM
I have reviewed your work, with independent analysis and it lines up with known science and mathamatics.

Very well done.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 05, 2013, 05:29:03 AM
Here is an example of known science vs. existence of ether (telluric currents) true science:

http://nrgnair.com/MPT/zdi_tech/tesla/common/radiant/TRE1.htm (http://nrgnair.com/MPT/zdi_tech/tesla/common/radiant/TRE1.htm) (Maxwell's equations section)




http://www.davidpratt.info/aethergrav.htm (http://www.davidpratt.info/aethergrav.htm) (aetherometry, gravity)


http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_gravity01.htm (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_gravity01.htm) (aether and gravity experiments)


http://milesmathis.com/caven.html (http://milesmathis.com/caven.html) (about the errors in the Cavendish experiment)


http://www.rexresearch.com/nipher/nipher1.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/nipher/nipher1.htm) (the extraordinary experiments of Dr. Francis Nipher; how to modify gravity by applying electrical tension)




A closely related subject is gps time deformation frame dragging; the real cause, is, of course, called aether frame dragging, here are best works:


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

http://www.worldnpa.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_1130.pdf (http://www.worldnpa.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_1130.pdf)

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

http://www.wbabin.net/weuro/agathan5.pdf (http://www.wbabin.net/weuro/agathan5.pdf)


Ether waves proven by the existence of telluric batteries:

http://www.icehouse.net/john1/stublefield1.html (http://www.icehouse.net/john1/stublefield1.html)



Dayton Miller ether drift results:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,3152.msg1398930.html#msg1398930 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,3152.msg1398930.html#msg1398930)


Here is the real deal about the Michelson-Morley experiment:

http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?p=31008#p31008 (http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?p=31008#p31008)
http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?p=31007#p31007 (http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?p=31007#p31007)

Please read further:


http://web.archive.org/web/20040607062702/ca.geocities.com/rayredbourne/docs/21.htm (http://web.archive.org/web/20040607062702/ca.geocities.com/rayredbourne/docs/21.htm)
http://web.archive.org/web/20040612113918/ca.geocities.com/rayredbourne/docs/b.htm (http://web.archive.org/web/20040612113918/ca.geocities.com/rayredbourne/docs/b.htm)
http://web.archive.org/web/20040611112531/ca.geocities.com/rayredbourne/docs/b2.htm (http://web.archive.org/web/20040611112531/ca.geocities.com/rayredbourne/docs/b2.htm)
http://web.archive.org/web/20040612033435/ca.geocities.com/rayredbourne/docs/23.htm (http://web.archive.org/web/20040612033435/ca.geocities.com/rayredbourne/docs/23.htm)

http://users.net.yu/~mrp/contents.html (http://users.net.yu/~mrp/contents.html) (chapters 5-10)
http://www.aquestionoftime.com/lorentz.htm (http://www.aquestionoftime.com/lorentz.htm)
http://www.aquestionoftime.com/michmore.htm (http://www.aquestionoftime.com/michmore.htm)

http://www.orgonelab.org/miller.htm (http://www.orgonelab.org/miller.htm)
These papers by Michelson and also by Kennedy-Thorndike have conveniently been forgotten by modern physics, or misinterpreted as being totally negative in result, even though all were undertaken with far more precision, with a more tangible positive result, than the celebrated Michelson-Morley experiment of 1887. Michelson went to his grave convinced that light speed was inconstant in different directions, and also convinced of the existence of the ether. The modern versions of science history have rarely discussed these facts.



Using the correct theory (ether + aether) we understand immediately the nature of light, magnetism, terrestrial and planetary/stellar gravity, how to produce levitation/ball lightning and much more.

Furthermore, we now have at our disposal the most precise and correct quantum model: baryons, mesons, quarks, subquarks, the structure of a subquark, the structure of a boson/antiboson.


The official attractive gravity theory cannot explain at all how the monoliths at Baalbek were moved and lifted into position:

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a2/Baalbek-stoneofpregnantwoman.jpg/800px-Baalbek-stoneofpregnantwoman.jpg)


Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 08, 2013, 05:44:26 AM
The Ominous Parallels, Kant Versus America chapter


The process of spreading a philosophy by means of free discussion among thinking adults is long and complex. From Plato to the present, it has been the dream of social planers to circumvent this process and, instead, to inject a controversial ideology directly into the plastic, unformed minds of children - by means of seizing a country's educational system and turning it into a vehicle for indoctrination.  In this way one may capture an entire generation without intellectual resistance, in a single coup d'ecole.



Here is how, for example, the concept of space-time was introduced to universities and colleges, forcing every student of physics to learn this fallacious concept by heart as scientific truth:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,3152.msg1399626.html#msg1399626 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,3152.msg1399626.html#msg1399626)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,3152.msg1399854.html#msg1399854 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,3152.msg1399854.html#msg1399854)



E. Johnson, The Pauline Epistles:

 It seems to be indirectly proved, from this machination, that these artists in fiction must have had a task of great difficulty before them in attempting to force these Letters upon the world. There must have been a sufficient number of men of true learning and taste during the Age of Publication, who were aware that these Letters were not genuine, and that the Church system was of recent origin. They were probably strong enough to make their tacit resistance felt. But the monks had organisation of a kind which honest men cannot have; and organisation triumphed
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 12, 2013, 06:45:35 AM
Well it certainly contradicts most FErs model of the solar system.

"The first successful measurement of c was made by Olaus Roemer in 1676.  He noticed that, depending on the Earth–Sun–Jupiter geometry, there could be a difference of up to 1000 seconds between the predicted times of the eclipses of Jupiter's moons, and the actual times that these eclipses were observed.  He correctly surmised that this is due to the varying length of time it takes for light to travel from Jupiter to Earth as the distance between these two planets varies.  He obtained a value of c equivalent to 214,000 km/s, which was very approximate because planetary distances were not accurately known at that time."

In the 1690s, Ole Rømer used his influence to bring about a uniform adoption of the Gregorian calendar in Protestant countries, though that could not be achieved in practice.



No European country could have possibly adopted the Gregorian calendar reformation in the period 1582-1800, given the absolute fact that the winter solstice must have falled on December 16 in the year 1582 AD, and not at all on December 11 (official chronology):

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1461577.html#msg1461577 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1461577.html#msg1461577)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1447025.html#msg1447025 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1447025.html#msg1447025)

The writings attributed to O. Romer MUST have been fabricated during the second half of the 18th century (official chronology calendar).



Jupiter paradoxes:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,55860.0.html#.UWgP3qJrMjA (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,55860.0.html#.UWgP3qJrMjA)


http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,54119.msg1333450.html#msg1333450 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,54119.msg1333450.html#msg1333450) (speed of light is a variable - see also pg. 1-4 from this thread)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 17, 2013, 06:12:39 AM
Tesla's classic 1900 experiment proves that light can and does travel faster than 299,792,458 m/s; moreover, it proves the existence of telluric currents (ether), which means that terrestrial gravity is a force exerted by the pressure of the same telluric currents.

Nikola Tesla:

The most essential requirement is that irrespective of frequency the wave or wave-train should continue for a certain period of time, which I have estimated to be not less than one-twelfth or probably 0.08484 of a second and which is taken in passing to and returning from the region diametrically opposite the pole over the earth's surface with a mean velocity of about 471,240 kilometers per second [292,822 miles per second, a velocity equal to one and a half times the "official" speed of light].


Tesla Patent/original paper:

http://www.classictesla.com/Patent/us000787412.pdf (http://www.classictesla.com/Patent/us000787412.pdf)


See also:

http://www.rastko.rs/rastko/delo/10868 (http://www.rastko.rs/rastko/delo/10868)



Tesla Colorado Springs experiment (existence of telluric currents):

http://www.pbs.org/tesla/ll/ll_colspr.html (http://www.pbs.org/tesla/ll/ll_colspr.html)

http://educate-yourself.org/fe/radiantenergystory.shtml (http://educate-yourself.org/fe/radiantenergystory.shtml)



(http://www.teslasociety.com/pictures/teslapic2.jpg)

Nikola Tesla holding a gas-filled phosphor-coated light bulb which was illuminated without wires by an electromagnetic field from the "Tesla Coil" (the energy was transmitted through the telluric currents).


Let us remember that, initially, E. Goldstein (1876, 1886) thought that cathode and canal rays were caused by aether vibrations.


An interview with Nikola Tesla, New Theories of Radio Waves:

http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1929-09-22.htm (http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1929-09-22.htm)

"When Dr. Heinrich Hertz undertook his experiments from 1887 to 1889 his object was to demonstrate a theory postulating a medium filling all space, called the ether, which was structureless, of inconceivable tenuity and yet solid and possessed of rigidity incomparably greater than that of the hardest steel.  He obtained certain results and the whole world acclaimed them as an experimental verification of that cherished theory.  But in reality what he observed tended to prove just its fallacy.

"I had maintained for many years before that such a medium as supposed could not exist, and that we must rather accept the view that all space is filled with a gaseous substance.  On repeating the Hertz experiments with much improved and very powerful apparatus, I satisfied myself that what he had observed was nothing else but effects of longitudinal waves in a gaseous medium, that is to say, waves, propagated by alternate compression and expansion.  He had observed waves in the ether much of the nature of sound waves in the air."


Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 19, 2013, 07:05:42 AM
It's the 306th anniversary of Leonhard Euler's birthday today. Not only my hero also my avatar. For those of a mathematical disposition who haven't heard of him google some of his work and boggle at his command of the subject. For those who think they have the ability to reinvent mathematics stay away from him: you're not fit to wipe his arse.


How the works/biography of Albrecht Haller were fabricated at the end of the 18th century/19th century:

http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dillum.ch%2Fhtml%2Falbrecht_von-haller_universalgenie_kritik.htm (http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dillum.ch%2Fhtml%2Falbrecht_von-haller_universalgenie_kritik.htm) (translation from German to English)

(the painting allegedly made at Gottingen: http://www.uni-goettingen.de/en/54589.html (http://www.uni-goettingen.de/en/54589.html) )

Haller's monumental manuscripts are even more voluminous than those attributed to Euler (in the official chronology Euler and Haller even exchanged letters).


The first mathematicians we can believe in are Cauchy, Gauss and Weierstrass, with some minor modifications of their dates of birth, and the first musicians who really lived in the XIXth century are Schumann, Wagner and Brahms.


The music attributed to Bach, Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven was actually created using special formulas requiring Fibonacci numbers and number sequences...

Bach, Mozart and the Golden Section:

http://web.archive.org/web/20110805132716/http://www.artofrecordproduction.com/content/view/195/22/ (http://web.archive.org/web/20110805132716/http://www.artofrecordproduction.com/content/view/195/22/)

http://web.archive.org/liveweb/http://whosemusicisit.blogspot.ro/2009/07/fibonacci-sequence-in-music-is-music.html (http://web.archive.org/liveweb/http://whosemusicisit.blogspot.ro/2009/07/fibonacci-sequence-in-music-is-music.html)


Evidence suggests that classical music composed by Mozart, Beethoven, and Bach embraces phi.


In a 1996 article in the American Scientist, for example, Mike Kay reported that Mozart’s sonatas were divided into two parts exactly at the Golden Mean point in almost all cases. Inasmuch as Mozart’s sister had said that Amadeus was always playing with numbers and fascinated by mathematics, it appears that this was either a conscious choice or an intuitive one. Meanwhile, Derek Haylock noted that in Beethoven’s Fifth Symphony (possibly his most famous one), the famous opening “motto” appears in the first and last bars, but also at the Golden Mean point (0.618) of the way through the symphony, as well as 0.382 of the way (i.e., the Golden Mean squared). Again, was it by design or accident? Keep in mind that Bartók, Debussy, Schubert, Bach and Satie may have also deliberately used the Golden Mean in their music.


Exploding the Myth of Mozart:
http://www.rense.com/general45/mozrt.htm (http://www.rense.com/general45/mozrt.htm)




Biography of Claudio Monteverdi:

http://www.answers.com/topic/claudio-monteverdi (http://www.answers.com/topic/claudio-monteverdi)


Relationship between Galileo Galilei and Monteverdi:

Monteverdi and Galileo were exact contemporaries and near the end of their lives Galileo arranged for Monteverdi to procure a beautiful Cremonese violin (probably built by Nicolo Amati) for his nephew Alberto Galilei, the son of Galileo’s brother Michelangelo who composed the lute solo in the first half of our program.
http://www.ljms.org/Performances-and-Tickets/Program-Notes/Tafelmusik.html (http://www.ljms.org/Performances-and-Tickets/Program-Notes/Tafelmusik.html)



The correct dating of the Council of Nicaea, the fact that both Pompeii and Herculaneum were destroyed at least after 1700 AD by the volcano Vesuvius, and that even in the official chronology there was no Vulgata as late as 1546 AD (Council of Trent) - see for example the extraordinary work The Pauline Epistles by E. Johnson), prove that the biographies of Martin Luther and J.S. Bach were falsified after 1750 AD.

M. Luther and J.S. Bach in the official chronology:

J.S. Bach and Martin Luther:

http://www.baroquemusic.org/bqxjsbach.html (http://www.baroquemusic.org/bqxjsbach.html)

http://www.mtio.com/articles/bissboo5.htm (http://www.mtio.com/articles/bissboo5.htm)


G.F. Handel  and S. Calvisius:

http://www.jstor.org/pss/3366025 (http://www.jstor.org/pss/3366025)


Calvisius, Seth (1650): Opus Chronologicum; Frankfurt und Emden, pg. 459:

Doch Calvisius zum Beispiel setzt die Eruption nicht auf das heute
gängige Datum „24. August“, sondern auf die Kalenden des Novembers,
also den 15. November. Und danach habe Rom drei Tage lang
gebrannt (Calvisius, 459 f.).

But such is the eruption dated by Calvisius not on the day
common date "24 August", "but on the Kalends of November",
So the 15th November. (Calvisius, 459 f.).

S. Calvisius dates the eruption of the volcano Vesuvius which destroyed Pompeii in the year 79 AD, thus his work was falsified at least after 1750 AD, as were the works attributed to Handel.


J.S. Bach about Handel:

Bach eventually complimented Handel and his music saying that Handel was "the only person I would wish to be, were I not Bach."

http://www.personadigitalstudio.com/Bach/ (http://www.personadigitalstudio.com/Bach/)

J. Haydn about Handel:

Upon hearing the 'Hallelujah Chorus' from Messiah, Joseph Haydn is said to have "wept like a child" and exclaimed:

"He is the master of us all."

W.A. Mozart about Handel:

Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart is said to have remarked,

"Handel understands effect better than any of us -- when he chooses, he strikes like a thunderbolt... though he often saunters, in the manner of his time, this is always something there."
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 20, 2013, 01:04:01 AM
Now the most precise proof that the works attributed to Euler were created well after 1750 AD.


In Euler's time, Russia still used the Julian calendar. His correspondents in the rest of Europe mostly used the newer Gregorian calendar, so when it was November 12, 1739, it was already November 23 in Berlin. Eighteenth century mail services were much better than most people would expect, so occasionally it was possible for a letter to seem to be answered before it had been written! We make note of these calendar problems whenever they arise.


However, when Pope Gregory XIII decreed that the day after October 4, 1582 would be October 15, 1582, the Catholic countries of France, Spain, Portugal, and Italy complied. Various Catholic German countries (Germany was not yet unified), Belgium, the Netherlands, and Switzerland followed suit within a year or two, and Hungary followed in 1587.



How could Leonhard Euler's calculations(1748) have been so disastrously wrong?



It is clear, then, that the conspirators who fabricated the works attributed to Euler, Newton, Lagrange, Fermat... offerred to the public false Easter rules, not having at their disposal Gauss' Easter formula.


No European country or astronomer (Euler included) could have possibly adopted the Gregorian calendar reformation in the period 1582-1800, given the absolute fact that the winter solstice must have falled on December 16 in the year 1582 AD, and not at all on December 11 (official chronology):

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1461577.html#msg1461577 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1461577.html#msg1461577)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1447025.html#msg1447025 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1447025.html#msg1447025)


Archimedes' Palimpsest was also forged after 1750 AD.

Martin Luther states that Pompeii was destroyed in the year 79 (Supputation Annorum Mundi, 1541, official chronology), therefore his works were also falsified well after 1700 AD.

When J.S. Bach was eight years old he went to the old Latin Grammar School, where Martin Luther had once been a pupil; he was taught reading and writing, Latin grammar, and a great deal of scripture, both in Latin and German.

http://www.mtio.com/articles/bissboo5.htm (http://www.mtio.com/articles/bissboo5.htm)

This is how precise astronomical dating allows us to discover and point out how the official chronology was forged.


Douglas Webster boldly stated over fifty year ago: “Mozart’s piano sonatas have all been analyzed; and almost all show that they have golden mean form, certainly in sonata form movements”

http://web.archive.org/web/20110805132716/http://www.artofrecordproduction.com/content/view/195/22/ (http://web.archive.org/web/20110805132716/http://www.artofrecordproduction.com/content/view/195/22/)

But in fact, even in the official chronology, Mozart's early work (not to mention many other works attributed to him) was in fact not composed by him:

http://rense.com/general45/mozrt.htm (http://rense.com/general45/mozrt.htm)

For instance, it has now been acknowledged that "Mozart as a spontaneous artist who composed music in his head and wrote it down without a second thought is a romantic fiction"




C. Pfister, one of the very best european historians, has discovered that there was no human settlement prior to 1700 AD in Switzerland, and that all gothic/medieval buildings and all ancients documents pertaining to the period 500 AD - 1600 AD were actually created in the 18th Century AD.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg998158.html#msg998158 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg998158.html#msg998158)


Here is a formula which the conspirators missed while inventing Euler's work (I discovered this formula back in 1998; it makes any and all logarithm tables obsolete; LN v = natural logarithm of v):

LN v = ((-2 +{2+[2+...(2+ 1/v + v)^1/2]^1/2}^1/2))^1/2 x 2^n

n+1 parantheses to evaluate - in the last parenthesis we substract 2 and take the square root one last time (n+1), before we multiply the result by 2^n

For v very large, we can omit the term 1/v

Example LN 9999999999 = 23.02585093 (8 significant digits)

For our formula we will use n=12

The first parenthesis 2 + v (where v, of course, is equal to 9999999999), and we calculate the square root, (2 + v/2)^1/2 (n=1)

We add 2 to the result, and calculate the next square root (n=2), and so on, for n=12 we will obtain: 2.000031602

So for n=13 (12 + 1, n+1), we substract 2 in the last parenthesis, and calculate the last square root, obtaining:

5.62154783 x 10^-3

We multiply by 2^12, that is 4096 and get the final excellent approximation:

23.02585991


As corollaries, we have:

COS @ = 1/2 X (({[(2 - @^2/2^n)^2 -2)^2...]-2}^2 -2)) (n/2+1 evaluations)

COS^-1 @ = ((2- {2+ [2+ (2+ 2@)^1/2]...^1/2}))^1/2 x 2^n (n+1 evaluations)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 22, 2013, 06:39:31 AM
Benjamin Franklin told his readers of the Poor Richard's Almanac to enjoy the extra 11 days in bed and that losing 11 days did not worry him--after all, Europe had managed since 1582.

http://books.google.ro/books?id=aRFzVkk4Ig0C&pg=PA25&lpg=PA25&dq=benjamin+franklin+gregorian+calendar+reform&source=bl&ots=9rpK44QmHA&sig=41sZgLSIImrRUQLLnz2JW6cidnI&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=UC91UZjgNofOtQahkYB4&ved=0CGkQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=benjamin%20franklin%20gregorian%20calendar%20reform&f=false (http://books.google.ro/books?id=aRFzVkk4Ig0C&pg=PA25&lpg=PA25&dq=benjamin+franklin+gregorian+calendar+reform&source=bl&ots=9rpK44QmHA&sig=41sZgLSIImrRUQLLnz2JW6cidnI&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=UC91UZjgNofOtQahkYB4&ved=0CGkQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=benjamin%20franklin%20gregorian%20calendar%20reform&f=false)


How the London Royal Society agreed FULLY to the 11 days change in calendar in the period 1750-1751 AD:

http://www.flamsteed.org/greg.pdf (http://www.flamsteed.org/greg.pdf)


Chapter 9 from Biggest Secret, the unauthorized biography (official chronology) of the Founding Fathers (B. Franklin included):

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/biggestsecret/bigsec/biggestsecret09.htm (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/biggestsecret/bigsec/biggestsecret09.htm)



In 1806, Napoleon, we are told, ordered a return to the Gregorian calendar.


Historic Doubts Relative to Napoleon Buonaparte de R. Whately

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Historic_Doubts_Relative_to_Napoleon_Buonaparte (http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Historic_Doubts_Relative_to_Napoleon_Buonaparte)


http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dillum.ch%2Fhtml%2Fnapoleon_maystre_uebersetzung_09.htm (http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dillum.ch%2Fhtml%2Fnapoleon_maystre_uebersetzung_09.htm) (the biography of Napoleon Bonaparte copied after the biography of Napoleon III)


As we have seen from the axial precession/Gregorian calendar reform hoax, the entire official chronology has been forged up to at least 1825-1830 AD; in 1582, the winter solstice MUST HAVE FALLEN on December 16 and not on December 11.


In the FE theory, the 50 seconds of arc per year (1 degree/71.6 years) change of longitude of the Pole Star is due to the movement of the Pole Star itself and NOT due to any axial precession of the Earth.

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/0903/5hOHPsanterne900.jpg (http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/0903/5hOHPsanterne900.jpg)


In the official chronology there are NO astronomical or historical records/proofs of ANY axial precession of the Earth itself, not to mention how the Gregorian calendar reform was forged/falsified:


http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1461577.html#msg1461577 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1461577.html#msg1461577)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1447025.html#msg1447025 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1447025.html#msg1447025)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 25, 2013, 05:51:51 AM
Tides and Radio Waves


Walter gives credit for the initial impetus to investigate the PUSH GRAVITY concept to his son TOM. Tom was only 6 years old when he told his father that he did not believe that the Moon created the tides. When Walter asked him why, Tom launched into his idea of a pushing force which created pressure waves to move the water.

This pushing force is exerted by the telluric currents (pressure gravity).


How Dr. T. Henry Moray, one of the greatest physicists of the 20th century, discovered these telluric currents:

During the Christmas Holidays of 1911, I began to fully realize that the energy I was working with was not of a static nature, but of an oscillating nature. Further I realized that the energy was not coming out of the earth, but instead was coming to the earth from some outside source. These electrical oscillations in the form of waves were not simple oscillations, but were surgings --- like the waves of the sea --- coming to the earth continually, more in the daytime than at night, but always coming in vibrations from the reservoir of colossal energy out there in space.


While investigating the output of his device, he discovered a feature of the natural static energy, which had somehow been overlooked by other aerial battery designers. The electrostatic power had a flimmering, pulsating quality to it. He learned of this "static pulsation" while listening through headphones, which were connected to telephone wires. The static came in a single, potent surge. This first "wave" subsided, with numerous "back surges" following. Soon thereafter, the process repeated itself. The static surges came "like ocean waves". Indeed, with the volume of "white noise" which they produced, they sounded like ocean waves!

These peculiar waves did not arrive with "clock precision". Just like ocean waves, they arrived in schedules of their own. Dr. Moray was convinced that these were world-permeating waves. He came to believe that they represented the natural "cadence of the universe". This intriguing characteristic suggested that small amounts of pulsating electrostatic charge might be used to induce large oscillations in a large "tank" of charge.


Dr. Gustav Le Bon and his work on telluric currents:

Another researcher, a contemporary of Tesla, succeeded in advancing the "external bombardment" theory of radioactivity with new experimental proofs. Dr. Gustav Le Bon, a Belgian physicist, examined and compared ultraviolet rays and radioactive energies with great fascination. Concluding from experiments that energetic bombardments were directly responsible for radioactivity, he was able to perform manipulations of the same. He succeeded in diminishing the radioactive output of certain materials by simple physical treatments. Heating measurably slowed the radioactive decay of radium chloride, a thing considered implausible by physicists.


In each case, Le Bon raised the radium temperature until it glowed red-hot. The same retardation of emanations were observed. He found it possible to isolate the agent, which was actually radioactive in the radium lattice, a glowing gaseous "emanation" which could be condensed in liquid air. Radium was thereafter itself de-natured. Being exposed to the external influence of bombarding rays, the radium again became active. The apparent reactivation of radium after heating required twenty days before reaching its maximum value.

 Le Bon stated that the reason why all matter was spontaneously emanating rays was not because they were contaminated with heavy radioactive elements. Ordinary matter was disintegrating into rays because it was being bombarded by external rays of a peculiar variety.


The external rays which disintegrate matter are telluric currents of dextrorotatory spin.


The work done by Dr. Dayton Miller on detecting ether (telluric currents):

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg751624#msg751624

"The effect [of ether-drift] has persisted throughout. After considering all the possible sources of error, there always remained a positive effect." Dayton Miller (1928, p.399)

http://www.orgonelab.org/miller.htm (http://www.orgonelab.org/miller.htm)

Dayton Miller's 1933 paper in Reviews of Modern Physics details the positive results from over 20 years of experimental research into the question of ether-drift, and remains the most definitive body of work on the subject of light-beam interferometry.


 As a graduate of physics from Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society and Acoustical Society of America, Chairman of the Division of Physical Sciences of the National Research Council, Chairman of the Physics Department of Case School of Applied Science (today Case Western Reserve University), and Member of the National Academy of Sciences well known for his work in acoustics, Miller was no "outsider". While he was alive, he produced a series of papers presenting solid data on the existence of a measurable ether-drift, and he successfully defended his findings to not a small number of critics, including Einstein.


TRUE WIRELESS by Nikola Tesla:

http://milan.milanovic.org/math/srpski/tesla/tesla3.html (http://milan.milanovic.org/math/srpski/tesla/tesla3.html)

"When Dr. Heinrich Hertz undertook his experiments from 1887 to 1889 his object was to demonstrate a theory postulating a medium filling all space, called the ether, which was structureless, of inconceivable tenuity and yet solid and possessed of rigidity incomparably greater than that of the hardest steel.  He obtained certain results and the whole world acclaimed them as an experimental verification of that cherished theory.  But in reality what he observed tended to prove just its fallacy.

"I had maintained for many years before that such a medium as supposed could not exist, and that we must rather accept the view that all space is filled with a gaseous substance.  On repeating the Hertz experiments with much improved and very powerful apparatus, I satisfied myself that what he had observed was nothing else but effects of longitudinal waves in a gaseous medium, that is to say, waves, propagated by alternate compression and expansion.  He had observed waves in the ether much of the nature of sound waves in the air."


Black Holes do not exist:


http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=688 (http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=688)


http://web.archive.org/web/20090729082308/http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/index.html (http://web.archive.org/web/20090729082308/http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/index.html) (one of the best archives on black holes hoax)

http://web.archive.org/web/20090318144723/http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dp5/bol.htm (http://web.archive.org/web/20090318144723/http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dp5/bol.htm) (black holes, fact or fiction?)


Radio waves cannot be used to determine distances on an astronomical scale because of the aether layer which lies between out atmosphere and the orbits of the sun/moon/planets/stars.


G.B. Airy experiment, stellar parallax/aberration:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1231580#msg1231580 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1231580#msg1231580)


An altimeter actually includes an aneroid barometer which measures the atmospheric pressure. A radar altimeter uses radio signals. Both methods do not take into account the layers of aether which exist starting at about 12 km in altitude and going to about 15 km, and which influence both the pressure reading and also the distance actually travelled by the radar waves.

Nasa managed to keep the true facts away from public view regarding its missions: that is, the crafts ran into a belt of resistance much quicker  and at a much lower altitude (12-14 km) than previously thought. For example, in 1958, the Explorer, after sending back some data, not only slowed down, but it went hay-wire as all the electrical circuits on board, including the transmitter and receiver, literally 'fried' out, burned up in the strong electro-magnetic currents of the radiation belt.


Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 25, 2013, 06:04:22 AM
And now, for the second part of the message (Tides and Radio Waves), one of the most extraordinary accounts on how the TRUE radio waves theory was hidden from public view by J.P. Morgan:

http://www.cheniere.org/correspondence/030706.htm (http://www.cheniere.org/correspondence/030706.htm)

http://www.cheniere.org/articles/Deliberate%20Discard.htm (http://www.cheniere.org/articles/Deliberate%20Discard.htm)


The ruthless suppression of Nikola Tesla also set the stage for the major cartels continuing to suppress subsequent overunity inventors from the 1890s to the present day.

Introduction:

Maxwell died in 1879, and at the time his own theory had not been accepted very much at all. Immediately the vectorists – notably Heaviside, Gibbs, and Hertz – began emasculating Maxwell’s 20 quaternion-like equations in 20 unknowns, into the present highly simplified vector algebra of much lower group symmetry. (Quaternions also have a much higher group symmetry than tensors, for those who believe tensors are the answer). This occurred in the 1880s and 1890s. Heaviside’s equations were tentatively selected as the basis for the new electrical engineering, just being created and being slowly placed into our universities.

To see a glimpse of what can be done in quaternion EM, see T. W. Barrett, “Tesla’s Nonlinear Oscillator-Shuttle-Circuit (OSC) Theory,” Annales de la Fondation Louis de Broglie, 16(1), 1991, p. 23-41. Barrett – one of the cofounders of ultrawideband radar – shows that EM expressed in quaternions allows shuttling and storage of potentials in circuits, and also allows additional EM functioning of a circuit that a conventional EM analysis cannot reveal. He shows that Tesla’s patented circuits did exactly this sort of deliberate “shuttling” and control of the potential energy, quite contrary to what is thought possible in our present regular circuits and theory.

Barrett was so impressed by the novelty of Tesla’s discoveries in this respect, that he extended Tesla’s methods and obtained two patents of his own – on processes still used in various special communications systems. [See Terence W. Barrett, “Active Signalling Systems,” U.S. Patent No. 5,486,833, Jan. 23, 1996. A signaling system in time-frequency space for detecting targets in the presence of clutter and for penetrating media. 14 U.S. patents cited. 22 claims, 37 drawing sheets. See also Terence W. Barrett, “Oscillator-Shuttle-Circuit (OSC) Networks for Conditioning Energy in Higher-Order Symmetry Algebraic Topological Forms and RF Phase Conjugation,” U.S. Patent No. 5,493,691. Feb. 20, 1996.]. About nine years or so after Maxwell’s death, Hertz performed some experiments which proved the speed of light in vacuum was essentially as predicted by Maxwell. That started the gradual acceptance of Maxwell’s theory (i.e., particularly of the new highly truncated version of it).

Meanwhile, Nikola Tesla – the most important electrical scientist at the time – had discovered that the “medium” was active and that EM energy could be freely extracted directly from the active medium itself. He was hell-bent on doing just that and freely giving it to humanity. J. P. Morgan and Thomas Edison were associates, and Morgan was backing Edison. The two later took Edison’s electric company component and formed General Electric Company from it.

The purpose of this paper is to reveal the iron suppression of Tesla and his dream of giving the world free electrical energy extracted directly from the active medium (the active vacuum/spacetime itself). The electrical engineering model taught and studied in all our universities, beginning in the 1890s, was also ruthlessly curtailed to cast out all asymmetric Maxwellian systems and to also discard Heaviside’s odd and nearly incredible giant curled EM energy flow component actually accompanying every far more feeble Poynting energy flow in every EM system or circuit. Following the decimation of Tesla around the turn of the century, similar tactics have continued against follow-on inventors who discovered overunity systems and attempted to complete them and bring them to market. The suppression continues to this day, as can be attested by several living overunity inventors and inventor groups. For more than a century there has indeed been a giant, unwritten conspiracy of some of the most powerful cartels on earth, to continue the curtailment of the electrical engineering model and practice, and to continue to suppress overunity inventions and inventors.

J.P. Morgan Recognizes Tesla As a Mortal Enemy

Backed by Westinghouse, in the “electricity wars” Tesla had essentially annihilated J. P. Morgan and Edison on Edison’s intended DC electrical power cartel (a DC power plant every 20 miles!) by winning the contract for electrification of Niagara Falls and by installing the much more practical and much cheaper Tesla AC power system. Morgan, who was determinedly building up a giant financial empire, was also a very ruthless man who brooked no opposition. Morgan was funding Edison, and – after the destruction of their intended DC power empire by Tesla – Morgan recognized Tesla as a dangerous arch foe, and he was determined to destroy Tesla completely and remove him as a threat. He also realized that, if Tesla were permitted to give the world free EM energy extracted from the active medium and needing no fuel consumption, then much of Morgan’s own ambitions (which included future forays into the emerging giant fuel industry) would be totally thwarted. So Tesla had to go, and he had to go completely.

Economic Paralysis of Westinghouse

Westinghouse – a decent man who had liked Tesla and backed him (when Tesla, at the time) was using a pick and shovel to dig ditches to pay for his daily food – then fell on bad times, and was headed for bankruptcy. He had signed a contract with Tesla to pay Tesla very nice royalties on the AC power systems, and this represented several hundred millions of dollars. Westinghouse affirmed to Tesla that, even though he went bankrupt, he would pay Tesla as long as he, Westinghouse, had a dollar in his pocket.

Tesla deeply appreciated Westinghouse’s warm friendship and Westinghouse backing him when no one else would. In a remarkable gesture of profound gratitude, Tesla simply tore up the contract, freeing Westinghouse and saving him from total financial ruin. But financially Westinghouse was unable to further fund large projects. This put Tesla right where Morgan wanted him.

How Morgan Trapped Tesla and Destroyed Him

Accordingly, to finance his dream of capturing free electrical energy from the active medium (from the vacuum/spacetime), Tesla had to turn to Morgan for financing. Morgan cynically agreed to finance Tesla (and the free energy project), but only after Tesla agreed to sign over 51% controlling interest in all his (Tesla’s) inventions. Tesla signed the agreement, and Morgan gave him about half of the money needed for the project at Long Island.

But Morgan had put Tesla in an iron trap from which there was no escape. He now controlled all Tesla’s inventions and their use, so he had Tesla paralyzed in that respect. And then later he simply refused to give Tesla the rest of the money needed to finish the project. Consequently Tesla was halted. He declined financially and went totally bankrupt. He became totally destitute, reduced to living in a hotel room on the good graces of the hotel and a small patron or two. He never recovered from this absolute destitution until his death in 1943.

Thus Morgan totally crushed Tesla with an iron hand, thereby permanently removing Tesla as an unacceptable threat to Morgan’s empire and removing Tesla’s threat of producing and giving away free energy from the active medium. All the above is well-known. But there is another part of the story that has escaped recognition. And that strange part of Morgan’s actions has profoundly affected all humanity and this entire planet and biosphere for more than a century.

The Rest of the Story

Morgan was not only ruthless but extremely thorough. When the “new” Heaviside equations were tentatively accepted as the new “Maxwell’s theory” to be taught in the electrical engineering just beginning to be set up in some universities etc., Morgan also directed his close scientific advisors to assure that this new “electrical theory” was harmless and did not contain or teach any of Tesla’s “energy freely from the active medium” systems. In other words, not only was it essential to suppress the present Tesla, but it was essential to suppress all the future “Teslas”.

At the time, scientists did not have scientific jobs waiting all over, as they do today. A scientist at the university was not really too well paid, and a really good scientist would often seek and obtain a job as a consultant to one of the rising industrialists such as Morgan. Indeed, Edison’s UK group already had an electrical scientist consultant of the highest caliber – Dr. John Ambrose Fleming in England. Fleming became consultant to the Edison group in 1881 and continued as such for 10 years. Fleming was an honorable and ethical man, and of course would not personally engage in skullduggery.

But all Morgan/Edison had to do was assign a sufficiently good scientist of their own to have a personal conversation with Fleming, since Fleming had studied directly and extensively under Maxwell himself. Fleming was thoroughly familiar with the characteristics of Maxwell’s theory, and he was also thoroughly familiar with Heaviside’s emasculated vector algebra subset. The conversation would just be a group theory conversation, pleasant but adroit, and it would draw out from Fleming (who was of highest character and ethics) the exact technical characteristics of the Heaviside model – particularly with respect to any potential EM system taking excess free energy from a hypothetical active medium.

Modern group theory was founded by the brilliant teenager Évariste Galois, whose work was later published and developed after Galois’ unfortunate quick death on May 31, 1832 from being fatally wounded in a duel the previous day. The brilliant but erratic Galois was only 20 years old when he perished. But later his work was to profoundly affect mathematics, electrodynamics, physics, and all other sciences.

In April of 1830, Galois (1811-1832), a student at the École Normale, had published “An Analysis of a Memoir on the Algebraic Resolution of Equations” in the Bulletin de Ferussac. In June, he published “Notes on the Resolution of Numerical Equations” and “On the Theory of Numbers.” These and a later memoir make up what is now called Galois theory. Galois’s manuscripts written just before his death in a duel, with added annotations by Joseph Liouville, were published in 1846 in the Journal de Mathématiques Pures et Appliquées. In 1870, with the publication of Camille Jordan’s Traité des Substitutions, group theory became a fully established and very important part of mathematics and science.

So in 1881, Fleming most certainly would have been well aware and conversant in group theory and the group symmetry of a given algebra, and thus of the characteristics of the systems that were included in a given algebraic model. The necessary knowledge to assess the Heaviside vector equations was already there when Morgan’s need (to suppress Nikola Tesla and to render the reduced Heaviside equations harmless) became paramount in the late 1880s.

The news about the group symmetry characteristics of Heaviside’s equations was not good. Those Heaviside vector equations still included some of Maxwell’s asymmetrical systems. And any EM system that freely receives energy from its active environment, and uses it to freely power its loads, is an asymmetrical Maxwellian system a priori. Hence engineers who were taught such a theory would be able to eventually design and build some of Tesla’s “free EM energy from the active medium” systems.

Morgan’s response would have been short and direct: “Fix it!” Obviously the fix was to simply remove the remaining asymmetry of the Heaviside model’s equations. It is not too hard a job to convince mathematicians to change asymmetry anyway, since they tend to worship “the beauty of symmetry” and asymmetry is considered “vulgar”.

Lorentz’s Symmetrization of the Heaviside Equations

H. A. Lorentz was the man who was elicited to do the necessary “symmetrization” with ease, thereby accomplishing exactly what Morgan decreed to his own advisors that must be done: Get rid of those Tesla systems capable of taking and freely using EM energy from the active medium. H. A. Lorentz (with the “t”) simply lifted and used what L. V. Lorenz (without the “t”) had already done.

For the deliberate “fixing” of the already sharply curtailed Heaviside equations, see H. A. Lorentz, “La Théorie électromagnétique de Maxwell et son application aux corps mouvants,” [The Electromagnetic Theory of Maxwell and its application to moving bodies], Arch. Néerl. Sci., Vol. 25, 1892, p. 363-552. [Also in H. A. Lorentz, Collected Papers, The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, vol. 2, pp. 168-238, esp. p. 168.] This is the work that Lorentz cites later (in 1895) for his proof of the symmetrical regauging theorems (the two equations of symmetrical regauging).

This is the “symmetrization” (at the direction of J. P. Morgan) of the Heaviside equations that arbitrarily discarded all remaining asymmetrical Maxwellian systems – thus discarding all systems that receive excess EM energy freely from the “active medium” (active vacuum) and could use this free energy to power loads and themselves. With this “fix”, Morgan was assured that Tesla’s discovery of the active medium – and that EM energy could be extracted from it – would never be taught.

Electrical engineering was just beginning to be formed and started in those days, and so almost from its inception electrical engineering has used these “fixed” Heaviside equations (erroneously calling the resulting crippled model “Maxwell’s theory” which was and is a blatant falsity). Hence our electrical engineers – almost from the beginning – have thought, designed, built, and deployed only that subset of Maxwellian systems that self-destroy any use of excess energy from the vacuum, hence self-preventing having COP>1.0 and self-powering EM systems taking their excess input energy directly from the active vacuum.

It also prevented electrical engineers from realizing how their circuits are actually powered, and where the energy actually comes from. It does not come from cranking the shaft of the generator! For a clear exposé of how a symmetrical electrical power circuit and system kills its own source, and also to see what actually powers the external circuit in a generator-powered system, see “Figure 2. Operation of a Symmetrical Electrical Power System,” in T. E. Bearden, “Engineering the Active Vacuum: On the Asymmetrical Aharonov-Bohm Effect and Magnetic Vector Potential A vs. Magnetic Field B.”

For an excellent paper adroitly pointing out Lorentz’s propensity for using other people’s work but taking or receiving credit for it himself, see J. D. Jackson and L. B. Okun, “Historical roots of gauge invariance,” Reviews of Modern Physics, Vol. 73, July 2001, p. 663-680. For the Lorentz symmetrical regauging as used by our present electrical engineers and classical electrodynamicists, see J. D. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics, Third Edition, Wiley, 1999. For the vacuum, Maxwell’s (Heaviside’s) equations reduce to two coupled equations, shown as equations 6.10 and 6/11 on p. 246. The Lorentz regauging condition is applied by Jackson on p. 240, resulting in two inhomogeneous wave equations given as equations 6.15 and 6.16. The Lorentz condition is given in equation 6.14 on p. 240.

Elimination of Heaviside’s Giant Curled EM Energy Flow Component

Lorentz also was apparently impressed a second time, in 1900, to further reduce the already seriously reduced symmetrized Heaviside equations, in order to specifically eliminate the newly discovered giant Heaviside curled EM energy flow that – unknown to our present electrical engineers – accompanies every Poynting energy flow component (which is diverged into the circuit to power it), but is itself (the curled component) not diverged and thus is just wasted because it normally does not interact. The giant Heaviside curled EM energy flow component is more than a trillion times greater in magnitude than the accounted Poynting diverged EM energy flow component. Thus the Poynting energy flow theory in our present electrical engineering textbooks and curricula is only a pale shadow of the actual energy flowing in conjunction with an electrical system or circuit.

In Morgan’s view, it would simply not do to have all the future electrical engineers taught (and understand) that every generator already pours out more than a trillion times as much EM energy output as the mechanical shaft energy input we crank into the generator shaft! If they were to all know this, then inevitably some very sharp young doctoral candidates or post docs would figure out how to freely tap some of that available giant Heaviside curled energy flow component. And they would extract some of that giant energy flow and freely use it, thereby ushering in Tesla’s “free EM energy from the active medium” after all.

Here again, Morgan would simply have ordered the problem “fixed”. And again, Lorentz “fixed it” for him very easily, by introducing the standard little surface integral trick that retains the diverged small component (the Poynting component) but discards the huge nondiverged curled component. In other words, Lorentz altered the actually-used energy flow vector by throwing away that giant Heaviside component quite arbitrarily. Thus the Heaviside giant curled EM energy flow component is no longer accounted or even recognized in electrical engineering, but it still physically accompanies every accounted Poynting energy flow component in every EM system or circuit. [To see the dirty work, see H. A. Lorentz, Vorlesungen über Theoretische Physik an der Universität Leiden, Vol. V, Die Maxwellsche Theorie (1900-1902), Akademische Verlagsgesellschaft M.B.H., Leipzig, 1931, “Die Energie im elektromagnetischen Feld,” p. 179-186. Figure 25 on p. 185 shows the Lorentz concept of integrating the Poynting vector around a closed cylindrical surface surrounding a volumetric element. This is the procedure which arbitrarily selects only a small diverged component of the energy flow associated with a circuit—specifically, the small Poynting component being diverged into the circuit to power it—and then treats that tiny component as the “entire” energy flow. Thereby Lorentz arbitrarily discarded all the extra huge Heaviside curled energy transport component which is usually not diverged into the circuit conductors at all, does not interact with anything locally, and is just wasted.]

Justification for Removal of the Giant Heaviside Curled Energy Flow Component

To justify getting rid of the giant curled (and usually nondiverged) Heaviside energy flow component, Lorentz smoothly and slyly stated that “it does nothing and so it has no physical significance.” And that same smooth statement is used by our scientific community to this day to justify the emasculation of the actual energy flow vector and to use only the feeble Poynting component of it. E.g., quoting Jackson: “...the Poynting vector is arbitrary to the extent that the curl of any vector field can be added to it. Such an added term can, however, have no physical consequences. Hence it is customary to make the specific choice …” [J. D. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics, Second Edition, Wiley, 1975, p. 237].

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 25, 2013, 06:06:29 AM
Part III of Tides and Radio Waves, part II of the previous message:

Suffice it to say that NRAM optical physicists every year regularly perform true COP = 18 optimized experiments, without understanding the true source of the excess energy received from the active vacuum environment. To get their papers published, they are not allowed to use the term “excess emission” (they must use the mind-numbing term “negative absorption”). They are also not allowed to discuss the thermodynamics of the process (which when optimized in the IR or UV gives COP = 18), but can only point out the “increase in the reaction cross section” because of the self-resonance of the charged particles of the absorbing medium as compared to more normal static charged particles in a static absorbing medium.

Thus our electrical engineers and scientists today are totally unaware that every generator already pours out more than a trillion times as much EM energy flow from the vacuum, as is in the mechanical energy flow we input to the generator shaft. This even though in our leading universities our own NRAM optical physicists continue to experimentally prove it, without understanding where the excess EM energy comes from.

This second “fix” by Lorentz then finished Morgan’s suppression of the “new electrical engineering science” so that it would not contain asymmetrical Maxwellian systems nor would it contain Heaviside’s giant curled EM energy flow component. With these changes, Morgan (using Lorentz’s services) deliberately crippled electrical engineering and electrical power systems for more than 100 years, and guaranteed that COP>1.0 and self-powering Maxwellian systems – permitted by nature and Maxwell’s original theory – would not be built by our electrical power engineers.



Deciphering Energy Flow

“…only the entire surface integral of N [their notation for the Poynting vector] contributes to the energy balance. Paradoxical results may be obtained if one tries to identify the Poynting vector with the energy flow per unit area at any point.” [Wolfgang Panofsky and Melba Phillips, Classical Electricity and Magnetism, Second Edition, Addison-Wesley, Menlo Park, CA, 1962, third printing 1969, p.180].

“It is possible to introduce the Poynting vector S, defined by S = ExH, and regard it as the intensity of energy flow at a point. This procedure is open to criticism since we could add to S any vector whose divergence is zero without affecting [the basic integration procedure’s result].” … “…fortunately, we are rarely concerned with the energy flow at a point. In most applications we need the rate at which energy is crossing a closed surface.” [D.S. Jones, The Theory of Electromagnetism, Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1964, p. 52, 53.].

“It is important to realize that in physics today, we have no knowledge of what energy is.” [Richard P. Feynman, Robert B. Leighton, and Matthew Sands, The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, Vol. 1, 1964, p. 4-2].

In the hard physics literature, rigorous proof that eliminating the arbitrary Lorentz symmetry condition provides systems having free additional energy currents from the vacuum is given by M. W. Evans, P. K. Anastasovski, T. E. Bearden et al., “Classical Electrodynamics without the Lorentz Condition: Extracting Energy from the Vacuum,” Physica Scripta, Vol. 61, 2000, p. 513-517. Quoting from p. 513:

“It is shown that if the Lorentz condition is discarded, the Maxwell-Heaviside field equations become the Lehnert equations, indicating the presence of charge density and current density in the vacuum. The Lehnert equations are a subset of the O(3) Yang-Mills field equations. Charge and current density in the vacuum are defined straightforwardly in terms of the vector potential and scalar potential, and are conceptually similar to Maxwell’s displacement current, which also occurs in the classical vacuum. A demonstration is made of the existence of a time dependent classical vacuum polarization which appears if the Lorentz condition is discarded. Vacuum charge and current appear phenomenologically in the Lehnert equations but fundamentally in the O(3) Yang-Mills theory of classical electrodynamics. The latter also allows for the possibility of the existence of vacuum topological magnetic charge density and topological magnetic current density. Both O(3) and Lehnert equations are superior to the Maxwell-Heaviside equations in being able to describe phenomena not amenable to the latter. In theory, devices can be made to extract the energy associated with vacuum charge and current.”

One of the authors has remarked:

“This has led to one of the greatest ironies in history: All the hydrocarbons ever burned, all the steam turbines that ever turned the shaft of a generator, all the rivers ever dammed, all the nuclear fuel rods ever consumed, all the windmills and waterwheels, all the solar cells, and all the chemistry in all the batteries ever produced, have not directly delivered a single watt into the external circuit’s load. All that incredible fuel consumption and energy extracted from the environment has only been used to continually restore the source dipole that our own closed current loop circuits are deliberately designed to destroy faster than the load is powered.” [Thomas E. Bearden, “Extracting and Using Electromagnetic Energy from the Active Vacuum,” Modern Nonlinear Optics, Part 2. Second Edition, Advances in Chemical Physics, Volume 119, Edited by Myron W. Evans. Series Editors I. Prigogine and Stuart A. Rice, John Wiley and Sons, 2001, p. 691-192].

“…[There is] .. an often-overlooked feature inherent in the law that energy can neither be created nor destroyed. Rigorously, work is defined as changing the form of energy. When one joule of energy performs one joule of work, one joule of energy still remains, but in an altered form. If that remaining joule of energy has its form changed yet again, another joule of work has been done. And so on.” [M. W. Evans, P. K. Anastasovski, T. E. Bearden et al., “Classical Electrodynamics without the Lorentz Condition: Extracting Energy from the Vacuum,” Physica Scripta, Vol. 61, 2000, p. 515-516].

The Result Is the Horribly Crippled CEM/EE Model We Have and Use Today

As can be seen, from Morgan’s personal view that Tesla and the new Heaviside theory were unacceptable threats to his rising great financial empire, the ruthless Morgan felt fully justified in having the EE theory “fixed” and crippled, to permanently eliminate all asymmetrical Maxwellian systems from the Heaviside theory, and later also to eliminate Heaviside’s own giant curled EM energy flow component as well. In this way, Morgan directly assured the removal of self-powering and COP>1.0 asymmetrical electrical systems receiving and using excess free energy from the vacuum.

Regarding Tesla as his mortal enemy, Morgan also felt fully justified in shackling and then figuratively “imprisoning” Tesla financially for the rest of his life, totally destroying Tesla from any further open research and development that would ever again challenge Morgan’s escalating empire and huge cartels. Interestingly, Heaviside also wound up being a near-total hermit, living in a little garret apartment.

So eerily, more than a century ago and along with its very birthing, our “modern” classical electrodynamics and electrical engineering science was deliberately mutilated and crippled, specifically so that COP>1.0 and self-powering electrical systems – asymmetrically powering loads extracted from “free EM wind energy flows” from the vacuum/space itself – would never be known or developed by our electrical engineers.

Since then, hundreds of thousands of EEs have been graduated worldwide. Electrical engineering (with its deliberately crippled CEM/EE model) has become a giant part of our science, technology, culture, and society. Everything – from our electric lights to our refrigerators and heat pumps, radios and television sets, auto ignitions, lights and power for our cities, etc. – is now using this horribly emasculated CEM/EE model. It has directly prevented struggling nations having no oil or gas resources from achieving a modern economy (which is based on cheap energy). This has left those nations impoverished, with their peoples starving and miserable and disease-wracked. Hundreds of millions of deaths from starvation and disease have resulted worldwide. It has “welded into our minds and our very brains” the mistaken notion that – other than a wee bit of wind power, water power, solar power, etc. – we can only have “energy from consumption of fuel”.

So we have Morgan’s ruthlessness, and the present totally inexcusable lack of insight by our own scientists and engineers (and particularly our scientific leadership) – to thank for the present escalating “world energy crisis” and its resulting world-wide, environmental, and epochal consequences.


On the Physical Lines of Force by J.C. Maxwell, ORIGINAL MAXWELL EQUATIONS WITH DIAGRAMS:

http://vacuum-physics.com/Maxwell/maxwell_oplf.pdf (http://vacuum-physics.com/Maxwell/maxwell_oplf.pdf)


Maxwell ether theory:

http://www.gsjournal.net/old/science/tombe.pdf (http://www.gsjournal.net/old/science/tombe.pdf)


SPINTRONICS, secret world of magnets, the most thorough work on the double helix theory of the magnetic field (double helix of the telluric currents):

http://freeenergycommunity.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/the-secret-world-of-magnets-spintronics-2006-howard-johnson.pdf (http://freeenergycommunity.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/the-secret-world-of-magnets-spintronics-2006-howard-johnson.pdf)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 01, 2013, 11:37:12 AM
Official chronology information about Sebastian Munster’s Cosmographia:

Sebastian Münster’s Cosmographia was an immensely influential book that attempted to describe the entire world across all of human history and analyze its constituent elements of geography, history, ethnography, zoology and botany. First published in 1544 it went through thirty-five editions and was published in five languages, making it one of the most important books of the Reformation period.

Sebastian Münster: Cosmographia, "1544 AD", p. 479:

(http://www.dillum.ch/html/muenster_cosmographie_479_vesuvius_79_ad.gif)

The eruption of Vesuvius is now set as the year 79 AD and Pliny’s Historia Naturalis is described by Munster as having been a major influence upon his own work.

 
http://books.google.ro/books?id=5G-VUKxAIl8C&printsec=frontcover&hl=ro&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=pliny&f=false (http://books.google.ro/books?id=5G-VUKxAIl8C&printsec=frontcover&hl=ro&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=pliny&f=false)


Here is also a map of southern Italy drawn by Munster:

http://www.antiquarius-sb.com/public/Cartografia/s11629.jpg (http://www.antiquarius-sb.com/public/Cartografia/s11629.jpg)

 

And yet, during the same period of history, we have the map of southern Italy drawn by Abraham Ortelius, which features Pompeii as a thriving city in full activity:

https://www.ideararemaps.com/en/product/regni-neapolitani/

It is obvious that the entire work attributed to Sebastian Munster was created at least after 1750 AD.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1470359.html#msg1470359 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1470359.html#msg1470359)

 

A review of Edwin Johnson’s work, New York Times, May 14, 1904:

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9504E1DE1F3AE733A25757C1A9639C946597D6CF (http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9504E1DE1F3AE733A25757C1A9639C946597D6CF)

 

 
The Gregorian calendar reform hoax becomes the key to understanding also how the actual length of the year was modified to hide the truth about the 364 days of the year.

Official chronology of astronomy based on heliocentrism:

The day is measured by the daily reappearance of the Sun in the eastern sky. The actual measurement of a "day" takes place from one "high noon" to the next.

A "day" is actually 3 minutes and 57 seconds (56.55) longer (present consensus mean calculation) than the actual amount of time that it takes the Earth to rotate one time on her axis. The additional time (3 minutes 57 seconds) is necessary because the Earth has not only rotated on her axis but has also moved along in her orbit. It takes an additional 3 minutes and 56.55 seconds for the Earth to return to her daily "relative" position, which is indicated by identical shadows cast by the Sun's previous (yesterday) position.
 

Five synodical years of Venus equal 2919.6 days, whereas eight years of 365 days equal 2920 days, and eight Julian years of 365/4 days equal 2922 days. In other words, in four years there is a difference of approximately one day between the Venus and the Julian calendars.

The reform intended by the Canopus Decree did not take root because the people and the
conservatives among the priests kept faith with Venus and observed the New Year and other
festivals on the days regulated by it. As a matter of fact, we know that the Ptolemaic pharaohs were obliged to swear in the temple of Isis (Venus) that they would not reform the calendar, nor add a day every four years. Julius Caesar actually followed the Canopus Decree by fixing a calendar of 365/4 days. In —26 Augustus introduced the Julian year in Alexandria, but the Egyptians outside Alexandria still continued to observe the Venus year of 365 days, and Claudius Ptolemy, the Alexandrian astronomer of the second Christian century, wrote in his Almagest: "Eight Egyptian years without a sensible error equal five circlings of Venus."



The original 364 days/year calendar which was changed to 365 days/year (one day = 24 hours) is described in the Book of the Luminaries:

http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#Enoch_71 (http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#Enoch_71)


http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1461577.html#msg1461577 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1461577.html#msg1461577)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1447025.html#msg1447025 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1447025.html#msg1447025)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 01, 2013, 11:09:02 PM
All of physics and chemistry can be reduced to just one diagram:

(http://kendalastronomer.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/anu.jpg)

A subquark is composed of strings of bosons and antibosons.

Electricity/magnetism (same form of energy), light, infrared and ultraviolet rays, x-rays, terrestrial gravity are manifestations of these strings of bosons which travel/propagate through a subquark (laevorotatory and dextrorotatory).

Bosons, subquarks, quarks, mesons, baryons, the atoms themselves are resonating cavities.

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr01.htm (http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr01.htm)


The most important and crucial aspect of physics is left out of the textbooks: the fact that laevorotatory subquarks fill each nanometer of space and can be used immediately (double torsion, sound, electrical current) to produce "free energy" and antigravity.


As early as 1916, Professor Francis Nipher discovered antigravitational effects:

http://www.rexresearch.com/nipher/nipher1.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/nipher/nipher1.htm)



http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1394310.html#msg1394310 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1394310.html#msg1394310)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1401101.html#msg1401101 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1401101.html#msg1401101)


Francis Crick, codiscoverer of the DNA structure, describes this strange characteristic of the molecules of living organisms:

    It has been well known for many years that for any particular molecule only one hand occurs in nature.  For example the amino acids one finds in proteins are always what are called the L or levo amino acids, and never the D or dextro amino acids.  Only one of the two mirror possibilities occurs in proteins.


Linus Pauling, Nobel laureate in chemistry:

        This is a very puzzling fact . . . . All the proteins that have been investigated, obtained from animals and from plants, from higher organisms and from very simple organisms bacteria, molds, even viruses are found to have been made of L-amino acids.

One of the most intriguing works on chirality/isomerism:

How did protein amino acids get left-handed
while sugars got right-handed?


http://guava.physics.uiuc.edu/~nigel/courses/569/Essays_Fall2006/files/Rajan.pdf (http://guava.physics.uiuc.edu/~nigel/courses/569/Essays_Fall2006/files/Rajan.pdf)


Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 03, 2013, 03:12:00 AM
Among the most mysterious constructions in the world, the underground cities of Anatolia represent an extraordinary feat of engineering.

The Ozkonak underground city could house up to 60,000 people for three months.

The Derinkuyu underground city could provide shelter for up to 50,000 people.

http://www.goreme.com/derinkuyu-underground-city.php (http://www.goreme.com/derinkuyu-underground-city.php)

And there are a total of some 200 underground cities in Anatolia (they are still being found), with a total housing capacity estimated to be between 100,000 and 1,000,000 people.


It is obvious that they were built to escape a certain disaster (the entrances have gates in the shape of a millstone), after which the inhabitants returned to the surface.

Notwithstanding the amazing work done, how did these people know WHEN the cataclysm/natural catastrophy was going to occur (to the year and month)?


The very fact that it is underground suggests that the Derinkuyu Underground City was built as a shelter for residents of the homes aboveground. Its later use as just that only cements the theory. What is interesting about this theory is the sheer size of Derinkuyu. To construct such a massive shelter, there had to have been a good reason. It could protect from certain natural disasters as well. Whatever the case, the amount of foresight and effort that went into Derinkuyu would rival even modern emergency shelters, if that was its use. Building an emergency space for tens of thousands of people that is specifically for that use is not modern practice.


The new radical chronology provides us with answers, not only why these immense constructions were built, but, most importantly, when they were built.

http://turkeyufocase.blogspot.ro/2013/02/the-cities-of-cappadocia-is-cappadocia.html (http://turkeyufocase.blogspot.ro/2013/02/the-cities-of-cappadocia-is-cappadocia.html)



Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 03, 2013, 06:10:58 AM
Aborigines of the New World: “the Sun and the moon had equal light in the past."


At the other end of the world the Japanese asserted the same: the Nihongi Chronicle says that in the past "the radiance of the moon was next to that of the sun in splendor."


Traditions of many peoples maintain that the Moon lost a large part of its light and became much dimmer than it had been in earlier ages.


The memory of a world without a moon lives in oral tradition among the Indians. The Indians of the Bogota highlands in the eastern Cordilleras of Colombia relate some of their tribal reminiscences to the time before there was a moon. "In the earliest times, when the moon was not yet in the heavens," say the tribesmen of Chibchas.


Traditions of diverse peoples offer corroborative testimony to the effect that in a very early age, but still in the memory of mankind, no moon accompanied the Earth.


The Bundahishn (the most fantastic treatise in pre-Flood cosmology and astronomy) tells that   at a certain time in the past, the Earth had 24 hour a day light, coming from two Suns (the visible Sun and our present Moon) and that there were no solar or lunar eclipses.


Then, the Black Sun and its companion (the heavenly body which does bring about now the lunar eclipse) caused the first solar and lunar eclipses, in a cosmic catastrophe which is still recalled in various legends around the world.


Before the first eclipses occurred, when we had the two suns providing 24 hour a day light, our brain architecture was different.


Thalamus gland implant, brain architecture modification:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,56149.msg1403007.html#msg1403007 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,56149.msg1403007.html#msg1403007)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,55467.msg1384905.html#msg1384905 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,55467.msg1384905.html#msg1384905)


Photographs of the Black Sun in Antarctica:


http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,55467.msg1385209.html#msg1385209 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,55467.msg1385209.html#msg1385209)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,55467.msg1385488.html#msg1385488 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,55467.msg1385488.html#msg1385488)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 03, 2013, 07:24:20 AM
Biohomochirality and Terrestrial Gravity


Some molecules come in left– and right-handed forms that are mirror images of each other (i.e.: they are related like our left and right hands. Hence this property is called chirality, from the Greek word for hand. The two forms are called enantiomers (from the Greek word for opposite) or optical isomers, because they rotate plane-polarised light either to the right or to the left.).  All biological proteins are composed of only left-handed amino acids.  How this could have come about in a primordial soup has long been a puzzle to origin-of-life researchers, since both L (levo, left-handed) and D (dextro, right-handed) forms react indiscriminately.

Francis Crick, codiscoverer of the DNA structure, describes this strange characteristic of the molecules of living organisms:

    It has been well known for many years that for any particular molecule only one hand occurs in nature.  For example the amino acids one finds in proteins are always what are called the L or levo amino acids, and never the D or dextro amino acids.  Only one of the two mirror possibilities occurs in proteins.


Linus Pauling, Nobel laureate in chemistry:

        This is a very puzzling fact . . . . All the proteins that have been investigated, obtained from animals and from plants, from higher organisms and from very simple organisms bacteria, molds, even viruses are found to have been made of L-amino acids.


http://we.vub.ac.be/~dglg/Web/Teaching/Les/Orlifequestions/Cronin-Reisse.pdf (http://we.vub.ac.be/~dglg/Web/Teaching/Les/Orlifequestions/Cronin-Reisse.pdf) (origins of biohomochirality, an unsolved problem)

http://creation.com/origin-of-life-the-chirality-problem (http://creation.com/origin-of-life-the-chirality-problem) (the best work on the problem of biohomochirality)

http://crev.info/2004/06/mystery_of_the_lefthanded_proteins_solved (http://crev.info/2004/06/mystery_of_the_lefthanded_proteins_solved) (biohomochirality still unsolved)

http://guava.physics.uiuc.edu/~nigel/courses/569/Essays_Fall2006/files/Rajan.pdf (http://guava.physics.uiuc.edu/~nigel/courses/569/Essays_Fall2006/files/Rajan.pdf)


The latest attempt to try to solve the biohomochirality problem (salt induced peptides formation and the more recent work on potassium ions http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23536046 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23536046) ) has many unresolved major problems:

http://books.google.ro/books?id=5ZGUD49fMcAC&pg=PA165&lpg=PA165&dq=origin+of+salt+in+ocean+water+peptides+primordial+soup&source=bl&ots=FcdmUK6LXN&sig=oCgbOFYcBHsJp2SQ24xQJVxOozY&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=TFWCUcOrAoXatAaGjoGADA&ved=0CGwQ6AEwBzgK#v=onepage&q=origin%20of%20salt%20in%20ocean%20water%20peptides%20primordial%20soup&f=false (http://books.google.ro/books?id=5ZGUD49fMcAC&pg=PA165&lpg=PA165&dq=origin+of+salt+in+ocean+water+peptides+primordial+soup&source=bl&ots=FcdmUK6LXN&sig=oCgbOFYcBHsJp2SQ24xQJVxOozY&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=TFWCUcOrAoXatAaGjoGADA&ved=0CGwQ6AEwBzgK#v=onepage&q=origin%20of%20salt%20in%20ocean%20water%20peptides%20primordial%20soup&f=false)

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/evolutionary-theory-just-add-water/ (http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/evolutionary-theory-just-add-water/)


The best proofs from molecular biology and genetics which prove the theory of evolution to be just a myth:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,55960.msg1398306.html#msg1398306 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,55960.msg1398306.html#msg1398306)

http://lettherebelight-77.blogspot.ro/2012/02/what-evidence-is-found-for-first-life.html (http://lettherebelight-77.blogspot.ro/2012/02/what-evidence-is-found-for-first-life.html) (the best work on the proofs from molecular biology and genetics which demolish evolutionism)

http://www.uncommondescent.com/science-education/oldies-but-baddies-af-repeats-ncses-eight-challenges-to-id-from-ten-years-ago/#comment-453060 (http://www.uncommondescent.com/science-education/oldies-but-baddies-af-repeats-ncses-eight-challenges-to-id-from-ten-years-ago/#comment-453060) (R. Shapiro debunks the Miller experiment and the RNA world)


The origin of biohomochirality is to be found in the physics of the subquark:

(http://www.alliancesforhumanity.com/matter/matter_files/image007.jpg)

Dr.T. Henry Moray:

Further I realized that the energy was not coming out of the earth, but instead was coming to the earth from some outside source. These electrical oscillations in the form of waves were not simple oscillations, but were surgings --- like the waves of the sea --- coming to the earth continually, more in the daytime than at night, but always coming in vibrations from the reservoir of colossal energy out there in space.


Living tissue (with the exception of some bacteria) contains only L-amino acids (laevorotatory-left handed); dead tissue only D-amino acids (dextrorotatory-right handed).


Terrestrial gravity is represented by the dextrorotatory strings of receptive subquarks; antigravity comes into play once we can activate the laevorotatory strings of emissive subquarks (by torsion, sound, applying high electrical tension).

The physics of the subquark:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1401101.html#msg1401101 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1401101.html#msg1401101)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 04, 2013, 03:10:36 AM
A brief summary of the dating of the First Council of Nicaea and the startling conclusions following the fact that the Gregorian calendar reform never occurred in 1582 AD (the summary is from a writer who commented on the work done by G. Nosovsky, I also included commentaries from the chapter on new chronology penned by Nosovsky himself).


Let us turn to the canonical mediaeval ecclesial tractate - Matthew Vlastar’s Collection of Rules Devised by Holy Fathers, or The Alphabet Syntagma. This rather voluminous book represents the rendition of the rules formulated by the Ecclesial and local Councils of the Orthodox Church.

Matthew Vlastar is considered to have been a Holy Hierarch from Thessalonica, and written his tractate in the XIV century. Today’s copies are of a much later date, of course. A large part of Vlastar’s Collection of Rules Devised by Holy Fathers contains the rules for celebrating Easter. Among other things, it says the following:


“The Easter Rules makes the two following restrictions: it should not be celebrated together with the Judaists, and it can only be celebrated after the spring equinox. Two more had to be added later, namely: celebrate after the first full moon after the equinox, but not any day – it should be celebrated on the first Sunday after the equinox. All of these restrictions, except for the last one, are still valid (in times of Matthew Vlastar – the XIV century – Auth.), although nowadays we often celebrate on the Sunday that comes later. Namely, we always count two days after the Lawful Easter (that is, the Passover, or the full moon – Auth.) and end up with the subsequent Sunday. This didn’t happen out of ignorance or lack of skill on the part of the Elders, but due to lunar motion”

Let us emphasize that the quoted Collection of Rules Devised by Holy Fathers is a canonical mediaeval clerical volume, which gives it all the more authority, since we know that up until the XVII century, the Orthodox Church was very meticulous about the immutability of canonical literature and kept the texts exactly the way they were; with any alteration a complicated and widely discussed issue that would not have passed unnoticed.

So, by approximately 1330 AD, when Vlastar wrote his account, the last condition of Easter was violated: if the first Sunday happened to be within two days after the full moon, the celebration of Easter was postponed until the next weekend. This change was necessary because of the difference between the real full moon and the one computed in the Easter Book. The error, of which Vlastar was aware, is twenty-four hours in 304 years.

Therefore the Easter Book must have been written around AD 722 (722 = 1330 - 2 x 304). Had Vlastar known of the Easter Book’s 325 AD canonization, he would have noticed the three-day gap that had accumulated between the dates of the computed and the real full moon in more than a thousand years. So he either was unaware of the Easter Book or knew the correct date when it was written, which could not be near 325 AD.

G. Nosovsky: So, why the astronomical context of the Paschalia contradicts Scaliger’s dating (alleged 325 AD) of the Nicaean Council where the Paschalia was canonized?

This contradiction can easily be seen from the roughest of calculations.

1) The difference between the Paschalian full moons and the real ones grows at the rate of one day in 300 years.

2) A two-day difference had accumulated by the time of Vlastar, which is roughly dated 1330 AD.

3) Ergo, the Paschalia was compiled somewhere around 730 AD, since

1330 – (300 x 2) = 730.

It is understood that the Paschalia could only be canonized by the Council sometime later. But this fails to correspond to Scaliger’s dating of its canonization as 325 AD in any way at all!

Let us emphasize, that Matthew Vlastar himself, doesn’t see any contradiction here, since he is apparently unaware of the Nicaean Council’s dating as the alleged year 325 AD. A natural hypothesis: this traditional dating was introduced much later than Vlastar’s age. Most probably, it was first calculated in Scaliger’s time.

With the Easter formula derived by C.F. Gauss in 1800, Nosovsky calculated the Julian dates of all spring full moons from the first century AD up to his own time and compared them with the Easter dates obtained from the Easter Book. He reached a surprising conclusion: three of the four conditions imposed by the First Council of Nicaea were violated until 784, whereas Vlastar had noted that “all the restrictions except the last one have been kept firmly until now.” When proposing the year 325, Scaliger had no way of detecting this fault, because in the sixteenth century the full-moon calculations for the distant past couldn’t be performed with precision.

Another reason to doubt the validity of 325 AD is that the Easter dates repeat themselves every 532 years. The last cycle started in 1941, and previous ones were 1409 to 1940, 877 to 1408 and 345 to 876. But a periodic process is similar to drawing a circle—you can choose any starting point. Therefore, it seems peculiar for the council to have met in 325 AD and yet not to have begun the Easter cycle until 345.

Nosovsky thought it more reasonable that the First Council of Nicaea had taken place in 876 or 877 AD, the latter being the starting year of the first Easter cycle after 784 AD, which is when the Easter Book must have been compiled. This conclusion about the date of the First Council of Nicaea agreed with his full-moon calculations, which showed that the real and the computed full moons occurred on the same day only between 700 and 1000 AD. From 1000 on, the real full moons occurred more than twenty-four hours after the computed ones, whereas before 700 the order was reversed. The years 784 and 877 also match the traditional opinion that about a century had passed between the compilation and the subsequent canonization of the Easter Book.

G. Nosovky:

The Council that introduced the Paschalia – according to the modern tradition as well as the mediaeval one, was the Nicaean Council – could not have taken place before 784 AD, since this was the first year when the calendar date for the Christian Easter stopped coinciding with the Passover full moon due to slow astronomical shifts of lunar phases.

The last such coincidence occurred in 784 AD, and after that year, the dates of Easter and Passover drifted apart forever. This means the Nicaean Council could not have possibly canonized the Paschalia in IV AD, when the calendar Easter Sunday would coincide with the Passover eight (!) times – in 316, 319, 323, 343, 347, 367, 374, and 394 AD, and would even precede it by two days five (!) times, which is directly forbidden by the fourth Easter rule, that is, in 306 and 326 (allegedly already a year after the Nicaean Council), as well as the years 346, 350, and 370.

Thus, if we’re to follow the consensual chronological version, we’ll have to consider the first Easter celebrations after the Nicaean Council to blatantly contradict three of the four rules that the Council decreed specifically for this feast! The rules allegedly become broken the very next year after the Council decrees them, yet start to be followed zealously and in full detail five centuries (!) after that.

Let us note that J.J. Scaliger could not have noticed this obvious nonsense during his compilation of the consensual ancient chronology, since computing true full moon dates for the distant past had not been a solved problem in his epoch.

The above mentioned absurdity was noticed much later, when the state of astronomical science became satisfactory for said purpose, but it was too late already, since Scaliger’s version of chronology had already been canonized, rigidified, and baptized “scientific”, with all major corrections forbidden.


Now, the ecclesiastical vernal equinox was set on March 21st because the Church of Alexandria, whose staff were reputed to have astronomical expertise, reckoned that March 21st was the date of the equinox in 325 AD, the year of the First Council of Nicaea.

The Council of Laodicea was a regional synod of approximately thirty clerics from Asia Minor that assembled about 363–364 AD in Laodicea, Phrygia Pacatiana, in the official chronology.

The major concerns of the Council involved regulating the conduct of church members. The Council expressed its decrees in the form of written rules or canons.

However, the most pressing issue, the fact that the calendar Easter Sunday would coincide with the Passover eight (!) times – in 316, 319, 323, 343, 347, 367, 374, and 394 AD, and would even precede it by two days five (!) times, which is directly forbidden by the fourth Easter rule, that is, in 306 and 326 (allegedly already a year after the Nicaean Council), as well as the years 346, 350, and 370 was NOT presented during this alleged Council of Laodicea.


We are told that the motivation for the Gregorian reform was that the Julian calendar assumes that the time between vernal equinoxes is 365.25 days, when in fact it is about 11 minutes less. The accumulated error between these values was about 10 days (starting from the Council of Nicaea) when the reform was made, resulting in the equinox occurring on March 11 and moving steadily earlier in the calendar, also by the 16th century AD the winter solstice fell around December 11.


But, in fact, as we see from the information presented in the preceeding paragraphs, the Council of Nicaea could not have taken place any earlier than the year 876-877 e.n., which means that in the year 1582, the winter solstice would have arrived on December 16, not at all on December 11.

Papal Bull, Gregory XIII, 1582:

Therefore we took care not only that the vernal equinox returns on its former date, of which it has already deviated approximately ten days since the Nicene Council, and so that the fourteenth day of the Paschal moon is given its rightful place, from which it is now distant four days and more, but also that there is founded a methodical and rational system which ensures, in the future, that the equinox and the fourteenth day of the moon do not move from their appropriate positions.


Given the fact that in the year 1582, the winter solstice would have arrived on December 16, not at all on December 11, this discrepancy could not have been missed by T. Brahe, or G. Galilei, or J. Kepler - thus we can understand the fiction at work in the official chronology.

Newton agrees with the date of December 11, 1582 as well; moreover, Britain and the British Empire adopted the Gregorian calendar in 1752 (official chronology); again, more fiction at work: no European country could have possibly adopted the Gregorian calendar reformation in the period 1582-1800, given the absolute fact that the winter solstice must have falled on December 16 in the year 1582 AD, and not at all on December 11 (official chronology).


The conclusions are as follows:

No historical or astronomical proof exists that before 1700 AD any gradual shift in the orientation of Earth's axis of rotation (axial precession) ever took place. The 10 day cumulative error in the Vernal Equinox date since the Council of Nicaea until the year 1582 AD is due just to the reform of the Julian calendar: if we add the axial precession argument, then  the cumulative errors would have added to even more than 10 days, because of the reverse precessional movement. No axial precession means that the Earth did not ever orbit around the Sun, as we have been led to believe. And it means that the entire chronology of the official history has been forged at least after 1750 AD.

In the FE theory, the 50 seconds of arc per year (1 degree/71.6 years) change of longitude of the Pole Star is due to the movement of the Pole Star itself and NOT due to any axial precession of the Earth.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 19, 2013, 10:19:22 AM
An electromagnetic wave is simply a ripple in the sea of ether waves: it consists of two scalar waves, which propagate in a double torsion motion.

Here is N. Tesla describing the difference between an e/m wave and a scalar wave:

You have to have a large self-inductance in order that you may accomplish two things: First, a comparatively low frequency, which will reduce the radiation of the electromagnetic waves to a comparatively small value, and second, a great resonant effect.  That is not possible in an antenna, for instance, of large capacity and small self-inductance.  A large capacity and small self-inductance is the poorest kind of circuit which can be constructed; it gives a very small resonant effect.  That was the reason why in my experiments in Colorado the energies were 1,000 times greater than in the present antennae.

To be more explicit, I take a very large self-inductance and a comparatively small capacity, which I have constructed in a certain way so that the electricity cannot leak out.  I thus obtain a low frequency; but, as you know, the electromagnetic radiation is proportionate to the square root of the capacity divided by the self-induction.  I do not permit the energy to go out; I accumulate in that circuit a tremendous energy. 

You see, the apparatus which I have devised was an apparatus enabling one to produce tremendous differences of potential and currents in an antenna circuit.  These requirements must be fulfilled, whether you transmit by currents of conduction, or whether you transmit by electromagnetic waves.  You want high potential currents, you want a great amount of vibratory energy; but you can graduate this vibratory energy.  By proper design and choice of wave lengths, you can arrange it so that you get, for instance, 5 percent in these electromagnetic waves and 95 percent in the current that goes through the earth.  That is what I am doing.  Or you can get, as these radio men, 95 percent in the energy of electromagnetic waves and only 5 percent in the energy of the current. . . . The apparatus is suitable for one or the other method.  I am not producing radiation with my system; I am suppressing electromagnetic waves. . . . In my system, you should free yourself of the idea that there is radiation, that the energy is radiated.  It is not radiated; it is conserved. . . .


Tesla kept the ripples in the ether sea (electromagnetic waves) to a minimum, while sending the entire signal/impulse ONLY through the laevorotatory ether scalar wave (sometimes going beyond the speed of light): it is exactly how he achieved his legendary and fantastic results, by NOT using the hertzian ripples in the ether waves.

A normal electromagnetic wave will produce a temporary ripple in the ether sea, the signal transmitted will travel at the speed of light, in the absence of a higher density of aether (medium) and ether waves.

What electromagnetic radiation looks like (subquark strings):

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,58190.msg1489714.html#msg1489714 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,58190.msg1489714.html#msg1489714)

More information here:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,58190.msg1489785.html#msg1489785 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,58190.msg1489785.html#msg1489785)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 24, 2013, 06:10:23 AM
Therefore, the truncated Maxwell equations refer ONLY to the temporary hertzian ripples in the ether sea, and NOT to the scalar/ether waves themselves:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,58190.msg1489693.html#msg1489693 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,58190.msg1489693.html#msg1489693)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,58190.msg1489785.html#msg1489785 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,58190.msg1489785.html#msg1489785)


Now, a closed-form formula for the natural logarithm:

LN v = ((-2 +{2+[2+...(2+ 1/v + v)^1/2]^1/2}^1/2))^1/2 x 2^n

n+1 parantheses to evaluate - in the last parenthesis we substract 2 and take the square root one last time (n+1), before we multiply the result by 2^n

For v very large, we can omit the term 1/v


By summing the nested square root function, we obtain the final result:

LN v = 2n x ( v(1/2^n) - 2 + v-(2^-n) )1/2

Of course, we can use the first formula for computation utilizing only a pocket calculator with only the four basic arithmetic operations (since a square root function is essentially a continued fraction).


And there are more formulas to be derived from the logarithm continued function:

COS @ = 1/2 X (({[(2 - @^2/2^n)^2 -2)^2...]-2}^2 -2)) (n/2+1 evaluations)

COS^-1 @ = ((2- {2+ [2+ (2+ 2@)^1/2]...^1/2}))^1/2 x 2^n (n+1 evaluations)

 
COSH v = 1/2 x (({[( ( (2 + v2/2^n)^2) -2)^2] -2)^2 ...-2}^2 -2)) (n/2 +1 evaluations)

TAN-1 v = ((2- {2+ [2+ (2+ 2{1/(1+ v2)1/2})^1/2]...^1/2}))^1/2 x 2^n (n+1 evaluations)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 17, 2013, 05:55:29 AM
High School Physics 12th grade textbook, 2020 edition, table of contents


I. Ether Quantum Physics


1. Atomic structure of the subquark (tachyon)


2. String theory - bosons and antibosons

2.1 Vortex model of the atom

2.2 Geometrical structure of the elements

2.3 Boson and antiboson configuration


3. Antigravity through sound and double torsion

3.1 UFOs - structure, form, flight mechanism physics

3.2 Granite megalithic blocks levitation

3.3 Transmutation of metals

3.4 Dr. Bruce DePalma and Dr. Nikolai Kozyrev experiments


Endnote: failed theories of the 20th century - planetary model of the atom


II. Magnetricity


1. Linus Pauling experiments: laevorotatory structure of the living organisms


2. Ether – telluric currents


3. Aether – medium of propagation of ether waves


4. G.B. Airy's experiment (1871)


5. Compton effect explained by ether waves


6. Ball lightning and cavity resonators


Endnote: failed theories of the 20th century - the theory of relativity


III. Free energy and ether waves


1. Nikola Tesla nonhertzian wave analysis


2. Floyd Sweet transistor


3. Biefeld-Brown effect


4. Viktor Schauberger double torsion theory



IV. Sound - fundamental force of the Universe


1. The discoveries of John W. Keely


2. Implosion of the atom: from protons to baryons, mesons, quarks, and subquarks


3. Resonating cavity theory


4. Cymatics


5. Sacred cubits, lateral octaves, FA-MI interval
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 30, 2013, 04:15:57 AM

They never explain where this large amount of gravity comes from? ???

Force experienced by a 1 kilogram object on the surface of the earth is governed by: F = GMm/r^2

F = (6.67x10^-11 x 1 x 5.972E24)/ (6,371x10^3)^2
F = 9.8136N

The large amount of gravity comes from the massive rock underneath you.


Gases do not obey an attractive gravitational law:

SEMIDIURNAL CHANGES IN BAROMETRIC PRESSURE

The weight of the atmosphere is constantly changing as the changing barometric pressure indicates. Low pressure areas are not necessarily encircled by high pressure belts. The semidiurnal changes in barometric pressure are not explainable by the mechanistic principles of gravitation and the heat effect of solar radiation. The cause of these variations is unknown.


“It has been known now for two and a half centuries, that there are more or less daily variations in the height of the barometer, culminating in two maxima and two minima during the course of 24 hours. The same observation has been made and puzzled over at every station at which pressure records were kept and studied, but without success in finding for it the complete physical explanation. In speaking of the diurnal and semidiurnal variations of the barometer, Lord Rayleigh says: ‘The relative magnitude of the latter [semidiurnal variations], as observed at most parts of the earth’s surface, is still a mystery, all the attempted explanations being illusory.’”


One maximum is at 10 a.m., the other at 10 p.m.; the two minima are at 4 a.m. and 4 p.m. The heating effect of the sun can explain neither the time when the maxima appear nor the time of the minima of these semidiurnal variations. If the pressure becomes lower without the air becoming lighter through a lateral expansion due to heat, this must mean that the same mass of air gravitates with changing force at different hours.


The lowest pressure is near the equator, in the belt of the doldrums. Yet the troposphere is highest at the equator, being on the average about 18 km. high there; it is lower in the moderate latitudes, and only 6 km. high above the ground at the poles (official atmospheric data).



GASES IN THE ATMOSPHERE DO NOT OBEY AN ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATIONAL LAW

The ingredients of the air—oxygen, nitrogen, argon and other gases—though not in a compound but in a mixture, are found in equal proportions at various levels of the atmosphere despite great differences in specific weights. The explanation accepted in science is this: “Swift winds keep the gases thoroughly mixed, so that except for water-vapor the composition of the atmosphere is the same throughout the troposphere to a high degree of approximation.”  This explanation cannot be true. If it were true, then the moment the wind subsides, the nitrogen should stream upward, and the oxygen should drop, preceded by the argon. If winds are caused by a difference in weight between warm and cold air, the difference in weight between heavy gases high in the atmosphere and light gases at the lower levels should create storms, which would subside only after they had carried each gas to its natural place in accordance with its gravity or specific weight. But nothing of the kind happens.

When some aviators expressed the belief that “pockets of noxious gas” are in the air, the scientists replied:

“There are no ‘pockets of noxious gas.’ No single gas, and no other likely mixture of gases, has, at ordinary temperatures and pressures, the same density as atmospheric air. Therefore, a pocket of foreign gas in that atmosphere would almost certainly either bob up like a balloon, or sink like a stone in water.”

Why, then, do not the atmospheric gases separate and stay apart in accordance with the specific gravities?


Ozone, though heavier than oxygen, is absent in the lower layers of the atmosphere, is present in the upper layers, and is not subject to the “mixing effect of the wind.” The presence of ozone high in the atmosphere suggests that oxygen must be still higher: “As oxygen is less dense than ozone, it will tend to rise to even greater heights.”  Nowhere is it asked why ozone does not descend of its own weight or at least why it is not mixed by the wind with other gases.


Liquids do not obey an attractive gravitational law:

Over the oceans, the gravitational pull is greater than over the continents, though according to the theory of gravitation the reverse should be true; the hypothesis of isostasy also is unable to explain this phenomenon. The gravitational pull drops at the coast line of the continents. Furthermore, the distribution of gravitation in the sea often has the peculiarity of being stronger where the water is deeper. “In the whole Gulf and Caribbean region the generalization seems to hold that the deeper the water, the more strongly positive the anomalies.”

As far as observations could establish, the sea tides do not influence the plumb line, which is contrary to what is expected. Observations on reservoirs of water, where the mass of water could be increased and decreased, gave none of the results anticipated on the basis of the theory of gravitation.


Solids do not obey an attractive gravitational law:

Dr Kozyrev's experiments began in the 1950s and were conducted since the 1970s with the ongoing assistance of Dr V. V. Nasonov, who helped to standardise the laboratory methods and the statistical analysis of the results. Detectors using rotation and vibration were specially designed and made that would react in the presence of torsion fields, which Kozyrev called the "flow of time".

It is important to remember that these experiments were conducted under the strictest conditions, repeated in hundreds or in many cases thousands of trials and were written about in extensive mathematical detail. They have been rigorously peer-reviewed, and Lavrentyev and others have replicated the results independently.


According to the theory developed by N.A.Kozyrev, time and rotation are closely interconnected. In order to verify his theory, N.A.Kozyrev conducted a series of experiments with spinning gyroscopes. The goal of these experiments was to make a measurement of the forces arising while the gyroscope was spinning. N.A.Kozyrev detected that the weight of the spinning gyroscope changes slightly depending on the angular velocity and the direction of rotation. The effect he discovered was not large, but the nature of the arising forces could not be explained by existing theories. N.A.Kozyrev explained the observed effect as being the manifestation of some "physical properties of time".



In Dr. Bruce DePalma's Spinning Ball Experiment, a ball spinning at 27,000 RPM and a non-spinning ball were catapulted side-by-side with equal momentum and projection angle. In defiance of all who reject the ether as unrealistic, the spinning ball actually weighed less, and traveled higher than its non-spinning counterpart.


DePalma and his assistants were experts for photograph recording of high speed motions. In 1974 they studied parabolic curves of bodies thrown upward, using ball bearings and catapults. Ball bearings were put into rotation before start and also not-rotating likely objects were used for comparison. In 1977 these experiments were repeated by most precisely working equipment and Bruce DePalma published paper entitled ´Understanding the Dropping of the Spinning Ball Experiment´. His astonishment clearly is expressed, e.g. by this section:

Basically the spinning object going higher than the identical non-rotating control with the same initial velocity, and, then falling faster than the identical non-rotating control; present a dilemma which can only be resolved or understood -- on the basis of radically new concepts in physics -- concepts so radical that only the heretofore un-understood results of other experiments, (the elastic collision of a rotating and an identical non- rotating object, et al.), and new conceptions of physics growing out of the many discussions and correspondence pertaining to rotation, inertia, gravity, and motion in general.

It CANNOT be explained without the ether concept: the flagrant violation of Newton's laws, means that for the same mass, the same supposed law of universal gravitation, the spinning ball actually weighed less.


http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,50942.msg1248776.html#msg1248776 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,50942.msg1248776.html#msg1248776)

(Mountainous masses do not exert the gravitational pull expected by the theory of gravitation)

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 30, 2013, 04:52:40 AM
Ovid, Metamorphoses (transl. F. J. Miller), Book II:

"The chariot of the sun, driven by Phaethon, moved "no longer in the same
course as before." The horses "break loose from their course" and "rush aimlessly, knocking
against the stars set deep in the sky and snatching the chariot along through uncharted ways."
The constellations of the cold Bears tried to plunge into the forbidden sea, and the sun's chariot
roamed through unknown regions of the air. It was "borne along just as a ship driven before the
headlong blast, whose pilot has let the useless rudder go and abandoned the ship to the gods and
prayers."

"The earth bursts into flame, the highest parts first, and splits into deep cracks, and its moisture is
all dried up. The meadows are burned to white ashes; the trees are consumed, green leaves and
all, and the ripe grain furnishes fuel for its own destruction. . . . Great cities perish with their
walls, and the vast conflagration reduces whole nations to ashes."

"The woods are ablaze with the mountains. . . . Aetna is blazing boundlessly . . . and twin-peaked Parnassus. . . . Nor does its chilling clime save Scythia; Caucasus burns . . . and the heaven-piercing Alps and cloud-capped Apennines."
The scorched clouds belched forth smoke. Phaethon sees the earth aflame. "He can no longer
bear the ashes and whirling sparks, and is completely shrouded in the dense, hot smoke. In this
pitchy darkness he cannot tell where he is or whither he is going." "It was then, as men think, that the peoples of Aethiopia became black-skinned, since the blood was drawn to the surface of their bodies by the heat."
"Then also Libya became a desert, for the heat dried up her moisture. . . . The Don's waters
steam; Babylonian Euphrates burns; the Ganges, Phasis, Danube, Alpheus boil; Spercheos' banks
are aflame. The golden sands of Tagus melt in the intense heat, and the swans . . . are scorched. .

. . The Nile fled in terror to the ends of the earth . . . the seven mouths lie empty, filled with dust;
seven broad channels, all without a stream. The same mischance dries up the Thracian rivers,
Hebrus and Strymon; also the rivers of the west, the Rhine, Rhone, Po and the Tiber. . . . Great
cracks yawn everywhere. . . . Even the sea shrinks up, and what was but now a great watery
expanse is a dry plain of sand. The mountains, which the deep sea had covered before, spring
forth, and increase the numbers of the scattered Cyclades."


A well-known student of S. Freud and roommate of A. Einstein at Princeton had the following comments:

How could the poet have known that a change in the movement of the sun across the firmament
must cause a world conflagration, blazing of volcanoes, boiling of rivers, disappearance of seas,
birth of deserts, emergence of islands, if the sun never changed its harmonious journey from
sunrise to sunset?

How the Roman poet Ovid could have known of the relation between the interrupted movement of the sun and a world fire unless such a catastrophe had really occurred?


Now we know that the “ancient” Greek, Roman, Egyptian, Mayan, Babylonian bibliographical sources were all forgeries of the 18th Century, as demonstrated with ample proofs here in the new radical chronology subject.

The only sources we can trust for a description of  past planetary collisions (FE theory) in Worlds in Collision are as follows: Polynesia, Maoris of New Zealand, Samoan tribes, Tahiti, Hawaii, Loanga, Kanga, Wanyoro tribes in Africa, Oraibi, Kaska, Choctaw and Pawnee tribes in North America, Lapland tribes.

http://web.archive.org/web/20120913084341/http://openeye.99k.org/Books/Worlds%20In%20Collision.pdf (http://web.archive.org/web/20120913084341/http://openeye.99k.org/Books/Worlds%20In%20Collision.pdf)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/21746049/Velikovsky-Worlds-in-Collision# (http://www.scribd.com/doc/21746049/Velikovsky-Worlds-in-Collision#)

Their description matches exactly that narrated by "Ovid", which means that the authors of the Metamorphoses were actual witnesses to some of these cosmic catastrophes.


The first great cataclysm occurred some 50 years before the Flood, when the first solar and lunar eclipses took place.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1488602.html#msg1488602 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1488602.html#msg1488602)


The second cataclysm happened very close to the year 1700 AD (official chronological dating): the great Flood/Deluge, when the extraordinary underground cities of Anatolia were built:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1488591.html#msg1488591 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1488591.html#msg1488591)


The remaining two major cosmic catastrophes occurred during the exodus of Seth (Kush) to the Sinai Peninsula and the exodus of Akhenaton (son of Nimrod) to the same region near Egypt a few decades later (1750 AD).



Revelation, chapter 1, verse 11:

Saying, I am Alpha and Omega

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-SvnTwKLNxlg/TtfheddPMUI/AAAAAAAAOVI/X-r_Yb-Cn20/s200/alpha_omega+%25281%2529.jpg)

(http://www.essaysbyekowa.com/Druids_files/ankh2.jpg)

(http://thetalkingpot.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/ankh_svg.png?w=165&h=300)

I am Alpha and Omega = I am Ankh = I am Osiris

(http://www.diagnosis2012.co.uk/osi.gif)


More details here:

http://www.thegodabovegod.com/index_files/Jim%20West%20Articles/Lucifer%20the%20Lightbringer.htm (http://www.thegodabovegod.com/index_files/Jim%20West%20Articles/Lucifer%20the%20Lightbringer.htm)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 09, 2013, 06:08:46 AM
There is another way to prove that the new radical chronology is correct: the dimensions of the first Temple of Solomon, the Temple with a human form.

www.templesecrets.info (http://www.templesecrets.info)

(http://www.templesecrets.info/index/firsttemple3.gif)
(copyright tony badillo)

The key to the Temple’s secrets is in the floor plan and layout of its furnishings. The “plan” or “pattern” (Heb., tabnit) of its structure and  furniture is mentioned I Chronicles 28:11, 12, 19. Tabnit is also translated as design, structure, figure, form, likeness, and shape. Thus, in Deuteronomy  4:16-18 the Israelites are forbidden making any likeness, form, or figure of a human or beast for worship.

(http://www.templesecrets.info/index/firsttemple4.gif)
(copyright tony badillo)

(http://www.templesecrets.info/index/firsttemple8.gif)
(copyright tony badillo)

Thus the building’s floor plan and even the holy items put inside were secretly designed to contain the hidden form of a man.


The Temple's interior architecture reveals King Nebuchadnezzar’s metal statue:

(http://www.templesecrets.info/index/firsttemple10.gif)


This also explains the most bizarre incident in the Torah, the brazen serpent quote from Numbers 21:7 - the mother of all graven images - the commandments were added later in the priestly version.

www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,45731.msg1130692.html#msg1130692 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,45731.msg1130692.html#msg1130692) (who wrote the bible/koran section)


http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1469190.html#msg1469190 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1469190.html#msg1469190)


Numbers 28:18

In the first day shall be an holy convocation; ye shall do no manner of servile work therein

Matthew and John, we are told, WERE IN THE SAME ROOM AND WITNESSES OF THE LAST SUPPER.

John 13:1

Now before the feast of the passover, when Jesus knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end.


Matthew 26:17

Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover?

Mark 14:12

And on the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they sacrificed the Passover lamb, his disciples said to him, “Where will you have us go and prepare for you to eat the Passover?”

The episode described in John 13 could not possibly have taken place given the text to be found in Matthew and Mark: a direct violation of the commandment given in Numbers 28:18


The authors of the gospels of Matthew and Mark HAD NO IDEA/KNOWLEDGE OF THE EXISTENCE OF THE REGULATION/LAW PRESENTED IN NUMBERS 28:18 - the gospel of John was added AFTER the Priestly version was introduced in the Old Testament, that is why the date of the last supper was changed by a whole day.


HOW COULD Clement, Origen, Ignatius, Polycarp, Paul, not to mention Augustine, Eusebius and Jerome/Hieronymus himself, miss these incredible discrepancies?

Any scribe in the 1st or 2nd century AD would have noticed these serious and grave errors and would have pointed them out.

It is inconceivable that these errors could have passed unnoticed for some 2000 years.

As I proved earlier (see the New Dating of the Council of Nicaea message at the top of this page), both the Old and the New Testament were written at the same time in the period 1775-1780 AD; thus, just some 50 years later, the scholars began to notice the teeming errors and discrepancies in the text.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 11, 2013, 06:09:47 AM
Official science: "The precession of the equinoxes is caused by the gravitational forces of the Sun and the Moon, and to a lesser extent other bodies, on the Earth."

But the new radical chronology is the most direct and perfect proof that there was no axial precession (modification of the Earth axis of supposed rotation) in the past.

www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1488947.html#msg1488947 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1488947.html#msg1488947)

Thus there are no external attractive gravitational forces acting upon the Earth (sun, moon, or any other planet) - the same conclusion was reached by the author of the letters attributed to Newton (correspondence with Halley, Bentley and Oldenburg), as we have seen earlier.

Therefore terrestrial gravity is a force due to pressure (it cannot be an attractive force, or a rotational type of force): a confirmation of the correctness of the original set of Maxwell's equations.

Maxwell's original equations tell us that terrestrial gravity, electricity and magnetism are one and the same force: double helix theory of the magnetic field - the dextrorotatory helix (subquark string) is the terrestrial gravitational force, the laevorotatory helix acts as the electrical (antiterrestrial gravitational) force.

The experiments conducted by F. Nipher, T. Townsend Brown, T. Henry Moray and N. Tesla prove conclusively that electricity can  and does cause antigravitational effects upon objects.

Since terrestrial gravity is actually a force due to the pressure of telluric currents, it means that the surface of our Earth is completely flat: a spherical earth needs an attractive type of gravitational force for the entire heliocentric scenario to function.

As there are no solar/lunar/planetary gravitational forces acting upon the Earth, it means that the rotational type of gravity which does provide the force needed for the orbits of the Sun/Moon/Planets/Stars to exist, is separated by some kind of energy barrier/shield from the terrestrial pressure-type of gravity.

These conclusions can be easily reached once the full power of the new radical chronology is taken into account: no axial precession of the Earth has ever taken place in the past.


Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 11, 2013, 07:10:21 AM
The colossal dimensions of the Baalbek monoliths:

#ws (http://#ws)

#ws (http://#ws)

#noexternalembed-ws (http://#noexternalembed-ws)


Acoustic Levitation used to transport immense blocks of granite:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1388219.html#msg1388219 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1388219.html#msg1388219)

New radical chronology: baalbek monoliths - period of 1750 - 1770 AD

Eastern Europe, Bridge of the Giants (built in the same period, using the same technology: ball lightning acoustic levitation):

Podul Lui Dumnezeu, Ponoare Mehedinti Romania www.ponoare.ro (http://#)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 26, 2013, 07:43:16 AM
Ovid, Metamorphoses (transl. F. J. Miller), Book II:

"The chariot of the sun, driven by Phaethon, moved "no longer in the same
course as before." The horses "break loose from their course" and "rush aimlessly, knocking
against the stars set deep in the sky and snatching the chariot along through uncharted ways."
The constellations of the cold Bears tried to plunge into the forbidden sea, and the sun's chariot
roamed through unknown regions of the air. It was "borne along just as a ship driven before the
headlong blast, whose pilot has let the useless rudder go and abandoned the ship to the gods and
prayers."

"The earth bursts into flame, the highest parts first, and splits into deep cracks, and its moisture is
all dried up. The meadows are burned to white ashes; the trees are consumed, green leaves and
all, and the ripe grain furnishes fuel for its own destruction. . . . Great cities perish with their
walls, and the vast conflagration reduces whole nations to ashes."

"The woods are ablaze with the mountains. . . . Aetna is blazing boundlessly . . . and twin-peaked Parnassus. . . . Nor does its chilling clime save Scythia; Caucasus burns . . . and the heaven-piercing Alps and cloud-capped Apennines."
The scorched clouds belched forth smoke. Phaethon sees the earth aflame. "He can no longer
bear the ashes and whirling sparks, and is completely shrouded in the dense, hot smoke. In this
pitchy darkness he cannot tell where he is or whither he is going." "It was then, as men think, that the peoples of Aethiopia became black-skinned, since the blood was drawn to the surface of their bodies by the heat."
"Then also Libya became a desert, for the heat dried up her moisture. . . . The Don's waters
steam; Babylonian Euphrates burns; the Ganges, Phasis, Danube, Alpheus boil; Spercheos' banks
are aflame. The golden sands of Tagus melt in the intense heat, and the swans . . . are scorched. .

. . The Nile fled in terror to the ends of the earth . . . the seven mouths lie empty, filled with dust;
seven broad channels, all without a stream. The same mischance dries up the Thracian rivers,
Hebrus and Strymon; also the rivers of the west, the Rhine, Rhone, Po and the Tiber. . . . Great
cracks yawn everywhere. . . . Even the sea shrinks up, and what was but now a great watery
expanse is a dry plain of sand. The mountains, which the deep sea had covered before, spring
forth, and increase the numbers of the scattered Cyclades."


A well-known student of S. Freud and roommate of A. Einstein at Princeton had the following comments:

How could the poet have known that a change in the movement of the sun across the firmament
must cause a world conflagration, blazing of volcanoes, boiling of rivers, disappearance of seas,
birth of deserts, emergence of islands, if the sun never changed its harmonious journey from
sunrise to sunset?

How the Roman poet Ovid could have known of the relation between the interrupted movement of the sun and a world fire unless such a catastrophe had really occurred?


Now we know that the “ancient” Greek, Roman, Egyptian, Mayan, Babylonian bibliographical sources were all forgeries of the 18th Century, as demonstrated with ample proofs here in the new radical chronology subject.

The only sources we can trust for a description of  past planetary collisions (FE theory) in Worlds in Collision are as follows: Polynesia, Maoris of New Zealand, Samoan tribes, Tahiti, Hawaii, Loanga, Kanga, Wanyoro tribes in Africa, Oraibi, Kaska, Choctaw and Pawnee tribes in North America, Lapland tribes.

http://web.archive.org/web/20120913084341/http://openeye.99k.org/Books/Worlds%20In%20Collision.pdf (http://web.archive.org/web/20120913084341/http://openeye.99k.org/Books/Worlds%20In%20Collision.pdf)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/21746049/Velikovsky-Worlds-in-Collision# (http://www.scribd.com/doc/21746049/Velikovsky-Worlds-in-Collision#)

Their description matches exactly that narrated by "Ovid", which means that the authors of the Metamorphoses were actual witnesses to some of these cosmic catastrophes.


The first great cataclysm occurred some 50 years before the Flood, when the first solar and lunar eclipses occurred.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1488602.html#msg1488602 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1488602.html#msg1488602)


The second cataclysm happened very close to the year 1700 AD (official chronological dating): the great Flood/Deluge, when the extraordinary underground cities of Anatolia were built:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1488591.html#msg1488591 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1488591.html#msg1488591)


The remaining two major cosmic catastrophes occurred during the exodus of Seth (Kush) to the Sinai Peninsula and the exodus of Akhenaton (son of Nimrod) to the same region near Egypt a few decades later (1750 AD).



Adam Maloof (Princeton) and Lonnie Thompson (Ohio State University) confirm that a stupendous catastrophy occurred some 5200 years ago (of course, they will never accept that this catastrophe actually happened during the 18th century, as proven and described here).

http://web.archive.org/web/20131216205151/http://www.mayanendoftheworldplanetx.com/Pages/videostudio.html (http://web.archive.org/web/20131216205151/http://www.mayanendoftheworldplanetx.com/Pages/videostudio.html)

Princeton University geoscientist, Adam Maloof investigates 2012 Maya prognostications, in response to the many queries he has received concerning the possibility of an upcoming geographical poleshift. Dr. Maloof's specialities include paleogeography, the study of continental plate transmigrations. In these National Geographic video clips, he travels from the frigid Arctic to the scorching outbacks of Australia to the dense forrest of Central America, to investigate geologic evidence and traditions of any pass geographic poleshift.

His research revealed not one but two important discoveries; one poleshift transpired slowly over a million years( posing no threat to life on earth) while the other happened abruptly some 5200 years ago(approximately the end of the Maya's last Great Cycle, when the last "world" ended.) Perhaps a coincidence, but it was enough for Dr. Maloof to pursue and study the ancient Maya legacy in greater depth. A journey that would take him from Dresden Germany, home of the famous Dresden Codex (one of four codices that survived the Inquisition) to the ancient ruins of Chi'chen Itza.

To understand how these ancient people with such remarkable mathematical and astronomical skills, were inclined to prognosticate the future with such conviction. Their obsession with cycles and climate change, their beliefs that all major cycles began and ended with global destruction.

With the aid of notable Paleoclimatologist, Lonnie Thompson from Ohio State University, they venture to the summit of the Quelccaya ice caps of the Peruvian Andes at sixteen thousand feet, to unlock secrets trapped in the glaciers for over five thousands years. While continents apart, from ice core samples at Mt. Kilimanjaro, Africa to "Otzi The Iceman" from the Austrian Alps, all corroborate a global disaster at the end of the last Long Count cycle and provide possible insight on what may happen at the end of this current Great Cycle.

Full video can be seen in the National Geographic 2012 The Final Prophecy documentary.

And of course we have a Flat Earth alternative to the Ice Ages hypothesis.

Billions of tons of ice would have fallen on the polar regions, flash-freezing everything in little more than an instant.
 
This, at last, would explain the mystery of the mammoths found frozen where they stood. The mammoth, contrary to belief, was not a cold region animal, but one which lived in temperate grasslands.

 
Somehow those temperate regions were frozen in a moment. Some mammoths have been found frozen in the middle of eating! There you are munching away and the next thing you know you’re an ice lolly. If this ionized ice did rain down, the biggest build up would have been nearest to the magnetic poles because they would have had the most powerful attraction. Again, that is the case. The ice mass in the polar regions is greater at the poles than at the periphery and yet there is less snow and rain at the poles to create such a build up.


Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 27, 2013, 01:15:50 AM
Adam Maloof and Lonnie Thompson, National Geographic documentary (Svalbard - Norway, Australia, Quelccaya ice cap, Kilimanjaro glaciers)

National Geographic - 2012 Countdown To Armageddon.avi (http://#ws)

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 27, 2013, 02:13:09 AM
Is There a Creator? Part Two "Through the Wormhole" with Morgan Freeman" [HD] (http://#ws)
(starts at 7:00)

Latest research: universe as a "computer simulation".

What the researchers at JPL and CalTech do not understand is that this computer is not inorganic, but organic.

http://www.messagetoeagle.com/creatorprogrammer.php (http://www.messagetoeagle.com/creatorprogrammer.php)

http://www.transcend.ws/are-humans-advanced-simulations-is-the-universe-a-virtual-reality/ (http://www.transcend.ws/are-humans-advanced-simulations-is-the-universe-a-virtual-reality/)


Here we have discovered the real structure of the atom: the pixels in Dr. Rich Terrell's analysis are actually the laevorotatory subquark and the dextrorotatory subquark.

Crystal hexagonal universe:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,55467.msg1384905.html#msg1384905 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,55467.msg1384905.html#msg1384905)

Thalamus gland/organic computer:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,56149.msg1403007.html#msg1403007 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,56149.msg1403007.html#msg1403007)

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 27, 2013, 03:09:11 AM
COMETS TAIL/AGE OF THE HELIOCENTRIC SOLAR SYSTEM PARADOX

(from Worlds in Collision)

One theory sees in the comets errant cosmic bodies arriving from interstellar space. After approaching the sun, they turn away on an open (parabolic) curve. But if they happen to passclose to one of the larger planets, they may be compelled to change their open curves to ellipsesand become comets of short period. This is the theory of capture: comets of long periods or of no period are dislodged from their paths to become short-period comets. What the origin of the long-period comets is remains an unanswered question.

The short-period comets apparently have some relation to the larger planets. About fifty comets move between the sun and the orbit of Jupiter; their periods are under nine years. Four comets reach the orbit of Saturn; two comets revolve inside the circle described by Uranus; and nine comets, with an average period of seventy-one years, move within the orbit of Neptune. These comprise the system of the short-period comets as it is known at present. To the last group belongs the Halley comet, which, among the comets of short periods, has the longest period of revolution—about seventy-six years.


When passing close to the sun, comets emit tails. It is assumed that the material of the tail does not return to the comet's head but is dispersed in space; consequently, the comets as luminous bodies must have a limited life. If Halley's comet has pursued its present orbit since late pre-Cambrian times, it must "have grown and lost eight million tails, which seems improbable." If comets are wasted, their number in the solar system must permanently diminish, and no comet of short period could have preserved its tail since geological times.

But as there are many luminous comets of short period, they must have been produced or acquired at some time when other members of the system, the planets and the satellites, were already in their places.


Dr. D. Russell Humphreys:

According to evolutionary theory, comets are supposed to be the same age as the solar system, about five billion years. Yet each time a comet orbits close to the sun, it loses so much of its material that it could not survive much longer than about 100,000 years. Many comets have typical ages of less than 10,000 years.

Evolutionists explain this discrepancy by assuming that (a) comets come from an unobserved spherical "Oort cloud" well beyond the orbit of Pluto, (b) improbable gravitational interactions with infrequently passing stars often knock comets into the solar system, and (c) other improbable interactions with planets slow down the incoming comets often enough to account for the hundreds of comets observed. So far, none of these assumptions has been substantiated either by observations or realistic calculations. Lately, there has been much talk of the "Kuiper Belt," a disc of supposed comet sources lying in the plane of the solar system just outside the orbit of Pluto. Some asteroid-sized bodies of ice exist in that location, but they do not solve the evolutionists' problem, since according to evolutionary theory, the Kuiper Belt would quickly become exhausted if there were no Oort cloud to supply it.


Dr. Danny Faulkner:

http://creation.com/comets-and-the-age-of-the-solar-system (http://creation.com/comets-and-the-age-of-the-solar-system) (very well documented)

The standard model of a comet is one in which all of the material observed is released by an icy nucleus only a few kilometres across. This model strongly suggests that comets are very fragile, losing much of their material during each close pass to the Sun. Most comets follow orbits that take them vast distances from the Sun. If a comet’s orbit takes it too far from the Sun, then the comet could easily be captured by the gravitational attraction of other stars and thus would be lost to the Solar System. This places a maximum distance from the Sun that a comet may orbit. If this maximum distance can be estimated, Kepler's third law of planetary motion can be used to deduce the greatest possible orbital period that a comet may possess (about 11 million years). When combined with an estimate of how many trips around the Sun that a comet can survive, we can estimate the maximum age of comets. This figure is far less than the adopted 4.6 Ga age of the Solar System. Because no source of creation for comets has been identified, comets are assumed to be primordial. If this is true, then the age of the Solar System must be less than the estimated upper age of comets.




Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 09, 2013, 03:06:39 AM
The age of the Solar System must be less than the estimated upper age of comets.

From the work Saturnian Comets:

The usual explanation for the Saturnian and Jovian families of comets is that they had originally traveled on extremely elongated or even parabolic orbits and, passing close to one of the large planets, were changed into short-period comets, traveling on ellipses—it is usual to say that they were “captured.” However, the Russian astronomer K. Vshekhsviatsky of the Kiev Observatory, one of the leading authorities on comets, has brought strong arguments to show that the comets of the solar system are very youthful bodies—only a few thousand years old—and that they originated in explosions from the planets, especially from the major planets Saturn and Jupiter or their moons. By comparing the observed luminosity of the periodic comets on their subsequent returns, he found it failing and their masses rapidly diminishing by loss of matter to the space through which they travel; the head of the comet emits tails on each passage close to the sun and then dissipates the matter of the tails without recovery. Thus Vshekhsviatsky concluded that comets of short duration originated in the solar system, were not captured from outside of that system—a point to which the majority of astronomers still adhere—and that they came into existence by explosion from Jupiter and Saturn, and to a smaller extent by explosion from the smaller planets, like Venus and Mars.

K. Vshekhsviatsky, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific Vol. 74 (1962), p. 106.


http://creation.com/more-problems-for-the-oort-comet-cloud (http://creation.com/more-problems-for-the-oort-comet-cloud)


Halley's Comet, official astrophysics information

15 kilometers long, 8 kilometers wide and perhaps 8 kilometers thick.

Based strictly on this data, we have the following results:

Comet Halley, as well as other comets, may have only been orbiting in its present orbit for only a few thousand years.

Comet Halley may have been in its current orbit for as little as 3,000 years.


http://creation.com/comets-and-the-age-of-the-solar-system (http://creation.com/comets-and-the-age-of-the-solar-system)


That is, the age of the entire solar system cannot be more than 2,500-3,000 years old - an extraordinary agreement with the results of the facts that can be deduced from the new chronology subject.


However, as we have seen, the size of the Sun/Moon/planets/comets in the fixed flat earth context (see the proofs using the Solar ISS transit videos/Antarctica photographs) is much smaller than in the assumed heliocentric framework.

In the full fixed flat earth context, a comet has only some 20-30 meters in diameter: thus the dissipation rate of the material in a comet's tail (Halley's comet for example) does prove that Halley's comet has pursued its present orbit for only a few hundred years (another proof for the new radical chronology theory).
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 14, 2013, 02:49:02 AM
http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1962PASP...74..106V/0000107.000.html (http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1962PASP...74..106V/0000107.000.html)

Comets, Small Bodies, and Problems of the Solar System, full article
K. Vshekhsviatsky, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific Vol. 74 (1962)


Vshekhsviatsky concludes that comets of short duration originated in the solar system, were not captured from outside of that system—a point to which the majority of astronomers still adhere—and that they came into existence by explosion from Jupiter and Saturn, and to a smaller extent by explosion from the smaller planets, like Venus and Mars.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 18, 2013, 01:58:33 AM
Electric Comet

http://www.thunderbolts.info/thunderblogs/goodspeed.htm (http://www.thunderbolts.info/thunderblogs/goodspeed.htm)

The unpredictable behavior of comets continually contradicts the tenets of traditional comet theory - to the point that some experts now wonder if a theory even exists. “It's a mystery to me how comets work at all,” said Donald Brownlee, principle investigator of NASA's Stardust Mission.
 
One need only review the extraordinary spectacle provided by Comet Holmes 17P to see how deep the crisis in cometology reaches. In October of 2007, Holmes suddenly and unexpectedly brightened by a factor of a million. In less then 24 hours, it grew from a small 17th magnitude comet to a magnitude of 2.5, so large it was easily visible to the naked eye on Earth. Holmes' coma continued expanding until by mid-November of '07 it had become the largest object in the solar system, vastly larger than the Sun. The coma's diameter had grown from 28 thousand kilometers to 7 million km.
 
At the time of Holmes' extraordinary display, the comet was actually moving away from the Sun, and therefore cooling. Among the common sense questions posed by the enigma: how does such a gravitationally minuscule body hold in place a uniform, spherical coma 7 million kilometers in diameter? If Holmes' flare-up was the result of a collapse or explosion (as some scientists speculated) why was the ejected material not asymmetrical (as one would anticipate from an explosion)? Why did the claimed explosion not produce a variety of fragmentary sizes instead of the extremely fine dust that was actually observed? What explosive event could have caused the comet to luminate for MONTHS, rather than the SECONDS typical of an explosion's luminescence? Why did the comet's gaseous, dusty, spherical cloud persist for months, rather than dispersing quickly away from the comet?
 
Unfortunately, the science media and the astronomical community had barely anything to say about Comet Holmes. This seems nearly unbelievable, considering the enormous interest the comet generated on the Internet. As Thunderbolts contributor Scott Wall explained in his 2008 article, " Comet Holmes - a Media Non-event":

You might think that this remarkable behaviour would be big news, particularly among astronomers. A prominent Astronomy magazine recently published their top ten news stories of 2007. Surprisingly, this spectacular comet was not named as the top story. It didn't even finish in the top ten. In fact, the entire magazine completely ignored the comet. There was not even an editorial comment. Additionally, there was little if any newspaper or TV coverage....
One might think that the bizarre and unpredictable behavior of comets would inspire a fundamental reconsideration of comet theory. But comet science as a whole continues in a state of drift, never asking the questions that could change the picture entirely. For years, however, the questions have been asked by proponents of the Electric Universe, who contend that comets are charged objects moving through the electric field of the Sun. In recent years only the electric comet model has anticipated the major surprises in comet science, a fact anyone can confirm for himself. It is only reasonable, therefore, to ask if an electrical explanation might help us to understand the explosive behavior of Comet Holmes.


“The remarkable properties of comets are not even remotely explicable by any of the numerous ad hoc assumptions of ‘modern’ comet theory.”
— R A Lyttleton, FRS, Journey to the Centre of Uncertainty, Speculations in Science & Technology.

Therefore, for example, the ‘Oort Shell’ hypothesis of comets surrounding the Solar System is considered an unnecessary fiction. Indeed, Professor Ray Lyttleton described the Oort Shell theory as ‘a piece of trash.’

Professor S. Vsekhsviatskii, Director of the Kiev Observatory and Head of the Faculty of Astronomy, University of Kiev, has concluded from his studies of comets that:

i). Celestial mechanics, the distribution and statistics of cometary orbits, and consideration of the kinematics of the cometary system leave no doubt whatsoever that all comets, and therefore the products of their decay, were formed inside the Solar System, and were formed a little later, on the average, than were the planets.

ii). The existence of the families of short-period comets of Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune, and the peculiarities of their motion and nature – their chemistry, the presence of ice in their nuclei, their close association with Jupiter prior to discovery, etc. – demonstrates the recent origin of comets.

This is in accord with the theory of the eruptive development of planets, as developed by Lagrange, Proctor, Crommelin and Vsekhsviatskii. Recent, comprehensive investigations by Everhart (1969) confirmed once more that peculiarities of the observed distribution of short-period comet orbits cannot be explained on the basis of the ‘gravitational capture’ hypothesis.


In the event, it has been left to two astronomers [C. E. R. Bruce and Eric Crew] with a particular interest in electric discharge phenomena to propose a promising ejection mechanism which may explain the features of comets and meteorites.

… T. van Flandern has proposed the formation of comets, meteorites, asteroids and tektites from the explosion of a larger former planet in the Solar System by some unknown mechanism. He shows how many anomalies in the characteristics of our solar system may be simply explained by such an event. The stratification of chondritic types within the asteroid belt certainly indicates at least four separate events in that region of the Solar System. The differences in composition of meteorites from those regions may be diagnostic of the parent bodies.

(Wal Thornhill, 2008)


Electric Comet model:

http://www.thunderbolts.info/thunderblogs/archives/mgmirkin08/030108_evidence_confirms_electric_comet.htm (http://www.thunderbolts.info/thunderblogs/archives/mgmirkin08/030108_evidence_confirms_electric_comet.htm)


Here is another work signed S.K. Vsekhsviatskii (in addition to the article posted in the previous message):

http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1958SvA.....2..433V&classic=YES (http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1958SvA.....2..433V&classic=YES)

ON THE CAPTURE HYPOTHESIS OF SHORT PERIOD COMETS
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 21, 2013, 07:44:19 AM
Through.the.Wormhole-Can.We.Travel.Faster.than.Light?ENG.HD (http://#ws)

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)


John Webb (USNW): the first total and definite proof that the speed of light is VARIABLE

starts at 28:50

More information here: http://www.rense.com/general28/erin.htm (http://www.rense.com/general28/erin.htm)

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 26, 2013, 02:05:10 AM
Here is how modern science describes the lunar eclipse:

One of the most remarkable coincidences found in nature is the fact that the Moon and Sun both appear the same size as seen from Earth. The Moon, a small, cold, dark body, is only 3500 km in diameter while the Sun, a self luminous, gaseous giant, is 1,400,000 km across. The coincidence arises from the fact that although the Sun is 400 times larger than the Moon, it is also 400 times farther from Earth.

Moon Paradoxes: http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=709 (http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=709)

From America, Christopher Columbus also wrote to the king and the queen of Spain about the simultaneous eclipses:

This that I have said is what I have heard. What I know is that the year 94 I sailed in 24 degrees to the west in 9 hours, and it could not be mistake because there were eclipses: the sun was in Libra and the moon in Ariete.

http://www.mgar.net/docs/colon4.htm (http://www.mgar.net/docs/colon4.htm)

Esto que yo he dicho es lo que he oído. Lo que yo sé es que el ańo de 94 navegué en 24° al Poniente en término de nueve horas, y no pudo haber yerro porque hubo eclipses: el sol estaba en Libra y la luna en Ariete.

From Columbus words is clear that double eclipses were also known to the king and to the queen.


This alone proves that Columbus's journal was falsified much later in time...



(http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/Graphics-Other/PSCI/pirireis2.gif)

(https://s14.postimg.org/kq62vone9/bunda.jpg)


(https://web.archive.org/web/20090831201231im_/http://geocities.com/levelwater/africabrazil.gif)


http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1488602.html#msg1488602 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1488602.html#msg1488602)

The Bundahishn (the most fantastic treatise in pre-Flood cosmology and astronomy) tells that   at a certain time in the past, the Earth had 24 hour a day light, coming from two Suns (the visible Sun and our present Moon) and that there were no solar or lunar eclipses.

Then, the Black Sun and its companion (the heavenly body which does bring about now the lunar eclipse) caused the first solar and lunar eclipses, in a cosmic catastrophe which is still recalled in various legends around the world.


For those who still have doubts that the surface of the Sun is actually solid, here is solar paradox #4:

http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/index.html (http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/index.html)

http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/model.htm (http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/model.htm)

http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/sunquakes.htm (http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/sunquakes.htm)

http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/moss.htm (http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/moss.htm)


solid core + plasma cloud, based only on official photographs given by Nasa:
www.omatumr.com/abstracts2005/The_Suns_Origin.pdf (http://www.omatumr.com/abstracts2005/The_Suns_Origin.pdf)

about the fact that O. Manuel's article includes the wrong hypotheses, (imploding supernova), on:
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch06/060124solar3.htm (http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch06/060124solar3.htm)

http://www.the-electric-universe.info/Scripts/5th_state_of_matter.html (http://www.the-electric-universe.info/Scripts/5th_state_of_matter.html) (more info)


According to the Pawnee Indians tradition, there is a bull buffalo in the sky to the far northwest: with the passage of each year, the bull loses one hair, when all these hairs are gone, the world will end.


In Thrace we have the following account: there is a period at the end of which the sun, moon, and all the planets return to their original position.


A complete description of the sun's true orbit on the flat earth (see the maps posted earlier):

http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#Enoch_71 (http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#Enoch_71)
http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#Enoch_72 (http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#Enoch_72)
http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#Enoch_73 (http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#Enoch_73)
http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#Enoch_77 (http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#Enoch_77)


Distance for the six gates: 6356.2 km (arch of the circle will measure 6666.2 km)

Distance for a single gate: 1060.86 km

Since there are 30 windows for each gate, the distance alloted for each window will measure 35.362 km.


That is, there is ONLY a certain space assigned for each window: once the orbit of the sun will reach the final portion of a certain window, the sun/moon/planets will return to their original position.

In that position, for the first time in human history, the MOON will be visible during the solar eclipse: the solar eclipse will take place, but the moon will be visible in other hemi"sphere" (semicircle on a flat earth).


Moreover, the 35.362 km alloted for each window does prove that our history is very short, only a few hundreds of years old (confirming the comet tail paradox/new radical chronology proofs).

Let us assume that our history is just 354 years old.

Then the precession for the sun will measure 100 meters/year (35.4 km/354 years). 100 meters = 157.33 sacred cubits

If we divide this figure by 364 days in the year (see my earlier message about the different unit of time used in the book of Enoch), we obtain 0.43223 sacred cubits, or 0.274725 m.

Of course, the change in the path from gate to gate was added by the forgers of history to account for the 20 minutes/year in the official data for the earth's precession (which is proven to be nonexistent here: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1488947.html#msg1488947 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1488947.html#msg1488947) ).
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 29, 2013, 02:19:17 AM
Why did the Bronze Age precede the Iron Age even though iron is more widely distributed over the world and its manufacture is simpler than that of the alloy of copper and tin? (from Worlds in Collision)


(https://s9.postimg.org/l69d6j2of/tin1.jpg)
(https://s22.postimg.org/un1o013y9/tin2.jpg)
(https://s2.postimg.org/55u43d1mh/tin3.jpg)

(History: Fiction or Science, A. Fomenko, pg. 70)

Stone Age Hoax

http://www.thestoneage.org/ (http://www.thestoneage.org/)
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/arj/v2/n1/controversy-in-anthropology (http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/arj/v2/n1/controversy-in-anthropology)
http://evolutionfacts.com/Evolution-handbook/E-H-13a.htm (http://evolutionfacts.com/Evolution-handbook/E-H-13a.htm)
http://evolutionfacts.com/Evolution-handbook/E-H-13b.htm (http://evolutionfacts.com/Evolution-handbook/E-H-13b.htm)
http://evolutionfacts.com/Evolution-handbook/E-H-13c.htm (http://evolutionfacts.com/Evolution-handbook/E-H-13c.htm)

Egyptian Pteranodon and Roman Dinosaurs:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1412429.html#msg1412429 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1412429.html#msg1412429)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1413765.html#msg1413765 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1413765.html#msg1413765)


Palestrina Mosaic:

(http://www.genesispark.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/palestrina-mosaic1.jpg)

http://www.genesispark.com/exhibits/evidence/historical/ancient/dinosaur/ (http://www.genesispark.com/exhibits/evidence/historical/ancient/dinosaur/)

http://www.s8int.com/dinolit2.html (http://www.s8int.com/dinolit2.html)


http://eyedesignbook.com/ch6/eyech6-append-d.html (http://eyedesignbook.com/ch6/eyech6-append-d.html)

Panicked Evolutionists:  The Stephen Meyer Controversy

 "Neo-Darwinism seeks to explain the origin of new information, form, and structure as a result of selection acting on randomly arising variation at a very low level within the biological hierarchy, mainly, within the genetic text. Yet the major morphological innovations depend on a specificity of arrangement at a much higher level of the organizational hierarchy, a level that DNA alone does not determine. Yet if DNA is not wholly responsible for body plan morphogenesis, then DNA sequences can mutate indefinitely, without regard to realistic probabilistic limits, and still not produce a new body plan. Thus, the mechanism of natural selection acting on random mutations in DNA cannot in principle generate novel body plans, including those that first arose in the Cambrian explosion." 

What is it about Dr. Stephen Meyer's paper that has caused such an uproar? Meyer, who holds a Ph.D. from Cambridge University, argued in his paper that the contemporary form of evolutionary theory now dominant in the academy, known as "Neo-Darwinism," fails to account for the development of higher life forms and the complexity of living organisms. Pointing to what evolutionists identify as the "Cambrian explosion," Meyer argued that "the geologically sudden appearance of many new animal body plans" cannot be accounted for by Darwinian theory, "neo" or otherwise. 
     Accepting the scientific claim that the Cambrian explosion took place "about 530 million years ago," Meyer went on to explain that the "remarkable jump in the specified complexity or 'complex specified information' [CSI] of the biological world" cannot be explained by evolutionary theory. 


The best proofs from molecular biology and genetics which prove the theory of evolution to be just a myth:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,55960.msg1398306.html#msg1398306 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,55960.msg1398306.html#msg1398306)

http://lettherebelight-77.blogspot.ro/2012/02/what-evidence-is-found-for-first-life.htm (http://lettherebelight-77.blogspot.ro/2012/02/what-evidence-is-found-for-first-life.htm) (the best work on the proofs from molecular biology and genetics which demolish evolutionism)

http://www.uncommondescent.com/science-education/oldies-but-baddies-af-repeats-ncses-eight-challenges-to-id-from-ten-years-ago/#comment-453060 (http://www.uncommondescent.com/science-education/oldies-but-baddies-af-repeats-ncses-eight-challenges-to-id-from-ten-years-ago/#comment-453060) (R. Shapiro debunks the Miller experiment and the RNA world)

The greatest work on paleogeology:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/21746106/Velikovsky-Earth-in-Upheaval# (http://www.scribd.com/doc/21746106/Velikovsky-Earth-in-Upheaval#)


The existence of aether proven again:

#ws (http://#ws)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 13, 2013, 01:54:06 AM
More details concerning the Tibetan Acoustic Levitation (original message posted here: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1388219#msg1388219 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1388219#msg1388219) )

https://web.archive.org/web/20110304035318/http://www.nilsolof.se/ljudkraft.htm

(https://image.ibb.co/mkedky/tib1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/ic95Xd/tib2.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/cQHaXd/tib3.jpg)


http://web.archive.org/web/20060306044903/http://www.ianlawton.com/sl2.htm (http://web.archive.org/web/20060306044903/http://www.ianlawton.com/sl2.htm)

Rudolf von Linauer, tibetan levitation:

http://ufoarchives.blogspot.ro/2013/07/rudolf-von-linauer-and-tibetan-mystery.html (http://ufoarchives.blogspot.ro/2013/07/rudolf-von-linauer-and-tibetan-mystery.html)

UPDATE ON R. V. LINAUER:

http://ufoarchives.blogspot.ro/2013/10/rudolf-von-linauer-and-tibet.html (http://ufoarchives.blogspot.ro/2013/10/rudolf-von-linauer-and-tibet.html)

http://ufoarchives.blogspot.ro/2013/09/new-data-on-rudolf-von-linauer.html (http://ufoarchives.blogspot.ro/2013/09/new-data-on-rudolf-von-linauer.html)


(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/Om.svg/220px-Om.svg.png)

On the meaning of the crescent (raif) and the bindu:

http://www.mandalayoga.net/pretty_print.php?rub=what&p=mantra_om&lang=en (http://www.mandalayoga.net/pretty_print.php?rub=what&p=mantra_om&lang=en)


An equivalent symbol is the Thule swastika: red = laevorotatory ether, white = dextrorotatory ether, black = shadow swastika/aether swastika (see http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=58472.msg1487905#msg1487905 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=58472.msg1487905#msg1487905) )

Analysis of the acoustic levitation (D. Davidson):

If we assume that each monk with his instrument produced one half this much sound energy (which is highly unlikely) and we make the further gross assumption that this is the amount if power that reaches the stone (actually sound dissipates rapidly over distance), we would have about 0.04 watts (i.e., (19 instruments + 19 x 4 monks) x 0.000094) hitting the huge stone block.

This is an astoundingly small amount of energy actually hitting the 1.5 cubic meter stone to produce the effect.

To lift the stone 250 meters takes a prodigious amount of energy. Rocks such as granite and limestone have weights in the neighborhood of 150-175 pounds per cubic foot.

If we assume a nominal value of 160 pounds per cubic foot then the 1.5 cubic meter stones weighed around 8475 pounds (i.e., over 4 tons!!!). To lift the 8475 pounds 250 meters would require about 7 million ft-pounds of work (i.e., 8475 pounds X 250 meters / 0.30408 meters/foot = 6,968,035).

Since this was done over a 3 minute period then about 70 horsepower was produced (i.e., 7 x 106 foot-pounds / 180 seconds / 550 horsepower/foot-pound/second = 70.384). This is equivalent to 52 kilowatts (i.e., 70.384 X 0.74570 kilowatts/horsepower = 52.5).

The over unity power factor we obtain is 5,250,000 over unity (i.e., 52,500 watts/0.01 watts).


(https://image.ibb.co/jRVCCd/sea1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/m11VyJ/sea2.jpg)

The density of ether and aether where humans are present is markedly different (photographs taken near a Black Sea resort in the 1970s and 1980s showing the telluric currents: no flash reflection or fake streamers; other examples of real streamers here, http://www.pinellaspascoparanormal.com/aboutorbsandstreamers.htm (http://www.pinellaspascoparanormal.com/aboutorbsandstreamers.htm) )

"Nikola Tesla -- the literal inventor of modern civilization (via the now worldwide technology of "alternating current") -- experimentally anticipated the ether waves by finding them in nature; from massive experimental radio transmitters he had built on a mountain top in Colorado, he was broadcasting and receiving (by his own assertion) "longitudinal stresses" (as opposed to conventional EM "transverse waves") through the vacuum. This he was accomplishing with his own, hand-engineered equipment (produced according to Maxwell's original, quaternion equations), when he detected an interference "return" from a passing line of thunderstorms. Tesla termed the phenomenon a "standing columnar wave," and tracked it electromagnetically for hours as the cold front moved across the West."


Thus Tesla was able to change the initial data for the path of the ball lightning: the destination of the trajectory, based on a spherical earth hypothesis, was wrong, and had to be modified to reach an unhabitated area (the desired location of Tunguska). His equipment detected a different density of ether and aether, signaling the presence of human habitation (city of Kezhma).

http://olkhov.narod.ru/tunguska_trajectory.gif (http://olkhov.narod.ru/tunguska_trajectory.gif)

The initial path approached Kezhma from the south, then it abruptly changed course to the east. Two hundred and fifty miles later, while above Preobrazhenka, it reversed its heading toward the west. It exploded above the taiga at 60º55' N, 101º57' E (LeMaire 1980).

The same opinion was reached by Felix Zigel, who as an aerodynamics professor at the Moscow Institute of Aviation has been involved in the training of many Soviet cosmonauts. His latest study of all the eyewitness and physical data convinced him that "before the blast the Tunguska body described in the atmosphere a tremendous arc of about 375 miles in extent (in azimuth)" - that is, it "carried out a maneuver." No natural object is capable of such a feat.

Felix Zigel, professor of aerodynamics (Moscow Aviation Institute) and other space experts agree that, prior to exploding, the object changed from an eastward to a westward direction over the Stony Tunguska region.


It was the research done by professor Giuseppe Longo (University of Bologna) which uncovered the forgotten photographs taken in Irkutsk on June 30 and July 1, 1908.

(https://image.ibb.co/hYK0yJ/sea3.jpg)

He also was able to find the map drawn by Vasilyev (of course, Vasilyev's research ONLY reached as far east as the city of Krasnoyarsk).

There were other expeditions which went much further to the east, for example the I.M. Suslov voyage...

Evenki tribe account.

http://www.vurdalak.com/tunguska/witness/lyuchetkana_a.htm (http://www.vurdalak.com/tunguska/witness/lyuchetkana_a.htm)

A bright summer night fell, the fire began to diminish. In place of the heat, it grew cold. We decided to move toward the Katanga [river]. By the time we got to the Chambe river, we were already totally weak, all around we saw marvels, terrible marvels. It wasn’t our forest [any more]. I never saw a forest like that. It was strange somehow. Where we lived there had been dense forest, an old forest. But now in many places there was no forest at all. On the mountains all the trees lay flat, and it was bright, and everything was visible for a far distance.

(translation by Bill DeSmedt)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 27, 2013, 06:26:46 AM
“The universe is more like a giant thought than a giant machine and the substance of the great thought is consciousness which pervades all space.”
Sir James Jeans

Spirit – transcendent verb
Thought/Emotion – intentional/visualized verb (desire)
Imagination – potential verb (word for the idea/emotion) (knowledge)
Sound – manifested verb (action)

http://www.eso-garden.com/specials/the_secret_life_of_nature.pdf (http://www.eso-garden.com/specials/the_secret_life_of_nature.pdf) (takes the reader inside a subquark: the structure of a boson/antiboson) walnut = subquark/Anu/UPA

Chapters 7, 8 and 9

Taking a closer look at one walnut, Ron saw that two threads came out of it, one of which appeared fainter than the other.The clearer one looked like a tangled, twisted piece of string, which could be pulled out into a straight line with little effort and which, on being relaxed, resumed its tangled state.

Thinking he would see a spiral within one of these strings, Ron magnified it. Instead he saw a stream of bubbles flowing back and forth so quickly he could not observe the moment they reversed direction.

As the bubbles came out of the walnut in single file to move along what looked like a tube, some form of energy appeared to expand them to their maximum over a distance of up to ten bubble diameters.
Then the current reversed.

Fastening his attention onto a single bubble, Ron saw that as it moved through the tube the tube rotated one instant in one direction, next in the opposite, clockwise as the bubbles moved away, counterclockwise as they moved toward him, though again he could not distinguish the actual instant of transition.

Estimating the distance between successive bubbles as about six times the width of a bubble, Ron noted that as each bubble passed, the tube seemed to collapse very slightly, its edges no sharper than the boundary between two liquids. Managing to move along with a bubble-obviously not moving his physical body but his viewpoint-Ron saw that it was shaped like a fat doughnut, with an indented sort of cap that led the bubble's motion and trailed a tail.Wanting to see what was happening close up to one of the walnuts, Ron approached a thread that appeared to link two walnuts.

On closer inspection, the bubbles seemed to Ron to be created in the corkscrew spiral near the exit because there was no sign of bubbles at the start of this spiral. As the bubbles flowed back into the walnut, instead of forming a puff like those entering from the other thread, they simply shrank down to nothing. Whenever bubbles reversed direction, the tail would fade away, to reappear on the opposite side.

Bubbles in what to Ron was thread number two started out as mere squiggles of energy, pointed at both ends. Then the squiggle got fatter, turning into the stable tadpole shape.


Therefore, it is the tail (Ron’s own description) itself which forms both the bosons and antibosons.


What is the structure of the tail, so far the smallest particle known to science?

The Gizeh Pyramid is a large scale model of the particles which do make up the tail (which itself becomes a boson or an antiboson).

One of the most mysterious features of this Pyramid is the scale of its measurements: certainly the pyramid could have been built larger or smaller (keeping all of the proportions equal, of course), but it could only function if and only if it was built to its present scale.

Let us imagine our Universe (http://www.freewebs.com/raacoz/enclosure3%5B1%5D4.jpg (http://www.freewebs.com/raacoz/enclosure3%5B1%5D4.jpg) ) to be the size of a subquark (http://www.alliancesforhumanity.com/matter/matter_files/image010.jpg (http://www.alliancesforhumanity.com/matter/matter_files/image010.jpg) ). We know that a subquark has some 14 million bosons (and many more antibosons) inside its structure, and that a boson consists of two inverted pyramids which exchange aether and ether. Then, roughly, the Gizeh Pyramid would correspond to the size of such a boson’s interior pyramids.


Where are the “secret” tunnels/passages of the Gizeh Pyramid located?

Chinese five notes cycle

jiao (1)
shi (2)
gong (3)
shang (4)
yi (5)

1-3
3-5
5-2
2-4
4-1

(this, by the way, is also the origin of the Chinese five elements creation cycle)

1 – will designate the area from the base of the Gizeh pyramid to the top of the queen’s chamber
2 – from the bottom of the queen’s chamber, to the bottom of the king’s chamber
3 – from the bottom of the king’s chamber, to the top of the djed apex (just before the block separating the apex from its lower chambers)
4 – the djed itself
5 -  from the top of the djed apex, all to the way to the top of the Gizeh pyramid

I predict, therefore, that there is a narrow passage from the top of the djed apex all to the way to the top of the pyramid. The “secret” passage from the top of the pyramid which leads to the queen chamber has already been discovered a few years ago.

Two more secret passages will be discovered: leading from the queen’s chamber to the djed apex, and the other one descending from the djed apex to the base.

The most mysterious feature of the pyramid is the groove (FA-MI interval) inside the Grand Gallery:

(http://thegreatpyramidofgiza.ca/@Giza$Grand%20Gallery$Chapter_files/image003.jpg)


In the center of the boson we have the two apexes (called parabindu) which rotate as follows:

http://www.eaglespiritministry.com/pd/howto/images/mt_01.gif (http://www.eaglespiritministry.com/pd/howto/images/mt_01.gif)

The virtual (thought-like) pyramid is facing downwards: this is called the aparabindu particle in vedic physics. It produces aether, the medium needed for the sound to propagate.

The upward facing pyramid (imagination) produces sound, which activates the shadow/thought pyramid.

The Gizeh pyramid has a virtual twin pyramid: it faces downwards, like in the following images (posted in a different context here: http://www.aloha.net/~johnboy/Reticulum.htg/Great_Pyramid.jpg (http://www.aloha.net/~johnboy/Reticulum.htg/Great_Pyramid.jpg) ):

(http://www.aloha.net/~johnboy/Reticulum.htg/hourglass.jpg)

(http://www.aloha.net/~johnboy/Reticulum.htg/Zep_Tepi_hourglass.JPG)

Examples of the virtual component of matter (electrophotography/kirlian images):

http://webspace.webring.com/people/gl/lemagicien/kfpage/kf.html (http://webspace.webring.com/people/gl/lemagicien/kfpage/kf.html)

http://webspace.webring.com/people/gl/lemagicien/kfpage/kfgalery/gal.html (http://webspace.webring.com/people/gl/lemagicien/kfpage/kfgalery/gal.html) (plants)

http://webspace.webring.com/people/gl/lemagicien/kfpage/kfjava/kfjava.html (http://webspace.webring.com/people/gl/lemagicien/kfpage/kfjava/kfjava.html) (plants)

(http://webspace.webring.com/people/gl/lemagicien/kfpage/kfjava/flor1.gif)

(http://webspace.webring.com/people/gl/lemagicien/kfpage/kfjava/flor2.gif)

More photographs here: http://www.crystalinks.com/kirlian.html (http://www.crystalinks.com/kirlian.html)

The Secret Life of Plants, Tompkins and Bird, 1973 (http://www.scribd.com/doc/94867560/The-Secret-Life-of-Plants-Tompkins-and-Bird-1973#)


ETHERIC REGION OF THE PHYSICAL WORLD (BARYONS, MESONS, QUARKS AND SUBQUARKS):

http://www.rosicrucian.com/rcc/rcceng01.htm#part2 (http://www.rosicrucian.com/rcc/rcceng01.htm#part2)


Who actually built the Gizeh pyramid?

Zecharia Sitchin - The Wars of Gods and Men (3rd Book of Earth Chronicles) (http://www.scribd.com/doc/36694833/Zecharia-Sitchin-The-Wars-of-Gods-and-Men-3rd-Book-of-Earth-Chronicles#)

Chapter 7, figure 42 (a and b)

In chapter 7 we will also find a very good demonstration that the Gizeh pyramid could not have been built by any pharaohs (sixth or first dynasty).

In chapter 10 (figures 66 and 71), we can see the four meters of masonry at the base of the pyramid which means that the actual height measures 136.1 meters.

In figure 42 beings are shown with a crystal in front of their foreheads. Using this crystal, it was possible to build the Gizeh pyramid in less than two months, utilizing acoustic levitation and drilling.

In all humans, this virtual crystal (actually made up of baryons, mesons and quarks) is latent: only a few have been able to activate it on a very limited scale, Nikola Tesla was one of them.

Tesla Mind Lab:

http://www.creativethinkingwith.com/Nikola-Tesla-Creative-Thinking-Secrets.html (http://www.creativethinkingwith.com/Nikola-Tesla-Creative-Thinking-Secrets.html)


The original configuration of the Gizeh pyramid included many pairs of stones which actually made it possible for the inverted virtual pyramid to be activated.

Ninurta (Nimrod) found inside the pyramid...

"....Escorted by the Chief Mineralmaster, Ninurta inspected the array of "stones" and instruments. As he stopped by each one of them, he determined its destiny - to be smashed up and destroyed, to be taken away for display, or to be installed as instruments elsewhere. We know of these "destinies" and of the order in which Ninurta had stopped by the stones, from the text inscribed on tablets 10-13 of the epic poem Lugal-e. It is by following and correctly interpreting this text that the mystery of the purpose and functions of many features of the pyramid’s inner structure can be finally understood.

"Going up the Ascending Passage, Ninurta reached its junction with the imposing Grand Gallery and a Horizontal Passage. Ninurta followed the Horizontal Passage first, reaching a large chamber with a corbelled roof. Called "vulva" in the Ninharsag poem, this chamber’s axis lay exactly on the east-west center line of the pyramid. Its emission ("an outpouring which is like a lion whom no one dares attack") came from a stone fitted into a niche that was hollowed out in the east wall. It was the SHAM ("Destiny") Stone. Emitting a red radiance which Ninurta "saw in the darkness," it was the pulsating heart of the pyramid. But it was anathema to Ninurta, for during the battle, when he was aloft, this stone’s "strong power" was used " to grab to kill me, with a tracking which kills to seize me." He ordered it "pulled out... be taken apart... and to obliteration be destroyed."

Among other features, Ninurta encountered:

"....Whereas in the narrow passages only " a deem green light glowed," the Gallery glittered in multicolored lights - "its vault is like a rainbow, the darkness ends there." The many-hued glows were emitted by twenty-seven pairs of diverse crystal stones that were evenly spaced along the whole length of each side of the Gallery.... each crystal stone emitted a different radiance, giving the place its rainbow effect....

Ninurta’s priority was the uppermost Grand Chamber and its pulsating stone.... he reached the Antichamber of unique design...."There three portcullises - "the bolt, the bar and the lock" of the Sumerian poem - elaborately fitted into grooves in the walls and floor, hermetically sealed off the uppermost Grand Chamber: "to foe it is not opened...." But now, by pulling some cords, the portcullises were raised, and Ninurta passed through.

"He was now in the pyramid’s most restricted ("sacred") chamber, from which the guiding "Net" (radar?) was "spread out" to "survey Heaven and Earth...." It responded to vibrations with bell-like resonance. The heart of the guidance unit was the GUG Stone ("Direction Determining").... Ninurta ordered this stone destroyed: "Then, by the fate-determining Ninurta, on that day was the Gug stone from its hollow taken out and smashed."

Finally there was the Apex Stone of the Pyramid, the UL ("High As The Sky") Stone: "Let the mother’s offspring see it no more," he ordered. And, as the stone was sent crashing down, "let everyone distance himself," he shouted. The "Stones," which were "anathema" to Ninurta, were no more.


There were several attempts to build a similar pyramid on a much smaller scale. They all ended in failure: the corners of the structure could not be aligned perfectly.

(http://www.aloha.net/~johnboy/Reticulum.htg/Great_Pyramid.jpg)

http://www.mysticalconspiracy.info/2013/12/16/the-1978-nippon-pyramid-project/ (http://www.mysticalconspiracy.info/2013/12/16/the-1978-nippon-pyramid-project/)

http://sacredsites.com/africa/egypt/the_great_pyramid_of_giza.html (http://sacredsites.com/africa/egypt/the_great_pyramid_of_giza.html)


The structure of a magnet is larger scale version of the boson itself:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=60367.msg1563059#msg1563059 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=60367.msg1563059#msg1563059)


Comments on antigravitons:

http://dougvanvenrooij.wordpress.com/2013/03/15/anti-gravitons-may-explain-dark-matter-dark-energy-and-the-universe-we-observe-today-2/ (http://dougvanvenrooij.wordpress.com/2013/03/15/anti-gravitons-may-explain-dark-matter-dark-energy-and-the-universe-we-observe-today-2/)


Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 06, 2014, 02:43:58 AM
Gizeh Pyramid Advanced Calculus

The concept of radian measure, as opposed to the degree of an angle, is normally credited to Roger Cotes in 1714. He had the radian in everything but name, and he recognized its naturalness as a unit of angular measure

The first mention of the natural logarithm was by Nicholas Mercator in his work Logarithmotechnia published in 1668, although the mathematics teacher John Speidell had already in 1619 compiled a table on the natural logarithm.

The problem of extending the factorial to non-integer arguments was apparently first considered by Daniel Bernoulli and Christian Goldbach in the 1720s, and was solved at the end of the same decade by Leonhard Euler.



Basically, all the previous attempts to discover the hidden mathematical properties in the Gizeh Pyramid used only π and the golden section.

However, the most important figure of all is the ratio 136.1/53.33 = one hundred sacred inches. Then if we multiply this number by 25 we get the sacred cubit, or 0.63566 m. One sacred inch = 0.025424 m.

As I will demonstrate, the constructors of the pyramid had at their disposal all the details needed from advanced calculus: radian measure, Taylor series expansion, natural logarithm, gamma function, Stirling series (complete with realistic error bounds), and much more.

(http://egyptologist.org/discus/messages/8/7355.jpg)

The sacred cubit is designated in the form of a horseshoe projection, known as the "Boss" on the face of the Granite Leaf in the Ante-Chamber of the Pyramid. By application of this unit of measurement it was discovered to be subdivided into 25 equal parts known now as: Pyramid inches.


http://guardians.net/egypt/gp2.htm (http://guardians.net/egypt/gp2.htm)

http://books.google.ro/books?id=8LZCAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA270&lpg=PA270&dq=vyse+operation+gizeh+1837+queen+chamber+niche&source=bl&ots=4fJ-tNxlTs&sig=akFC7UCDV6SBqW87gq9VcokwMGU&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=OrNAUKzXE4TAhAfshYGwDA&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=vyse%20operation%20gizeh%201837%20queen%20chamber%20niche&f=false (http://books.google.ro/books?id=8LZCAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA270&lpg=PA270&dq=vyse+operation+gizeh+1837+queen+chamber+niche&source=bl&ots=4fJ-tNxlTs&sig=akFC7UCDV6SBqW87gq9VcokwMGU&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=OrNAUKzXE4TAhAfshYGwDA&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=vyse%20operation%20gizeh%201837%20queen%20chamber%20niche&f=false) (page 112)

https://web.archive.org/web/20120314235117/http://www.aiwaz.net/queen-chamber/a25 (https://web.archive.org/web/20120314235117/http://www.aiwaz.net/queen-chamber/a25)

http://www.world-mysteries.com/mpl_2.htm (http://www.world-mysteries.com/mpl_2.htm)

http://thegreatpyramidofgiza.ca (http://thegreatpyramidofgiza.ca)

http://www.samuellaboy.com/New_Folder/Special_Topics/Advanced_s.htm (http://www.samuellaboy.com/New_Folder/Special_Topics/Advanced_s.htm)

http://www.ancientegyptonline.co.uk/great-pyramid.html (http://www.ancientegyptonline.co.uk/great-pyramid.html)


100 – 36.43 = 100 sc (sacred cubits) = 360/π2

0.63566 radians = 36.4206 degrees

sin 136.12 = ln 2

ln 20sc = 2.5424 (=1si)

140.7 (total height without the apex) / 203 (steps of the pyramid )~= ln 2

sin 72.7 degrees = 1.5 sc

7.2738 = 286.1 si = displacement factor

tan 51.8554 degrees = 2 sc

(51.87 degrees = angle formed by the height of the pyramid, 5813 si, and the base, 9131 si)

Apex plateau triangle: base 224.6 si, height 286.1 si

Angle 1 = 51.87 degrees
Angle 2 = 38.13 degrees

sin 38.13 degrees  = 0.618

sin 51.87 degrees = 1/2sc

51.87/38.13 = 1.3603

3.813 = 6 sc

sin 5 x 286.1 sc = sin 909.31163 degrees = -1.618/10

286.1 si x 0.4 = 1.361 x 4 x 0.534

Triangle with sides 309.5si, 286.1si and 118.1si and angles of 67.57 and 22.43 degrees

sin 22.43 degrees = 0.381562

Queen chamber niche measurements

First step – w 1.568m / l 1.0414 m / h 1.743 m
Second step – w 1.34 m / l 1.0414 m / h 0.87266 m

π/360= 0.0087266

2.618/20 = 0.1309
0.1309/1.5 = 0.087266

1.743 = 0.87266 x 2

Third step – w 1.062 m / l 1.0414 m / h 0.69733 m

0.1309 x 5.34 = 0.699

0.69733 x 1.25 = 0.87266

0.69733 = 40π/360

https://web.archive.org/web/20170605173236/http://reocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/3324/nefersschooloflearning.htm

https://web.archive.org/web/20170605171457/http://reocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/3324/nefershouse.htm

https://web.archive.org/web/20120802231648/http://reocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/3324/pan3.gif

There are several values to be used for the sacred cubit depending on the color of the light spectrum: starting from 0.62832 all the way to 0.64 – the most important value is of course 0.63566, the sacred cubit.

The authors of the work even express each and every value of the Gizeh pyramid using a very special type of circle:

https://web.archive.org/web/20120802231648/http://reocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/3324/pan5.gif

However, I will use a different and more interesting representation in order to uncover the hidden mathematical symbols of the Gizeh pyramid, where the radius is equal to 68.05 (68.05 x 2 = 136.1 = the diameter of the circle).

On such a circle, using s = r x @ (@ measured in radians), we will obtain some very special values:

Degrees   -   Arclength

22.5 – 26.66
45 – 53.4
90 – 106.68 (exactly the frequencies used by the Tibetan monks)
72.9 – 86.5 (=136.1 sc)
2.142 – 2.542 (1si x 100)
136.1 – 161.8

FULL PYRAMID VOLUME

2,658,672.883 m3

We divide three times by 1si and we get,

1.6178314 x 1011

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/a/c/5/ac57cb1b5db9b61155d862c7a02fe425.png)


(http://mathworld.wolfram.com/images/equations/StirlingsSeries/NumberedEquation1.gif)

I will use all the terms up to and including 1/12x.


Then,

Γ(15.23065) = 1.6178314 x 1011

15.23065 x 180/π = 872.652 degrees (let us remember that π/360= 0.0087266).

15.23065 - 4π = 2.66428

Now let us use the special circle described above (r = 68.05) –

2.66428 x 68.05 = 181.3 (286.1 sc = 181.6)

FULL PYRAMID LATERAL AREA

87,326.424 m2

If we divide once by 1si we get 3,434,802.71

If we divide twice we get 135,100,798.7

Γ(10.966) = 3,434,802.71

15.23065/10.966 = 1.3889 = 25/18

Γ(12.495) = 135,100,798.7 

12.495 x 180/π = 715.91

12.495 - 3π = 3.0702

3.0702 x 68.05 = 208.93


208.93 = 72.83 + 136.1


FULL PYRAMID VOLUME/TOTAL LATERAL AREA = 30.4452

But 15.23065 x 2 = 30.4452


APEX TOTAL VOLUME

78.636 m3

Again, we divide three times by 1si to get,

4,785,112.6

Γ(11.116) = 4,785,112.6

11.116 x 180/π = 636.9

11.116 - 3π = 1.69122

1.69122 x 68.05 = 115.087

115.087 = 181.1 x 1sc


APEX TOTAL LATERAL AREA

88.93 m2

88.93 = 3,497.9 si

If we divide 88.93 twice by 1si we get

137,582


Γ(7.815) = 3497.9

7.815 x 180/π = 447.7665

447.7665 /5 = 140.8 x 1 sc (140.8 total height of the pyramid without the apex)

447.7665 – 360 = 87.766

7.815 -2π = 1.5318

153.18 + 26.18 = 180

1.5318 x 68.05 = 104.24

286.1/104.24 = 1/(1 – 1sc)



11.116/7.815 = 1.4224 = 64/45

VOLUME OF THE APEX/TOTAL APEX LATERAL AREA = 0.8842

1.4224 x 0.618 = 0.8842



Γ(9.564) = 137,582

9.564 x 180/π = 547.97 (= 447.76 + 100)

9.564 - 3π = 0.139222

0.139222 x 68.05 = 9.474

9.474/5 = 1.8948 = 1.361 + 5.34


It should be noted that we obtain these figures only for the Gizeh pyramid.

As an example, for the following values used for another pyramids, no correspondence can be obtained from the same kind of calculations.

1.   Side of the pyramid = 8, height =3, volume = 64 cubic meters
2.   Side of the pyramid = 6.18034, height = π, volume = 40 cubic meters


Let us proceed further with the Gizeh pyramid.

KING CHAMBER VOLUME

305.258 cubic meters

Dividing three times by 1si we get,

18,575,281.96

Γ(11.685) = 18,575,281.96

11.685 x 180/π = 669.5

11.685 - 3π = 2.26

2.26 x 68.05 = 153.81 (same figure as in the apex total lateral area)

153.81 + 26.18 = 180

KING CHAMBER SARCOPHAGUS VOLUME

77.56si x 21.77si x 33.46si = 69288.7

Γ(9.251) = 69,288.7

9.251 x 180/π = 530

9.251 - 2π = 2.9678

2.9678 x 68.05 = 201.96

201.96/π = 450/7

King chamber volume/201.96 = 1.511 exactly the distance from the queen chamber niche to the apex of the queen chamber itself.


In the next message, full calculations for the queen chamber niche, apex cone, and the queen chamber itself.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 08, 2014, 01:27:12 AM
Gizeh Pyramid Advanced Calculus (II)


VOLUME OF THE CONE GENERATED BY THE APEX PYRAMID

123.523 cubic meters

Dividing the volume three times by 1si, we get

7,516,502.3

Γ(11.308) = 7,516,502.3

11.308 x 180/Π = 647.9

11.308 - 3Π = 1.8832

1.8832 x 68.05 = 128.153


128.153 - 90 = 38.153 = 60sc

128.153/53.4=2.4

VOLUME OF THE APEX/VOLUME OF THE APEX CONE = 0.63657


VOLUME OF THE CONE GENERATED BY THE PYRAMID

4,176,223.827 cubic meters

2.5412838 x 1011

Γ(15.398) = 2.5412838 x 1011

15.398 x 180/Π = 882.24

15.398 - 4Π = 2.83163

2.83163 x 68.05 = 192.7

192.7 = 7.2738 x 26.5


Γ(11.06) = 4,176,223.827

11.06 x 180/Π = 633.691

11.06 - 3Π = 1.635222

11.06 x68.05 = 111.277

111.277/1.618 = 68.774

111.277 + 68.774 = 180

 FIBONACCI NUMBER #106

F106 = 6,356,306,993,006,846,248,183 = 6.3563 x 1021

F106/VOLUME OF THE PYRAMID = 1/2.5412838 x 10-11 (VOLUME OF THE PYRAMID CONE)



(http://www.touregypt.net/images/touregypt/greatpyramid3-19.jpg)

QUEEN’S CHAMBER VOLUME

VOLUME OF THE RECTANGULAR PRISM

140.9 cubic meters

8,574,194.2

Γ(11.363) = 8,574,194.2

11.363 x 180/Π = 651.05

11.363 - 3Π = 1.938

1.938 x 68.05 = 131.896

131.896/0.618 = 213.4 (=4 x 53.4)


VOLUME OF THE TRIANGULAR PRISM

45.57 cubic meters

2,773,032.4

Γ(10.884) = 2,773,032.4

10.884 x 180/Π = 623.61

10.884 - 3Π = 1.4592

1.4592 x 68.05 = 99.3

68.05Π – 99.3 = 11.448 (11.444 = 4 x 286.1si)


TOTAL VOLUME OF THE QUEEN’S CHAMBER

186.47

11,346,902.7

Γ(11.4803) = 11,346,902.7

11.4803 x 180/Π = 657.8

11.4803 - 3Π = 2.0555

2.0555 x 68.05 = 139.88

139.88/99.3 = 1.408 (height of pyramid = 140.7 meters)

139.88/2.618 = 53.43


QUEEN’S CHAMBER NICHE, FIRST SECTION

w = 1.568 m
h = 1.743 m
l = 1.0414 m

V = 2.8462 cubic meters

173,192.62

Γ(9.67) = 173,192.62

9.67 x 180Π = 554

9.67 - 3Π = 0.24522

0.24522 x 68.05 = 16.687

16.687 = 27 x 0.618

QUEEN’S CHAMBER NICHE, SECOND SECTION

w = 1.34 m
h = 0.87266 m (Π/360 = 0.0087266)
l = 1.0414

V = 1.217776 cubic meters

74,103

Γ(9.28) = 74103

9.28 x 180/Π = 531.7

9.28 - 2Π = 2.9968

2.9968 x 68.05 = 203.93 = 6sc x 53.4 = 136 x 1.5

QUEEN’S CHAMBER NICHE, THIRD SECTION

w = 1.062 m
h = 0.69733 m
l = 1.0414 m

V = 0.77122 cubic meters

46,929.81

Γ(9.07) = 46,929.81

9.07 x 180/Π = 519.67

9.07 - 2Π = 2.7868

2.7868 x 68.05 = 189.64

189.64 = 136.1 + 53.4

QUEEN’S CHAMBER NICHE, FOURTH SECTION

w = 0.773
h = 0.69733
l = 1.0414

V = 0.56135 cubic meters

34,158.9

Γ(8.924) = 34,158.9

8.924 x 180/Π = 511.3

8.924 - 2Π = 2.6408

2.6408 x 68.05 = 179.707

179.707/286.1 = 2Π/10

QUEEN’S CHAMBER NICHE, FIFTH SECTION

w = 0.5156
h = 0.69733
l = 1.0414

V = 0.37443 cubic meters

22,784.38

Γ(8.725) = 22,784.38

8.725 x 180/Π = 500

8.725 - 2Π = 2.4418

2.4418 x 68.05 = 166.166

166.166 ~= 10 x 16.687 (value obtained for the first section)

554 (value from the first section) x 3 = 10 x 166.2


CONCLUSIONS

The builders of the Gizeh Pyramid had at their disposal a deep knowledge of differential and integral calculus.

The notions of the radian, Taylor series expansion (used to calculate the decimal/fractional values of the trigonometric functions), tables of sine/cosine/tangent values, error estimates for the Taylor series (which uses the Extended Mean-Value Theorem, attributed to A. Cauchy), natural logarithm, Gamma function, Stirling series were well known to these builders as the foregoing calculations have shown in great detail.

Furthermore, the Stirling series could not have been used without an adequate error analysis which would provide realistic error bounds. Such an error analysis would involve knowledge of the Euler integral, Euler limit form, Euler constant, the notion of an asymptotic expansion, the Zeta function.

For proofs see Asymptotics and Special Functions, F.W.J. Olver, chapter 2 - sections 1.3, 1.4, 11.1-5, chapter 8 - section 4.1


It is inconceivable to state that the Gizeh pyramid was built some 5,000 years ago: no matter which hypothesis is used (extraterrestrials coming from the 12th planet [Z. Sitchin] or from some other galaxy - which would need negative energy/tachyon technology, thus debunking/disproving the infinite universe/multiple galaxy conjecture, Atlantis, or any other) there simply is not enough time for a round planet to have formed itself, given the official chronology used for any solar system evolution physics.

The Gizeh pyramid must have been built just a few hundreds of years ago: some decades later, the mathematics and physics used in its construction were infused into the Western scientific mainstream.


L. Euler: a fictional character invented at the end of the 18th century:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1483598#msg1483598 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1483598#msg1483598)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1483917#msg1483917 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1483917#msg1483917)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 10, 2014, 06:20:00 AM
Origin of Calculus: How Mathematical Analysis Was Imported to India, Italy, France and England

http://www.hinduwisdom.info/Yuktibhasa.pdf (http://www.hinduwisdom.info/Yuktibhasa.pdf)

A relevant epistemological question is this: did Newton at all understand the result he is alleged to have invented? Did Newton have the wherewithal, the necessary mathematical resources, to understand infinite series? As is well known, Cavalieri in 1635 stated the above formula (the infinite series expansion for the sine function) as what was later termed a conjecture. Wallis, too, simply stated the above result, without any proof. Fermat tried to derive the key result above from a result on figurate numbers, while Pascal used the famous “Pascal’s” triangle long known in India and China. Though Newton followed Wallis, he had no proof either, and neither did Leibniz who followed Pascal. Neither Newton nor any other mathematician in Europe had the mathematical wherewithal to understand the calculus for another two centuries, until the development of the real number system by Dedekind.

The next question naturally is this: if Newton and Leibniz did not quite understand the calculus, how did they invent it? In the amplified version of the usual narrative, how did Galileo, Cavalieri, Fermat, Pascal, and Roberval etc. all contribute to the invention of a mathematical procedure they couldn’t quite have understood? The frontiers of a discipline are usually foggy, but here we are talking of a gap which is typically 250 years.

Clearly a more natural hypothesis to adopt is that the calculus was not invented in Europe, but was imported, and that the calculus took nearly as long to assimilate as did zero.


Dr. Joseph George Gheverghese from the University of Manchester said there was strong circumstantial evidence that the Indians passed on their discoveries to mathematically knowledgeable Jesuit missionaries who visited India during the 15th century.

That knowledge may have eventually been passed on to Newton himself, he said.



A key development of pre-calculus Europe, that of generalisation on the basis of induction, has deep methodological similarities with the corresponding Kerala development (200 years before). There is further evidence that John Wallis (1665) gave a recurrence relation and proof of the Pythagorean theorem exactly as Bhaskara II did.

Although it was believed that Keralese calculus remained localised until its discovery by Charles Whish in 1832, Kerala had in fact been in contact with Europe ever since Vasco da Gama first arrived there in 1499 and trade routes were established between Kerala and Europe. Along with European traders, Jesuit missionaries from Europe were also present in Kerala during the 16th century. Many of them were mathematicians and astronomers, and were able to speak local languages such as Malayalam, and were thus able to comprehend Keralese mathematics. Indian mathematical manuscripts may have been brought to Europe by the Jesuit priests and scholars that were present in Kerala.


Other pieces of circumstantial evidence include:

James Gregory, who first stated the infinite series expansion of the arctangent (the Madhava-Gregory series) in Europe, never gave any derivation of his result, or any indication as to how he derived it, suggesting that this series was imported into Europe.


Kerala's established trade links with the British East India Company, which began trading with India sometime between 1600 and 1608, not too long before Europe's scientific revolution began.

There was some controversy in the late 17th century between Newton and Leibniz, over how they independently 'invented' calculus almost simultaneously, which sometimes leads to the suggestion that they both may have acquired the relevant ideas indirectly from Keralese calculus.


Some of Bhaskara's contributions to mathematics include the following:

Integer solutions of linear and quadratic indeterminate equations (Kuttaka). The rules he gives are (in effect) the same as those given by the renaissance European mathematicians of the 17th Century.

A cyclic, Chakravala method for solving indeterminate equations of the form ax2 + bx + c = y. The solution to this equation was traditionally attributed to William Brouncker in 1657, though his method was more difficult than the chakravala method.

Solutions of Diophantine equations of the second order, such as 61x^2 + 1 = y^2. This very equation was posed as a problem in 1657 by the French mathematician Pierre de Fermat.

Preliminary concept of mathematical analysis.

Preliminary concept of infinitesimal calculus, along with notable contributions towards integral calculus.

He conceived differential calculus, after discovering the derivative and differential coefficient.

Stated Rolle's theorem, a special case of one of the most important theorems in analysis, the mean value theorem.

Traces of the general mean value theorem are also found in his works.

Calculated the derivatives of trigonometric functions and formulae.


The calculus has played a key role in the development of the sciences, starting from the “Newtonian Revolution”. According to the “standard” story, the calculus was invented independently by Leibniz and Newton. This story of indigenous development, ab initio, is now beginning to totter, like the story of the “Copernican Revolution”. The English-speaking world has known for over one and a half centuries that “Taylor” series expansions for sine, cosine and arctangent functions were found in Indian mathe-matics/astronomy/timekeeping (jyotisa) texts, and specifically in the works of Madhava,Neelkantha (Tantrasangraha, 1501CE), Jyeshtadeva (Yuktibhâsâ, c. 1530 CE) etc. No one else, however, has so far studied the connection of these Indian developments to European mathematics.


The force on a body is the resultant of gravity and the work done against it. V.S 5.1.13

In the absence of all other forces gravity exists. V.S 5.1.7

Action is opposed by an equivalent opposite reaction - V.S 5.1.16-18

Newton's laws of motion copied from the Naya Vaiseshika Sutra.

Suppose that the mass of an object is 'm' and in time interval 't', the velocity of the object changes from 'u' to 'v' due to the force acting on it. Then,

Initial momentum = mu
Final momentum = mv
Change in momentum = m(v-u)

Therefore, the rate of change of momentum = m(v-u)/t = ma (from Kanada's first law)

From Kandas second law,
force is proportional to the rate of change of momentum.
Or, p k ma
Or, p = kma (where k is a constant)

If m=1 and a=1, then
1 = k*1*1 or k = 1
Or, p = ma

Therefore, unit force is the one that produces unit acceleration in an object of unit mass.

Prashastpada



ISAAC NEWTON, THE CALCULUS THIEF: (some excerpts)

He copied his laws of gravity from "Surya Sidhanta" the great Sanskrit astronomical work written in the Vedic age . Reproduced in another written text by Bhaskara , 1200 years before Newton it clearly explains gravity without an apple. However Vedic gravity was a push ( after observing the solar eclipse ) and NOT a pull. 

They took Calculus to Europe , from where the likes of Gottfried Wilhelm Von Liebniz , Isaac Newton and Robert Hooke raced with each other to translate , re-invent and market it in their own names, in a acrimonious manner.

It was John Wallis , while he was the keeper of Oxford Univeristy archives who first started pondering over translated Mathematics stolen from India. 

John Wallis patented Vedic Math infinity and infinitesimal in his own name.  Rest he could NOT understand .  Whatever he could make head or tail of, he included in his Arithmatica Infinitorum and Treatise on Algebra.

His baton was taken over by Isaac Barrow, who tutored Isaac Newton in Kerala Calculus.




http://ckraju.net/IndianCalculus/Bangalore.pdf (http://ckraju.net/IndianCalculus/Bangalore.pdf)

The Infinitesimal Calculus: How and Why it Was Imported into Europe


https://web.archive.org/web/20130713214810/http://indianrealist.com/2009/01/26/how-jesuits-took-calculus-from-india-to-europe/

‘Calculus is India’s Gift to Europe’

In his speech at ICIH 2009, Professor C.K. Raju revealed that calculus was an Indian invention that was transmitted by Jesuit priests to Europe from Cochin in the second half of 16th century. “Indian infinite series has been known to British scholars since at least 1832, but no scholar tried to establish the connection with the calculus attributed to Newton and Leibnitz,” he said.

Dr. Raju’s 10-year research that included archival work in Kerala and Rome was published in a book “Cultural Foundations of Mathematics.” It established that the Jesuit priests took trigonometric tables and planetary models from the Kerala mathematicians of the Aryabhata school and exported them to Europe starting around 1560 in connection with the European navigational problem.

“When the Europeans received the Indian calculus, they couldn’t understand it properly because the Indian philosophy of mathematics is different from the Western philosophy of mathematics. It took them about 300 years to fully comprehend its working. The calculus was used by Newton to develop his laws of physics,” Dr. Raju added. Ironically, some British scholars claimed credit for this research despite being warned against plagiarizing Professor Raju’s work.



However, what Dr. C.K. Raju does not realize is that the same science of calculus was also imported to India, in order to create the false impression of an ancient indian history.

http://madhesi.wordpress.com/2008/09/24/did-ashoka-exist/ (http://madhesi.wordpress.com/2008/09/24/did-ashoka-exist/) (how Emperor Ashoka, India's greatest historical figure, is a fictional character invented in the 19th century)

Not so ancient India:

http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=27888#27888 (http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=27888#27888)


Ptolemy's Almagest: it was created at least after 1350 AD, here are the complete proofs:


When was Ptolemy's star catalogue in Almagest compiled in reality?

https://web.archive.org/web/20160306134153/http://hbar.phys.msu.ru/gorm/fomenko/fomenko3.pdf



The dating of Ptolemy's Almagest based on the coverings of the stars and on lunar eclipses

https://web.archive.org/web/20141008085625/http://hbar.phys.msu.ru/gorm/fomenko/fomenko4.pdf


Both works appeared in the Acta Applicandae Mathematicae (17 - 1989 and 29 - 1992).


HISTORY: FICTION OR SCIENCE? VOLUME 3, DATING PTOLEMY'S ALMAGEST

https://archive.org/stream/AnatolyFomenkoBooks/History-FictionOrScienceByAnatolyFomenkoVol.3#mode/2up

Pg. 209 - 214

Tycho Brahe = N. Copernicus


Pg. 248 - 259

Who actually wrote the works attributed to Hipparchus, T. Brahe and C. Ptolemy


Pg. 302 - 327

J. Kepler = N. Copernic = T. Brahe = C. Ptolemy the most extraordinary analysis

The other pages include one of the best ever discussion on the new chronology of the times of J. Kepler, C. Ptolemy, T. Brahe, N. Copernicus, who were actually one and the same person.


Dating Ptolemy's Almagest (a more technical work):

https://www.jaks.sk/dokumenty/fomenko/Fomenko-%20Kalashnikov-%20Nosovsky%20-%20Dating%20Ptolemy-s%20Almagest%20-1993-.pdf

The coverings of the stars, and the lunar eclipses described in Almagest, could have occurred ONLY during the period 800 - 1350 a.d. and not one thousand years earlier. Archimedes' Palimpsest was also forged after 1750 AD.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 28, 2014, 12:47:36 AM
Therefore, the truncated Maxwell equations refer ONLY to the temporary hertzian ripples in the ether sea, and NOT to the scalar/ether waves themselves:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,58190.msg1489693.html#msg1489693 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,58190.msg1489693.html#msg1489693)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,58190.msg1489785.html#msg1489785 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,58190.msg1489785.html#msg1489785)


Now, a closed-form formula for the natural logarithm:

LN v = ((-2 +{2+[2+...(2+ 1/v + v)^1/2]^1/2}^1/2))^1/2 x 2^n

n+1 parantheses to evaluate - in the last parenthesis we substract 2 and take the square root one last time (n+1), before we multiply the result by 2^n

For v very large, we can omit the term 1/v


By summing the nested square root function, we obtain the final result:

LN v = 2n x ( v(1/2^n) - 2 + v-(2^-n) )1/2

Of course, we can use the first formula for computation utilizing only a pocket calculator with only the four basic arithmetic operations (since a square root function is essentially a continued fraction).


And there are more formulas to be derived from the logarithm continued function:

COS @ = 1/2 X (({[(2 - @^2/2^n)^2 -2)^2...]-2}^2 -2)) (n/2+1 evaluations)

COS^-1 @ = ((2- {2+ [2+ (2+ 2@)^1/2]...^1/2}))^1/2 x 2^n (n+1 evaluations)

 
COSH v = 1/2 x (({[( ( (2 + v2/2^n)^2) -2)^2] -2)^2 ...-2}^2 -2)) (n/2 +1 evaluations)

TAN-1 v = ((2- {2+ [2+ (2+ 2{1/(1+ v2)1/2})^1/2]...^1/2}))^1/2 x 2^n (n+1 evaluations)


ln v = 2n x ( v1/2n+1 - 1/v1/2n+1 )

This is the correct formula for the natural logarithm function, linking algebraic functions with elementary and higher transcendental functions, providing the fastest way to calculate the value for any logarithm, and at the same time help to evaluate any integral containing lnx terms.


For a first approximation:

ln v = 2n x ( v1/2n - 1 )

First results appear for n = 8 to 12, all the remaining digits for n = 19 and greater...

Example: x = 100,000 ; lnx = 11.5129255

with n=20, the first approximation is lnx = 11.512445 (e11.512445 = 100001.958 )


For the function 2n x v1/2n, there is a certain pattern for the succesive approximations, (fk+1 - fk)/(fk - fk-1); as an example for 1x108 after the first four evaluations, the ratios approach 2; for 1x105, after the first four calculations, for 5.23 x 1012, after the first five evaluations.

Now, for the first time, we can evaluate and obtain estimates for the logarithmic integral (li(x)):

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/e/4/5/e45c5ac061c344e09072e21062be8c66.png)

Perhaps we will encounter integrals of the form ( u2n+1/(u-1) x du ) or some form of partial fraction decompositions containing 2n+1 factors, but there is an excellent chance to obtain a formula or even some kind of an estimate which will settle the matter:

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/9/0/9/909e0e0f5bad15cbd4d82e2f0e2e6b10.png)

li(x) - Π(x) = O(x1/2lnx) (number of primes not exceeding x and a verification of Riemann's hypothesis at the same time - I recommend H.R. Edwards' Riemann's Zeta Function for further information)

We all know that the integral of lnx = xlnx - x; however, the real beauty and significance of this formula is revealed only when we use the correct logarithm expression derived above for the first time:

2n x ((1/(1 + 1/2n+1)) x v1 + 1/2n+1  -  (1/(1 - 1/2n+1)) x v1 - 1/2n+1 )



Einstein, 1905:

"The principle of the constancy of the velocity of light is of course contained in Maxwell's equations”


ALBERT IN RELATIVITYLAND

http://www.gsjournal.net/old/ntham/amesbury.pdf (http://www.gsjournal.net/old/ntham/amesbury.pdf)

However, space-time as a fourth dimension is nothing more than the product of professor Minkowski's cerebral and mathematical imagination.


On Physical Lines of Force, the original set of Maxwell's equations:

http://vacuum-physics.com/Maxwell/maxwell_oplf.pdf (http://vacuum-physics.com/Maxwell/maxwell_oplf.pdf)


The best work done on the original set of Maxwell's equations belongs to Dr. Frederick Tombe.

http://web.archive.org/web/20071006083222/http://www.wbabin.net/science/tombe4.pdf (http://web.archive.org/web/20071006083222/http://www.wbabin.net/science/tombe4.pdf)

The correct demonstration of the rotating aethereal substance within Maxwell’s vortex cells.

Dr. Tombe's paper demonstrates quite clearly the fallacy of Einstein's statement.


Dr. Tombe went even further with his paper: Gravity and Light -

http://www.gsjournal.net/old/science/tombe18.pdf (http://www.gsjournal.net/old/science/tombe18.pdf)

Abstract. Gravity and light are two different manifestations of aether flow.

Another classic by Dr. Tombe:

http://www.gsjournal.net/old/science/tombe5.pdf (http://www.gsjournal.net/old/science/tombe5.pdf)

Gravitation and the Gyroscopic Force



Double helix theory of the Magnetic field:

http://www.gsjournal.net/old/science/tombe.pdf (http://www.gsjournal.net/old/science/tombe.pdf)


There is no such thing as the theory of relativity:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=60367.msg1563056#msg1563056 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=60367.msg1563056#msg1563056)


Dayton Miller ether drift experiments:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=60367.msg1563058#msg1563058 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=60367.msg1563058#msg1563058)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 12, 2014, 12:34:18 AM
Circle arclength formula:

A = 2n x (2c2 - c(2c2 + c(2c2 ... +c(2c2 - 2bc)1/2)1/2)1/2...)1/2

c = radius, b = side of the right triangle which lies on the x-axis


Then, we can certainly factor out the term c1/2n+1, which means that the logarithm of the radius of a circle is definitely linked to the trigonometric functions.


Sacred cubit radians

Degrees to sacred cubit radians - divide by 36.4206 = (100 - 100 sc)

Sacred cubit radians (scr) to degrees - multiply by 36.4206

50 degrees = 1/0.7284 scr (7.28 = displacement factor of the Gizeh Pyramid)

100 degrees = 2.7457 scr = 1/0.364206


sc = sacred cubit = 0.63566 (there are several sacred cubit measurements, ranging from 0.625 to 0.64)


b12 + a12 = c12

b1 = d1 x d2 (divisors of b1)

a1 = (d12 - d22)/2

c1 = (d12 +d22/2


b1, a1, c1 in the natural numbers set

If b1 is prime, then b12 + a22 = c22 (where c2 = (b12 +1)/2 )



Using sacred cubit radians, we finally understand the importance of the arclength for the b12 + a12 = c12 formula.


b1 = 33
c1 = 65

arccos 33/65 = 1.0385 radians = 59.4897 degrees, no symmetry can be detected

However, using scr, we get 1.6334 scr.

Multiplying the arclength for the given angle by one sc we get 106.1785, and then by the scr value: 167.025

65sc2 = 26.264

167.025/26.264 = 6.36 (10 sc)

Similarly, for 5177 = b1 (c1 = 14425), we get the value 2.5424 x 1/0.2861

for 3173 = b1 (c1 = 14125), we get (2 + 1/sc2)/sc, and so on.


The sequence 2sc - 1/2sc x N (N = 1,2,3 ... ) will give the values: 5.34, 7.287, 13.6034, 63.65 and much more.


The Fibonacci numbers are actually sacred cubit numbers.

1,618034 = 4sc2 (sc = 0.636009827)

Then Fn = 1/(8sc2 -1) x 22n x sc2n



Then we get:

(b12)sc + (a12)sc =~ ([(b1 + a1 + c1)/2]2)sc

b11/sc + a11/sc =~ c11/sc


b1sc + a1sc = (k x c1)sc , 1 < k <~2




Let p(n) = partitions of a natural number

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/4/3/e/43ece82da690519129ca823eb824f391.png)


I am going to derive the asymptotic formula for p(n) using just the sacred cubit as a guide; using the above formula I have calculated p(n) up to n = 96, we also know that p(243) = 133,978,259,344,888

For starters let n!/([lnn]! x (n - [lnn])!) = f(n), where [ x ] is the integer part of x, then

f(83)/p(83) = 1/sc

f(91)/p(91) = 1/12


Using various functions to approximate ln p(n) such as (n/sc2)1/2, and n1/2/sc2, we get some special values:

ln p(33) = 331/2 x 1.6195

[(1 + 4sc2) x 33 )]1/2/sc = ln p(33) x 1/sc

For h1 = ((1 + 4sc2) x lnn)1/2/sc we get

h1(33) - (3sc + lnn) = 1sc
h1(51) - (3sc + lnn) = 1/2sc

2431/(1 - sc) = 3sc + ln 243


Finally, without using complex analysis or Ramanujan sums, we get:

ln p(n) = [(1 + 4sc2) x n )]1/2/sc  - (lnn + 1 + 1/sc2 - 1/sc) - a very good approximation



Next, I am going to attempt to solve the most difficult known problem in number theory: large number factorization of semiprimes (product of two very large prime numbers), at least for a semiprime which has ten digits, using just the sacred cubit: a new formula (the leading asymptotic term) which solves the problem for numbers with ten digits or less, and a new algorithm featuring Fibonacci numbers remainders.

There is a wealth of information which can be obtained from the b1 term, using sacred cubits, and which can be the starting point to a whole new approach to factoring semiprimes.

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 14, 2014, 12:53:54 AM
(b12)sc + (a12)sc =~ ([(b1 + a1 + c1)/2]2)sc

b11/sc + a11/sc =~ c11/sc



a1 + c1 = d12

List of 4sc2 sequence numbers (Fibonacci numbers):

http://www.maths.surrey.ac.uk/hosted-sites/R.Knott/Fibonacci/fibtable.html (http://www.maths.surrey.ac.uk/hosted-sites/R.Knott/Fibonacci/fibtable.html)


With a reasonable approximation for a1, we can obtain a very good estimate for d1 from the first formula, presented for the first time in my previous message.

8141 x 131071 = 1073602561

1073602561 = 286572 + 252378911 = 28657 x 46368 - 255165215  (where 28657 = F23, and 46368 = F24)

If b1<a1, then the a1 term will be of the form F242 - ..., or F24 x F25 - ..., F25 x F26 - ..., or F252 - ... ; if b1>a1, then a1 will equal F23 x F24 - ..., F222 - ... , that is, only 4-6 possible choices.

In order to get a very good estimate for d1, we will use the first remainder (and a few subsequent remainders if needed, more explanation below) obtained from the b1 for each of the above choices .

For the a1 =  F25 x F26 - ... choice, using a10 = 255165215, and substituting in the first formula, we get:

d1 = 132578.957, an excellent approximation.

Actually, a1 = 8556257280 = 750252 + 2927506655 = 75025 x 121393 - 551252545


65537 x 131071 = 8590000127 = 750252 + 2961249502 = 75025 x 121393 - 517509698

Using the same reasoning and the same formula, we get a first estimate for d1, d1 = 130095.707


It is only by using the power of the sacred cubit that we can actually get these estimates, impossible to obtain otherwise by any other method.


But we can actually accomplish much more, by using the 4sc2 sequence to reveal the sacred cubit structure of the natural number system.


821 x 941 = 772561

772561 = 610 x 987 + 170491 = 9872 - 201608

170491 = 3772 + 28362 = 377 x 610 - 59479

The sum of the remainders obtained by dividing the numbers by Fn will equal a product of Fn numbers.

201608 = 377 x 610 - 28362 = 3772 + 59479

28362 = 144 x 233 - 5190 = 1442 + 7899

59479 = 2332 + 5190 = 233 x 377 - 28362

7899 = 892 - 22 = 89 x 55 + 3004

5190 = 89 x 55 + 295 = 892 - 2731


3004 = 552 - 21 = 55 x 34 + 1134

2731 = 552 - 294 = 55 x 34 + 861


1134 = 342 - 22 = 34 x 21 + 420

861 = 34 x 21 + 147 = 342 - 295

420 = 212 - 20 = 21 x 13 + 147

294 = 21 x 13 + 21 = 212 - 147 ; 147 + 21 = 168

147 = 21 x 8 - 21 = 13 x 8 + 43

43 = 8 x 5 + 3 = 82 - 21

21 = 5 x 3 + 6 = 52 - 4


Of course, we can immediately obtain a first approximation for d1, d1 = 918; by summing the remainders of b1 in their corresponding order, we can obtain even better estimate for d1.


Now, we can actually get the remainders of the a1 term either by noticing that 6 and 4 (remainders obtained by dividing 21 by F5 and F4) can be used to start the a1 sequence of remainders starting from the bottom up, or by using a very interesting shortcut involving b1sc.

Actually, a1 = 105720 = 3772 - 36409 = 377 x 233 + 17879

Using the same scheme as above, we get finally:

40 = 82 - 24 = 8 x 3 + 16

16 = 52 - 9 = 32 + 7

9 = 3 x 5 - 6 = 2 x 3 - 3


65 = 82 + 1 = 8 x 13 - 39

39 = 8 x 5 - 1 = 52 + 14

14 = 3 x 5 -1 = 2 x 5 + 4


Knowing that 6 and 4 are the remainders of a1, we can see that from the possible choices we eventually get (11, 19, 9 and 14) only 9 and 14 will make any sense, given the fact that the sum of the remainders at each stage of the calculation will equal a product of Fn numbers.


One of the remainders of a1 will be 2857.


3004 - 2857 = 147



772561sc = 5530


5530 - 5063 = 2 x 233

5530 - 2857 = 89 x 30

(5063, another a1 remainder)

That is, there is a certain symmetry and relationship between b1sc and some of the a1 remainders.


The same reasoning can be used for any b1 = d1 x d2.

For 1000009 = 3413 x 293, we get a first estimate of 3486, and by summing the remainders of b1 (576230 + 204130 + 62001 + 25840 + 5104 + 2817 + 947 ...) we get an estimate of 3400, which is amazing, because we only use the remainders from b1 and very simple approximations.


For 1000009, b1sc = 6515.72

9368 - 6515.72 = 610 x 4.66 = 987 x 2.88  (4.66 = 2 x 2.33 , and 2.88 = 2 x 1.44, both 233 and 144 are Fn)

9368 is one of the a1 remainders

Another a1 remainder is 3448

6515.72 - 3448 =~ 552 = 233 x 13


The algorithm uses only Fn numbers, and is proportional to the number of the digits of b1 and not to any divisor of b1.


I believe that this formula is just the first leading term of a certain asymptotic approximation to d1, and we have seen the extraordinary approximations which can be obtained effortlessly:

(b12)sc + (a12)sc =~ ([(b1 + a1 + c1)/2]2)sc


Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 16, 2014, 07:47:45 AM
2123 = b1 = 11 x 193
18564 = a1

2123sc = 130.26

301 - 130.26 = 34 x 5

854 - 130.26 =~ 144 x 5

301 and 854 remainders of 18564 upon division by the corresponding Fn numbers.


21232sc = 16967.50815

a1 - 21232sc = 1596.4918  (1597 = F17)


18564sc = 516.92

902 - 516.92 = 7 x 55

902 remainder of 2123


15617 = b1 = 97 x 161
8256 = a1


8256sc = 308.84

15617sc = 463.13

463.13 - 106 = 89 x 4   (106 remainder of 8256)

932 - 308.84 = 7 x 89   (932 remainder of 15617)


1000009 = b1 = 3413 x 293
5781360 = a1

10000092sc = 293627 x 144.5  (293627 remainder of 5781360)
10000092sc - (293627 x 144.5) = 25519.6
25840 - 25519 = 233 + 89 (25840 remainder of 1000009)

1000009sc = 6515.72

6515.72 - 3448 =~ 552


231 - 1 = 2147483647

261 - 1 = 2.3059 x 1018

b1 = (231 - 1) x (261 - 1) = 4.951760152 x 1027
a1 = 2.658455989 x 1036

In a situation like this b12sc can be used to find useful relationships between the remainders of b1 and a1, and even estimates.

In fact, with a1 trial function 4 x 1035, we get an estimate for d1 = 2.353 x 1018.


I would need access to a computer which can handle division/multiplication of integers with 50 digits+, and then use the b1, a1 remainders to discover the hidden sacred cubit symmetries:

-the following powers of b1 also would be very useful to discover further formulas: 2sc + 1/2sc, 1/sc, 2sc, 1, 1/2sc, 2 - 2sc, sc, sc/2, 2sc - 1/2sc (in fact it would cover the range of all possible values of a1)

-ln (b1/a1 + a1/b1) leads to the conclusion that the remainders of 2c1 and b1 + a1 also do contain useful information


For a 200 digit number (semiprime), the required computational time (1990) for the methods then used in integer factorization will take 4 x 1015 years.

For a 300 digit number, we would need 5 x 1021 years

For a 500 digit number, the figure would rise to 4.2 x 1032 years.

An elegant method would not resort to "needle in the haystack algorithms", but would make full use of the very interesting mathematical relationships which do exist between the remainders of b1 and a1 upon division by the corresponding Fn numbers - an algorithm which is proportional to the number of the digits of b1.


Even the universal constants of bifurcation theory are related to the sacred cubit.

136/18 x 1/4sc2 = 4.66933 (Feigenbaum constant)

136/48 x 1/4sc2 = 2.8333 (-2.8333 is the Shenker-Rand constant)

4.6692 + 2.618034 = 7.2872 (displacement factor of the Gizeh pyramid, 286.1 sacred inches = 7.28)

2 x 2.8333 = 4.66933 x 3sc2


Albert Einstein,Relativity, The special and the general theory, 11th ed., 1936, p.64:

“In contrast to electric and magnetic fields, the gravitational field exhibits a most remarkable property, which is of fundamental importance ... Bodies which are moving under the sole influence of a gravitational field receive an acceleration, which does not in the least depend either on the material or the physical state of the body.”


PROJECT MONTGOLFIER - Dr. Thomas Townsend Brown proves the fallacy of Einstein's statetment; also the Biefeld-Brown effect shows that terrestrial gravity and antigravity are electrical forces of opposite spin.


http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=59837.msg1540161#msg1540161 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=59837.msg1540161#msg1540161)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=59837.msg1552735#msg1552735 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=59837.msg1552735#msg1552735)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=59837.msg1554378#msg1554378 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=59837.msg1554378#msg1554378)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=59837.msg1553607#msg1553607 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=59837.msg1553607#msg1553607)
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 28, 2014, 07:55:42 AM
Riemann’s Hypothesis – Sacred cubit structure of the zeros of the Zeta function

(http://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/zeros.jpg)

The zeros of the Zeta function of Riemann are angles (expressed in radians); by finding the corresponding angles in the first four quadrants, and multiplying by 68.05 (radius of the circle), we obtain a certain arclength.

Then, an intricate and extraordinary system/network of sacred cubit equations will become apparent, showing that the structure of the zeros of the Zeta function cannot be understood without employing the notion of the  sacred cubit.

Furthermore, each group of five consecutive zeros of the Zeta function will form a five element cycle (as described earlier), with striking sacred cubit mathematical relationships becoming evident.


The zeros of the Zeta function can be viewed as sort of a Poincare map: the iteration of an initial point (of a periodic differential equation on a cylinder, for our case, for visualization purposes) under the Poincare map is the succesive interaction of the spiral with a vertical line on the cylinder (the sequence of Poincare maps fit together to make a spiral on the cylinder).


http://mathworld.wolfram.com/RiemannZetaFunctionZeros.html (http://mathworld.wolfram.com/RiemannZetaFunctionZeros.html)

http://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/physics1.htm (http://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/physics1.htm)

http://member.melbpc.org.au/~tmajlath/Riemann.html (http://member.melbpc.org.au/~tmajlath/Riemann.html)

http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/zeta_tables/index.html (http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/zeta_tables/index.html)



The Stieltjes constants are actually sacred cubit constants.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/5/8/8/588c959810d6a7a80c98cca8fe7735ad.png)

A0 = 0.5772156649
A1 = 072815845

7.28158 is one of the values of the displacement factor of the Gizeh pyramid.

In fact,

0.078158455 – 0.07273942 = 7.6425 x 10-5

7.6425 x sc = 4.858 = 10 x (2sc – 1/2sc)

Then, the Euler constant can be expressed as:

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/3/3/4/334de1ea38b615839e4ee6b65ee1b103.png) = 0.07273942 x 18sc/(18sc – 10)

(http://mathworld.wolfram.com/images/equations/Euler-MascheroniConstant/Inline5.gif)

We can express Catalan’s constant, G, in terms of sacred cubits.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/b/0/d/b0d0101eaeceacd98b6e430f4ce72b60.png)

G x 0.2861 = 1/6sc

G/1.361 = 1/[1 + (2sc – 1/2sc)]

The Feigenbaum constant can be expressed in terms of G.

4.6693 x 0.72738 = 5.34 x sc

(18sc – 10)/18sc x sc x 53.4 = 4.27678

4.27678/4.6693 = G


The sum of the negative integer powers of the nontrivial zeros is again a sacred cubit constant.


(http://mathworld.wolfram.com/images/equations/RiemannZetaFunctionZeros/Inline60.gif)

=  (http://mathworld.wolfram.com/images/equations/RiemannZetaFunctionZeros/Inline62.gif)

The sum will equal 0.02309571

2.309571/sc = 7.2738/2 – 3.5567 x 10-3

355.555 = 2/3 x 533.33

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/RiemannZetaFunctionZeros.html (http://mathworld.wolfram.com/RiemannZetaFunctionZeros.html) (for all the sums of the negative integer powers of the nontrivial zeros, from Z(1) to Z(6) )


FIRST FIVE ZEROS OF THE ZETA FUNCTION (see http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/zeta_tables/index.html (http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/zeta_tables/index.html) )

We reduce the value of the zero itself (angle expressed in radians) to the first few quadrants, as needed, then multiply this value by 68.05 to find the value of the arclength.

14.134725 - 4π = 1.568354 (value of the width of the first section from the queen chamber niche)

1.568354 x 68.05 = 106.726

Let us now find further sacred cubit equations featuring 14.134725

Ln 14.134725 = 14.134725/5.3366

14.134725 x 0.618 = 1/0.11447 (11.444 is one of the most important constants of the Gizeh pyramid, and equals 4 x 2.861)

14.134725/2.5424 = 1/180

14.134725 – 21/2 = 12.7205 = 20sc

14.134725 - 5π = -1/sc

26.666 x 4 = 106.666

106.726sc = 14.134725 + 5.332

Let us now express 45 degrees as sacred cubit radians:

45/36.4206 = 1.23556

1.23541 x 180 = 222.37

Dividing 14.134725 by one sacred cubit we obtain:

14.134725/sc = 22.22363

Since 106.666 is the radian value for 90 degrees multiplied by68.05, we can see that the first zero of the Zeta function is absolutely related to the value of 90 degrees.


21.02204 - 6π 2.172476

2.172476 x 68.05 = 147.837


25.0108 - 7π = 3.0196

3.0196 x 68.05 = 205.487


30.424 - 8π = 5.29125

5.29125 x 68.05 = 360.07


32.935 - 2π = 26.666
32.935 - 8π = 7.8022

7.8022 x 68.05 = 530.94

37.586

by substracting 9π and multiplying by 68.05 we get 633.658
by substracting 8π and multiplying by 68.05 we get 847.444

Now, the crucial observation is made: each set of five consecutive zeros of the Zeta function, expressed as arclength (and at this early stage also as the zero divided by one sc) will obey the rules of the five elements cycle defined earlied on this page.


Therefore,

360.07 – 106.726 = 253.444
253.42 = 156.6 x 1.618

360.07 – 205.487 = 154.583

154.583 x 0.618 = 100sc x 1.5

530.94 – 360.07 = 170.874 (Gizeh pyramid value)

633.659 – 530.94 = 102.719
102.719/sc = 161.594 (136.1 expressed in radians and multplied by 68.05)


Since the values of the zeros at this early stage are actually spaced out quite nicely, we can divide their values by one sc to obtain further equations.

Dividing the previous values of the first five zeros of the Zeta function by one sc we get:

22.22363

33.07

39.346 (1/1si)

47.862

51.81

33.07 = (the Euler constant x 180)/π

39.346/22.22363 = 1.77

e1/1.77 = 1.759398 = 1 + 39.346/51.81

e0.75943 = 4 x 53.4

0.75943 = 1/1.31678

51.81/33.07 = 1.5666

47.862/33.07 = 1.4473

1.4487 = 52.762 degrees/36.4206

140.6/52.762 = 2.666

With an angle of 5.29125 and a radius of 68.05 the triangle formed will have sides measuring: 37.2285, 56.9635, 68.05 – their sum will be 99.884

If we subtract π/2 from the 3.0196, we get again 1.4488 – the corresponding triangle will have sides measuring 8.2768, 67.54, 68.05, and a sum of 143.872

143.872/99.884 = 1.4462

47.862/22.223 = 2.154

2.154/5.34 = sc2

2.154/1.5666 = 1/0.727296

2.154/1.316777 = 1 + sc

1.316777 + 0.25 = 1.56666

32.935 – 14.134725 = 18.8

Volume of Gizeh pyramid/Lateral area = 30.4452

30.4452 x 0.618 = 18.815

30.4452 x π/180 =1/1.882

Volume of apex/Lateral area of apex = 0.8842


5.29125 – 1.4488 = 3.84246

3.84246 x 68.05 = 261.474


205.487/261.479 = 1/2sc

261.479/360.07 = 0.7263 (one of the values for the displacement factor)

360.07 x 2sc = 458.01

530.94 – 458.01 = 72.931


ZEROS 6 THROUGH 10

37.586

40.9187

43.32707

48.00515

49.774

Using the same procedure (1. Deriving the value of the arclength and 2. Dividing each zero by one sc) we will get again equations involving sc.

Most importantly, again, the consecutive five zeros will obey the rules of the five elements cycle defined earlier.

In fact 1463.0528/1074.2345 = 1.361 (1463.0528 is the arclength for 49.772, and 1074.2345 is the arclength for 40.9187)

Moreover, we meet again with the constant 2.534


ZEROS 125 THROUGH 129

278.2507

279.229251

282.465

283.2111851

284.875964

Again the same precise mathematical relationships involving sc and the five elements cycle.




From the list posted earlier, let us pick at random the following five zeros:

361574.0875
361574.94195
361575.08737
361575.76592
361576.1480

The angles reduced to the first two quadrants will measure:

1.90582 (3sc)
2.76022
2.90562
3.584213
3.9663

Multiplying by 68.05 we get:

129.69105
187.833
197.727
243.906
269.91

I invite the reader to discover the precise equations involving sc and the five element cycle of values expressed as various formulas involving sc.






At random, again, let us pick another set of five consecutive zeros.

1132486.2441
1132486.3922
1132486.87488
1132487.57186
1132487.951

Angles:

1.7827
1.9307
2.9127
3.1107
3.4897

Arclengths:

121.3127
131.384
164.184
211.683
237.474

We obtain again mathematical equations involving sc, and the precise five element cycle values expressed as various formulas involving sc.


Let us now put the sacred cubit to the ultimate test: the Lehmer phenomenon.

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/LehmersPhenomenon.html (http://mathworld.wolfram.com/LehmersPhenomenon.html)

7005.0606918
7005.10055

Angles:

2.450667
2.4905252

Arclengths:

166.7679
169.48024

169.48024 – 166.7679 = 2.71234

2.71234 x euler’s constant = 1.5656

2.71234/2sc = 4 x 0.533

2.71234/8 = 0.339 = 0.53333 x sc

2.71234 – 0.1695 = 2.54284  (2 x 0.1695 = 3.39)


Conclusions:

The builders of the Gizeh pyramid must have had among their ranks the equivalent of G.F.B. Riemann and must have had at their disposal the Riemann-Siegel formula:

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Riemann-SiegelFormula.html (http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Riemann-SiegelFormula.html)

Either all zeros lie on the x=1/2 line, or none of them do (each set of five consecutive zeros are part of a five element cycle, and of an intricate system of equations involving sc: if a single zero is to be found on different x = @ line, then the previous four zeros will no longer be part of a five element cycle, and so on right back to the very first zero.

The zeros of the Zeta function are intersections of the helical sound wave travelling from the pyramid to the apex (at the quantum physics infinitesimal level, see my previous message on this page for a complete explanation) with the outer surface of the cylinder (or some similar shape) which links the pyramid with its apex, then the values themselves are projections onto the central axis (in our case the x = ½ line).
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Ichimaru Gin :] on March 11, 2014, 05:02:17 PM
So if I get the gist of it, Newton merely adopted what was known earlier (and aided in the Gizeh construction), as evidenced by the surprising finding that he did not fully comprehend his own supposed invention? Very interesting!!! I also found the Wolfram links quite helpful. Thank you Levee.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 13, 2014, 07:06:20 AM
Here is a work on Riemann's Zeta function which explains further the findings of C.L. Siegel in the 1930s: the discovery of the asymptotic formula of the Zeta function in Riemann's archives, and of course, much more on the Riemann's hypothesis, if you are interested in this problem:

http://books.google.ro/books?id=ruVmGFPwNhQC&pg=PA298&lpg=PA298&dq=edwards+riemann+zeta+function&source=bl&ots=P4HbjJaNFk&sig=ySMxAy_uEaOaKAkKCo6gbN_w-CQ&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=LbEhU8jmKafF0QHukIHoBg&ved=0CGoQ6AEwBjgK#v=onepage&q=edwards%20riemann%20zeta%20function&f=false (http://books.google.ro/books?id=ruVmGFPwNhQC&pg=PA298&lpg=PA298&dq=edwards+riemann+zeta+function&source=bl&ots=P4HbjJaNFk&sig=ySMxAy_uEaOaKAkKCo6gbN_w-CQ&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=LbEhU8jmKafF0QHukIHoBg&ved=0CGoQ6AEwBjgK#v=onepage&q=edwards%20riemann%20zeta%20function&f=false)


Believe or not, the value of the first zero of the Zeta function on the x = 1/2 line has everything to do with the value of the frequency of the musical instrument (drum) used by the tibetan monks, as described earlier - the single drum of 534.4 Hz.

Height of apex of pyramid: 7.2738 units (286.1 si)

Two apexes in merkabah formation: 9.245 units total height (http://www.absoluteempowerment.com/attachments/Image/Merkabah/002.gif (http://www.absoluteempowerment.com/attachments/Image/Merkabah/002.gif) )

Pyramid total height (including subterranean chamber): 174.6 units (140.6 + 30 + 4)

Each and every boson/antiboson has in its center two truncated pyramids facing each other, with their two apexes rotating in opposite direction right in the center of the distance between the truncated summits.

The importance of the value of 534.4 is as follows: 340 + 9.245 + 170 = 534 - 2x7.27

The distance between the pyramids is 186 (actually 185.58625)

In the center lie the two apexes in a merkabah mathematical figure.


Then, 185.586 - 1/0.0063566 = 2 x 14.134725 (where 14.134725 is the value of the first zero of the Zeta function on the x = 1/2 line).


9.245 - 7.2738 = 1.9712

9.245 - 2x1.9712 = 5.3026

2x14.134725 - 5.3026 = 2x11.483425

11.483425 - 11.444 = 0.039425   -   where 0.039425 = 2x0.0197125

In order to discover the true significance of the value of 14.134725 we must make use of the one of the most interesting geometrical figures of the Gizeh pyramid: the sothic triangle (http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/tw/SothicTri.jpg (http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/tw/SothicTri.jpg) ).

That is, we embed the apex itself into a larger triangle as follows:

the side angles of the sothic triangle will measure, of course, 51.87 degrees

its height will measure 16.786 units

the base of the sothic triangle will measure 26.35224 (2x13.17612)


For the apex there are only two possible side angle measures: 68.57 degrees and 51.87 degrees.

68.57 degrees

Substracting 1/2 the value of the base of the apex from 1/2 the value of the base of the sothic triangle we get:

10.32135

14.134725 - 10.32135 = 3.813375 = 6 sacred cubits


51.87 degrees

Substracting 1/2 the value of the base of the apex from 1/2 the value of the base of the sothic triangle we get:

7.4666

14.134725 - 7.4666 = 6.666 = 1/0.15


Now things get really interesting.

tan 51.87 degrees x 13.17612 = 16.786

16.786 - 14.134725 = 2.65129 = 5.3026/2

e2.65129 - 14.134725 = 1/26.6

2.65129 - 2.648634 = 0.00266

We remember that ln 14.134725 = 2.648634


Then, we understand precisely the significance of this figure:

http://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/zeros.jpg (http://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/zeros.jpg)

The distance from the very center of the boson to the apex of the sothic triangle will measure exactly 14.134725

Then the sound wave vortex manifests itself and each intersection of this helix with the outer surface of the cylinder (in the shape of a very complex sine wave) will appear on the center axis (its projection) with a certain value: the exact values of the zeros of the Zeta function on the x= 1/2 line).

As the a new wave starts from the pyramid and travels towards the its apex in the center, more values of the zeros of the Zeta function will be plotted on the x = 1/2 line, and so on.


"Although the Riemann zeta-function is an analytic function with [a] deceptively simple definition, it keeps bouncing around almost randomly without settling down to some regular asymptotic pattern. The Riemann zeta-function displays the essence of chaos in quantum mechanics, analytically smooth, and yet seemingly unpredictable."

M.C. Gutzwiller, Chaos in Classical and Quantum Mechanics (Springer, 1990), p. 377

"One idea for proving the Riemann hypothesis is to give a spectral interpretation of the zeros. That is, if the zeros can be interpreted as the eigenvalues of 1/2 + iT, where T is a Hermitian operator on some Hilbert space, then since the eigenvalues of a Hermitian operator are real, the Riemann hypothesis follows. This idea was originally put forth by Pólya and Hilbert, and serious support for this idea was found in the resemblance between the "explicit formulae" of prime number theory, which go back to Riemann and von Mangoldt, but which were formalized as a duality principle by Weil, on the one hand, and the Selberg trace formula on the other.

The best evidence for the spectral interpretation comes from the theory of the Gaussian Unitary Ensemble (GUE), which show that the local behavior of the zeros mimics that of a random Hamiltonian. The link gives a more extended discussion of this topic."

"Gutzwiller gave a trace formula in the setting of quantum chaos which relates the classical and quantum mechanical pictures. Given a chaotic (classical) dynamical system, there will exist a dense set of periodic orbits, and one side of the trace formula will be a sum over the lengths of these orbits. On the other side will be a sum over the eigenvalues of the Hamiltonian in the quantum-mechanical analog of the given classical dynamical system.

This setup resembles the explicit formulas of prime number theory. In this analogy, the lengths of the prime periodic orbits play the role of the rational primes, while the eigenvalues of the Hamiltonian play the role of the zeros of the zeta function. Based on this analogy and pearls mined from Odlyzko's numerical evidence, Sir Michael Berry proposes that there exists a classical dynamical system, asymmetric with respect to time reversal, the lengths of whose periodic orbits correspond to the rational primes, and whose quantum-mechanical analog has a Hamiltonian with zeros equal to the imaginary parts of the nontrivial zeros of the zeta function. The search for such a dynamical system is one approach to proving the Riemann hypothesis."   (Daniel Bump)


However, these distinguished mathematicians will NEVER be able to understand the true significance of Riemann's hypothesis outside of the subject of my previous messages: the Gizeh pyramid and the sacred cubit.


The Gizeh pyramid is the architectural equivalent of Riemann's Zeta function.


There were several people who wrote the works attributed to Newton: one wrote the Principia, another the texts on alchemy, another the treatises on chemistry, and others who compiled the works on optics and Newton's private letters.

Newton merely adopted what was known earlier (and aided in the Gizeh construction), as evidenced by the surprising finding that he did not fully comprehend his own supposed invention? Very interesting!!!

Indeed. The Gizeh pyramid was constructed only a few hundreds of years ago: calculus was then slowly infused into the Western cultural/scientific mainstream during the Renaissance which occurred during the 18th century.
Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 15, 2014, 03:09:56 AM
Ukraine/Crimeea/Moldavia - Flat Surface of the Earth

In the official historical chronology, Dimitrie Cantemir is recognized as one of the greatest geniuses ever produced by Eastern Europe.

Dimitrie Cantemir (1673–1723) was twice Prince of Moldavia (in March–April 1693 and in 1710–1711). He was also a prolific man of letters – philosopher, historian, composer, musicologist, linguist, ethnographer, and geographer.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/09/Dimitrie_Cantemir_-_Foto01.jpg/220px-Dimitrie_Cantemir_-_Foto01.jpg)

In 1714 Cantemir became a member of the Royal Academy of Berlin. Between 1711 and 1719 he wrote his most important creations. Cantemir was known as one of the greatest linguists of his time, speaking and writing eleven languages, and being well versed in Oriental scholarship. His oeuvre is voluminous, diverse, and original; although some of his scientific writings contain unconfirmed theories and inaccuracies, his expertise, sagacity, and groundbreaking researches are widely acknowledged.


http://www.dacii.go.ro/materiale/dacii/spiritualitate/pagini/monument_megalitice_ceahlau.htm (http://www.dacii.go.ro/materiale/dacii/spiritualitate/pagini/monument_megalitice_ceahlau.htm)

From the classic work signed Dimitrie Cantemir, Descriptio Moldaviae (http://www.educatlaiasi.ro/uploadpoze/2%20martie%20semnificatii.jpg (http://www.educatlaiasi.ro/uploadpoze/2%20martie%20semnificatii.jpg) ), we have the following quote:

"Cel mai inalt multe al Moldovei este Ceahlaul si daca acest munte ar fi fost cunoscut poetilor vechi, el ar fi fost tot atat de celebru ca si Olimpul, Pindul sau Pelia. De alta parte, cat de inalt este muntele acesta se poate conchide din imprejurarea ca in timpul cat cerul este senin si soarele se inclina spre apus, acest munte se poate vedea intreg si asa de curat de la orasul Acherman (Tyras, Cetatea Alba), departe de 60 de ore, ca si cand ar fi in apropiere. Iar pe dealurile din jur se vad urme de cai, de caini si de pasari, imprimate in stanci, in numar asa de mare ca si cand ar fi trecut pe acolo o oaste imensa de calareti.”

Acherman = Cetatea Alba = White Fortress

Here is the map:

(http://zelea-codreanu.com/Cuvantul_Legionar/2011/07/poze/RSS_Autonoma_Moldova.jpg)

(http://basarabia-bucovina.info/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Cetatea-Alba-Reproducere-Mariana-Slapac-Basarabia-Bucovina.Info_.jpg)

Carpathian Mountains, Ceahlaul Range, Toaca Peak:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/ba/Csalh%C3%B3.jpg/800px-Csalh%C3%B3.jpg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/ba/Csalh%C3%B3.jpg/800px-Csalh%C3%B3.jpg)

Exact location on map: http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/V%C3%A2rful_Toaca,_Masivul_Ceahl%C4%83u (http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/V%C3%A2rful_Toaca,_Masivul_Ceahl%C4%83u)


TOACA PEAK MEASURES 1907 METERS IN ALTITUDE

DISTANCE CETATEA ALBA/WHITE FORTRESS TO TOACA PEAK: OVER 300 KM


Dimitrie Cantemir is saying that he could see the highest peak of the Ceahlaul Range all the way from the White Fortress very clearly.

The visual obstacle, for a distance of 300 km, altitude of observer some 20 meters above sea level (White Fortress) measures some 4 km.


Of course, now we know that the works attributed to Cantemir were invented at the beginning of the 19th century...however, the description is extraordinary.


Here is a historical figure which did exist: Gheorghe Asachi.

Gheorghe Asachi, surname also spelled Asaki; March 1, 1788 – November 12, 1869) was a Moldavian-born Romanian prose writer, poet, painter, historian, dramatist and translator. An Enlightenment-educated polymath and polyglot, he was one of the most influential people of his generation. Asachi was a respected journalist and political figure, as well as active in technical fields such as civil engineering and pedagogy, and, for long, the civil servant charged with overseeing all Moldavian schools. Among his leading achievements were the issuing of Albina Românească, a highly influential magazine, and the creation of Academia Mihăileană, which replaced Greek-language education with teaching in Romanian. His literary works combined a taste for Classicism with Romantic tenets, while his version of the literary language relied on archaisms and borrowings from the Moldavian dialect.

http://www.mlnar.ro/system/files/images/gheorghe_asachi.thumbnail.jpg (http://www.mlnar.ro/system/files/images/gheorghe_asachi.thumbnail.jpg)


http://romaniapress-misterelelumii.blogspot.ro/2011/01/misterele-ceahlaului-fenomene.html (http://romaniapress-misterelelumii.blogspot.ro/2011/01/misterele-ceahlaului-fenomene.html)

Ceahlaul nu se ridica, nici pe departe, la altitudinea altor piscuri muntoase din România sau din tarile vecine. Cu toate acestea, in mod paradoxal, el este singurul masiv care poate fi vazut de la sute de kilometri departare. in anumite conditii atmosferice si de luminozitate solara, piscurile Ceahlaului se zaresc cu o deosebita claritate de pe tarmul Marii Negre si de pe malurile Nistrului. Gheorghe Asachi scria despre acest fenomen inca din anul 1859: „Corabierul de pe Marea Neagra vede piscul cel inalt al acestui munte, de la Capul Mangaliei si pâna la Cetatea Alba. Locuitorul de pe tarmul Nistrului vede soarele apunând dupa masa acestui munte, iar pastorul nomad, dupa ce si-a iernat turmele sale pe câmpiile Bugeacului, se intoarce catre casa având in vedere vârful Pionului, sau Ceahlaului”.


Translation: The ship owner (corabier denotes actually each member of the crew, from captain to sailor) sailing the Black Sea can see the highest peak of the Ceahlaul range, starting from Mangalia all the way to the White Fortress.

The local inhabitants located on the banks of the river Nistrul can see the sunset, as the sun disappears behind the Ceahlaul range.

Mangalia on the map:

http://romeonet.ro/imagini/forum.romeonet.ro_litoral.jpg (http://romeonet.ro/imagini/forum.romeonet.ro_litoral.jpg)

River Nistru:

http://romaniancoins.org/harti/entransnistria.jpg (http://romaniancoins.org/harti/entransnistria.jpg)

Banks of river Nistru:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4e/Ua_river_dnestr_piliptsche.jpg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4e/Ua_river_dnestr_piliptsche.jpg)

THE VISUAL OBSTACLE FROM MANGALIA TO THE TOACA PEAK MEASURES OVER 12 KM.

THE VISUAL OBSTACLE FROM RIVER NISTRU TO TOACA IS 2.7 KM.


Mountain climbers say that they can see the Black Sea all the way from the Carpathian mountains, Bucegi Range, Omu Peak (2505 m in altitude):

https://web.archive.org/web/20090422052937/https://www.infomontan.ro/Galerie/Turism%20Diverse/Files/009.html


It is absolutely impossible to see the Black Sea from Peak Omu on a spherical earth: the visual obstacle measures 800 meters (Peak Omu on the map):

http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/V%C3%A2rful_Omu,_Mun%C8%9Bii_Bucegi (http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/V%C3%A2rful_Omu,_Mun%C8%9Bii_Bucegi)


Photographs of Peak Omu taken from Bucharest, residential neighborhood, building measuring 20 meters in height:


http://forum.softpedia.com/lofiversion/index.php/t21996.html (http://forum.softpedia.com/lofiversion/index.php/t21996.html)

(http://image.ibb.co/nuXcAS/Bucegii_2a.jpg)

(http://image.ibb.co/d43Ojn/pipera2.jpg)

(http://image.ibb.co/g8C2AS/bucegii.jpg)

(http://image.ibb.co/d43Ojn/pipera2.jpg)


Each and every geographical detail can be seen over the 150 km distance: no curvature whatsoever.

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=28196.msg674444#msg674444 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=28196.msg674444#msg674444) (curvature, visual obstacle formulas)



Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 19, 2014, 03:43:27 AM
Here is another clear proof that the surface of the Earth is actually flat:

 
Grand Haven Daily Tribune   April 3, 1925

COAST GUARDS SEE MILWAUKEE LIGHTS GLEAM

Captain Wm. J. Preston and Crew See Lights of Milwaukee

and Racine Clearly From Surf Boat

ANSWER TO FLARE

Crew Runs Into Lake in Search For Flashing Torch

Grand Haven Daily Tribune   April 3, 1925

Captain Wm. J. Preston and his U. S. Coast Guard crew at Grand Haven harbor witnessed a strange natural phenomenon last night, when they saw clearly the lights of both Milwaukee and Racine, shining across the lake.  As far as known this is the first time that such a freak condition has prevailed here.

 The phenomena was first noticed at shortly after seven o’clock last night, when the lookout called the keeper’s attention to what seemed to be a light flaring out on the lake.  Captain Preston examined the light, and was of the impression that some ship out in the lake was “torching” for assistance.

Launch Power Boat

   He ordered the big power boat launched and with the crew started on a cruise into the lake to locate, if possible, the cause of the light.  The power boat was headed due west and after running a distance of six or seven miles the light became clearer, but seemed to be but little nearer.  The crew kept on going, however, and at a distance of about ten and twelve miles out, a beautiful panorama of light unfolded before the eyes of the coast guards.

 Captain Preston decided that the flare came from the government lighthouse at Windy Point at Racine.  Being familiar with the Racine lights the keeper was able to identify several of the short lights at Racine, Wis.

Saw Milwaukee Also

   A little further north another set of lights were plainly visible.  Captain Preston knowing the Milwaukee lights well, easily distinguished them and identified them as the Milwaukee lights.  The lights along Juneau Park water front, the illumination of the buildings near the park and the Northwestern Railway station were clearly visible from the Coast Guard boat.  So clearly did the lights stand out that it seemed as though the boat was within a few miles of Milwaukee harbor. 

   Convinced that the phenomenon was a mirage, or a condition due to some peculiarity of the atmosphere, the keeper ordered the boat back to the station.  The lights remained visible for the greater part of the run, and the flare of the Windy Point light house could be seen after the crew reached the station here.


DISTANCE GRAND HAVEN TO MILWAUKEE: OVER 80 MILES (128 KM).

http://www.coastwatch.msu.edu/images/twomichigans2a.gif (http://www.coastwatch.msu.edu/images/twomichigans2a.gif)


Windy Point Lighthouse:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5f/Wind_Point_Lighthouse_071104_edit2.jpg/800px-Wind_Point_Lighthouse_071104_edit2.jpg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5f/Wind_Point_Lighthouse_071104_edit2.jpg/800px-Wind_Point_Lighthouse_071104_edit2.jpg)

The lighthouse stands 108 feet (33 m) tall

THE CURVATURE FOR 128 KM IS 321 METERS.

Using the well known formula for the visual obstacle, let us calculate its value:

h = 3 meters BD = 1163 METERS

h = 5 meters BD = 1129 METERS

h = 10 meters BD = 1068 METERS

h = 20 meters BD = 984 METERS

h = 50 meters BD = 827.6 METERS

h = 100 meters BD = 667.6 METERS


No terrestrial refraction formula/looming formula can account for this extraordinary proof that the surface across lake Michigan is flat.

In fact: http://ireland.iol.ie/~geniet/eng/refract.htm# (http://ireland.iol.ie/~geniet/eng/refract.htm#)

If we use h = 50 for the observer, and 140 for the distant object height, we get a negative answer: no way it could be seen over a 128 km distance; while the actual data for the account is h = 5 m, and d = 40 m.


Looming/modified lapse rate:

http://mintaka.sdsu.edu/GF/explain/atmos_refr/altitudes.html (http://mintaka.sdsu.edu/GF/explain/atmos_refr/altitudes.html)

The formula used here does not recognize the change in the range of temperature values, nor do we know if it takes into consideration the very basic formula I posted earlier for the visual obstacle: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=28196.msg674444#msg674444 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=28196.msg674444#msg674444) - however, it is an excellent place to start and to explore the effect of looming/ducting on the visual target being observed.

Let us use several values, starting with the value of 15 C for that day (Milwaukee/Racine/Holland/Grand Haven) and increasing the value for the target by 1-3 degrees.

For a value of 15 C overall we get of course a negative altitude value of the target.

For a value of 16 C (for the target) we get, again, a negative altitude value for the target (−0.317 degrees of arc) - target is hidden by horizon

For a value of 17 C (for the target) we get: −0.207 degrees of arc, target is hidden by horizon

For a value of 18 C (for the target) we get: −0.098 degrees of arc, target is hidden by horizon


Let us decrease the value to 12 C.

Increasing the value for the target to 15 C degrees, again, we get negative values. This would also correspond to a huge k = 0.613 value.

From the textbook on atmospheric science:

 "So the ray curvature for an arbitrary lapse rate  γ K/m will be

k  = ( 0.034 − γ ) / 0.154

where we take γ to be positive if the temperature decreases with height, and a positive curvature means a ray concave toward the Earth.

Example 1: the Standard Atmosphere:

In the Standard Atmosphere, the lapse rate is 6.5°/km or  γ = 0.0065 K/m. The numerator of the formula above becomes .034 − .0065 = .0275, so the ratio k is about 1/5.6 or 0.179. In other words, the ray curvature is not quite 18% that of the Earth; the radius of curvature of the ray is about 5.6 times the Earth's radius.

Example 2: free convection:

In free convection, the (adiabatic) lapse rate is about 10.6°/km or  γ = 0.0106 K/m. The numerator of the formula above becomes .034 − .0106 = .0234, so the ratio k is about 1/6.6 or 0.152. In other words, the ray curvature is about 15% that of the Earth; the radius of curvature of the ray is about 6.6 times the Earth's radius. This is close to the condition of the atmosphere near the ground in the middle of the day, when most surveying is done; the value calculated is close to the values found in practical survey work."


Moreover, as we have seen, the light from Windy Point was continuously observed, during the approach, and during the return to the station:

The power boat was headed due west and after running a distance of six or seven miles the light became clearer, but seemed to be but little nearer.  The crew kept on going, however, and at a distance of about ten and twelve miles out, a beautiful panorama of light unfolded before the eyes of the coast guards.

The keeper ordered the boat back to the station.  The lights remained visible for the greater part of the run, and the flare of the Windy Point light house could be seen after the crew reached the station here.



Now, the calculation for the most pronounced form of looming: ducting.

However, ducting requires the value for the ray curvature, k, to be greater than or equal to 1.

This amounts to at least a five degree difference in temperature.

With 10C in Grand Haven (or Holland) and 15C in Racine, we get k = 1.182.


For the very same geographical/hydrographical conditions, for the same latitude in question, for cities located on the opposite shores of Lake Michigan, it is absolutely impossible to have a five degree difference, at the very same instant of time - moreover, looming/ducting do not apply to the two cases presented here:

FURTHERMORE, as we have seen, the light from the lighthouse located in Racine was seen all of the time.

For the second case exemplifed here, see below, Mr. Kanis did see the very shape of the buildings: in the case of ducting/looming a very distorted image would appear making it instantly recognizable:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f4/Superopr_mirage_sequence.jpg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f4/Superopr_mirage_sequence.jpg)
http://3sky.de/Div/Luftspieg/Summary.html (http://3sky.de/Div/Luftspieg/Summary.html)
http://finland.fi/public/default.aspx?contentid=160069&contentlan=2&culture=en-US (http://finland.fi/public/default.aspx?contentid=160069&contentlan=2&culture=en-US)




(https://image.ibb.co/irqVco/m11.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/mBT0co/m12.jpg)

'As twilight deepened, there were more and more lights.'

Bringing out a pair of binoculars, Kanis said he was able to make out the shape of some buildings.

'With the binoculars we could make out three different communities,' Kanis said.

According to one Coast Guard crewman, it is possible to see city lights across the lake at very specific times.

Currently a Coast Guard crewman stationed in Holland, Todd Reed has worked on the east side of Lake Michigan for 30 years and said he's been able to see lights across the lake at least a dozen times.

The highest building in Milwaukee has a height of 183 meters, the difference from h = 5 meters in altitude being 946 meters, and those residents saw the buildings from THREE DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES, two of which have buildings whose heights measure way under 183 meters.

Therefore, the only way those buildings could be seen, given the 128 km distance, would be if the surface of Lake Michigan is completely flat.

THE TALLEST BUILDING IN RACINE IS THE COUNTY COURTHOUSE, 40 METERS; IT WOULD BE ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE TO SEE THIS COURTHOUSE FROM 128 KM DISTANCE, FROM HOLLAND.


On Memorial Day, it was 60 F degrees (15 C) in Milwaukee on that day.


Black Sun photographs, the Moon and the Sun are disks and not spheres:


http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=58190.msg1490160#msg1490160 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=58190.msg1490160#msg1490160)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=58190.msg1490183#msg1490183 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=58190.msg1490183#msg1490183) (solar/lunar ISS transit videos)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=58190.msg1490299#msg1490299 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=58190.msg1490299#msg1490299) (Thierry Legault photographs)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 31, 2014, 02:46:09 AM
Earth is not a Globe, chapter IX, Cause of Sunrise and Sunset:

ALTHOUGH the sun is at all times above the earth's surface, it appears in the morning to ascend from the north-east to the noonday position, and thence to descend and disappear, or set, in the north-west. This phenomenon arises from the operation of a simple and everywhere visible law of perspective.

It does not only appear to ascend (rise), it actually DOES so.

(http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0805/antarcticeclipse_bruenjes_big.jpg)

http://www.moonglow.net/eclipse/2003nov23/ (http://www.moonglow.net/eclipse/2003nov23/)


Official science information:

The sun "travels " between the Tropic of Cancer (23.5 N) on the Northern Solstice (first day of summer in the Northern Hemisphere) to the Tropic of Capricorn (23.5 S) on the Southern Solstice and back to the Tropic of Cancer in one year (365 days). Thus the sun travels 47 degrees of latitude * 2 (to compensate for the round trip) = 94 degrees of latitude during a solar year.


In the Flat Earth Theory, the diameter of the Sun is only some 600 meters - therefore, as it travels between the two tropics, rising and setting each and every day, there will be a limited amount of space/distance to account for the yearly solar precession phenomenon.

Due to precession, the Sun's apparent position relative to the vernal equinox slowly regresses about 50 arc seconds (0.014 degree) every year, or approximately one degree every 72.2 years. This results in the difference of 20 minutes between the sidereal and tropical years.

http://img585.imageshack.us/img585/8711/bun1copy.jpg (http://img585.imageshack.us/img585/8711/bun1copy.jpg)

No matter whether the other FE will accept the six gates/180 windows theory or not (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1566598#msg1566598 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1566598#msg1566598) ) we can understand that there will be an upper bound for the distance/space alloted for the precession of the Sun, as it orbits above the flat Earth.

Works on precession:

http://www.aloha.net/~johnboy/Preces.htg/precession.htm (http://www.aloha.net/~johnboy/Preces.htg/precession.htm)

http://www.crystalinks.com/precession.html (http://www.crystalinks.com/precession.html)

This means that our entire history is only some hundreds of years old - confirming the comet tail paradox/new radical chronology proofs. Moreover, if the other FE are not happy with a 354 year old history, they can calculate themselves an upper bound: it cannot exceed some 500 years, because of the very distance between the two tropics.


It is not nearly enough to state that the surface of the Earth is flat: the shape of the Earth is part of a much larger question - has our entire history up to at least 1825 been forged/falsified?

Let us remember that currently the FE cannot answer at all the axial precession question (with my exception), as the RE can immediately state that the historical/astronomical records from Hipparchus up to B. Franklin are true, and thus prove that the Earth has been rotating around its own axis for at least the past 2000 years.

The solar precession is the best key to answer not only the question about the correct chronology of history, but also it provides a direct way to prove that the Earth is actually flat.

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488947#msg1488947 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488947#msg1488947)

One of the most important canonical books of the orthodox church, in the official history, is the Syntagma by Matthew Vlastar.

Matthew Vlastar’s Collection of Rules Devised by Holy Fathers, or The Alphabet Syntagma. This rather voluminous book represents the rendition of the rules formulated by the Ecclesial and local Councils of the Orthodox Church.

Matthew Vlastar is considered to have been a Holy Hierarch from Thessalonica, and written his tractate in the XIV century. Today’s copies are of a much later date, of course. A large part of Vlastar’s Collection of Rules Devised by Holy Fathers contains the rules for celebrating Easter. Among other things, it says the following:


“The Easter Rules makes the two following restrictions: it should not be celebrated together with the Judaists, and it can only be celebrated after the spring equinox. Two more had to be added later, namely: celebrate after the first full moon after the equinox, but not any day – it should be celebrated on the first Sunday after the equinox. All of these restrictions, except for the last one, are still valid (in times of Matthew Vlastar – the XIV century – Auth.), although nowadays we often celebrate on the Sunday that comes later. Namely, we always count two days after the Lawful Easter (that is, the Passover, or the full moon – Auth.) and end up with the subsequent Sunday. This didn’t happen out of ignorance or lack of skill on the part of the Elders, but due to lunar motion”

Let us emphasize that the quoted Collection of Rules Devised by Holy Fathers is a canonical mediaeval clerical volume, which gives it all the more authority, since we know that up until the XVII century, the Orthodox Church was very meticulous about the immutability of canonical literature and kept the texts exactly the way they were; with any alteration a complicated and widely discussed issue that would not have passed unnoticed.

So, by approximately 1330 AD, when Vlastar wrote his account, the last condition of Easter was violated: if the first Sunday happened to be within two days after the full moon, the celebration of Easter was postponed until the next weekend. This change was necessary because of the difference between the real full moon and the one computed in the Easter Book. The error, of which Vlastar was aware, is twenty-four hours in 304 years.

Therefore the Easter Book must have been written around AD 722 (722 = 1330 - 2 x 304). Had Vlastar known of the Easter Book’s 325 AD canonization, he would have noticed the three-day gap that had accumulated between the dates of the computed and the real full moon in more than a thousand years. So he either was unaware of the Easter Book or knew the correct date when it was written, which could not be near 325 AD.


G. Nosovsky: So, why the astronomical context of the Paschalia contradicts Scaliger’s dating (alleged 325 AD) of the Nicaean Council where the Paschalia was canonized?

This contradiction can easily be seen from the roughest of calculations.

1) The difference between the Paschalian full moons and the real ones grows at the rate of one day in 300 years.

2) A two-day difference had accumulated by the time of Vlastar, which is roughly dated 1330 AD.

3) Ergo, the Paschalia was compiled somewhere around 730 AD, since

1330 – (300 x 2) = 730.

It is understood that the Paschalia could only be canonized by the Council sometime later. But this fails to correspond to Scaliger’s dating of its canonization as 325 AD in any way at all!

Let us emphasize, that Matthew Vlastar himself, doesn’t see any contradiction here, since he is apparently unaware of the Nicaean Council’s dating as the alleged year 325 AD. A natural hypothesis: this traditional dating was introduced much later than Vlastar’s age. Most probably, it was first calculated in Scaliger’s time.

With the Easter formula derived by C.F. Gauss in 1800, Nosovsky calculated the Julian dates of all spring full moons from the first century AD up to his own time and compared them with the Easter dates obtained from the Easter Book. He reached a surprising conclusion: three of the four conditions imposed by the First Council of Nicaea were violated until 784, whereas Vlastar had noted that “all the restrictions except the last one have been kept firmly until now.” When proposing the year 325, Scaliger had no way of detecting this fault, because in the sixteenth century the full-moon calculations for the distant past couldn’t be performed with precision.


Few scientists remember the original debate between Immanuel Velikovsky and Carl Sagan, where the creator of the original Cosmos series was debunked on each and every statement on cosmology made later in the series:

http://www.varchive.org/lec/aaas/transcripts.htm (http://www.varchive.org/lec/aaas/transcripts.htm) (original debate)

http://www.varchive.org/lec/aaas/afterword.htm (http://www.varchive.org/lec/aaas/afterword.htm) (Velikovsky's final response and notes)
http://www.varchive.org/lec/aaas/challenge.htm (http://www.varchive.org/lec/aaas/challenge.htm)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 04, 2014, 06:20:26 AM
Flat Earth Solar Precession Facts

(http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/Graphics-Other/PSCI/pirireis2.gif)

(https://web.archive.org/web/20090831201231im_/http://geocities.com/levelwater/africabrazil.gif)

The real orbit of the Sun above the Flat Earth:

(https://s14.postimg.org/kq62vone9/bunda.jpg)

Distance between Tropic of Cancer and Tropic of Capricorn: 3,234.64 miles (center of first map)

Arclength: 6356.621 KM (side of figure/map) - this is the absolute uppermost bound/limit

Polar axis length (official numbers):  6356.7519 km = actual radius of the flat earth map (http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/7857/africabrazil.gif (http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/7857/africabrazil.gif) )


Precession = a slow westward shift of the equinoxes along the plane of the ecliptic


RE maps of the solar precession:

(http://www.crystalinks.com/precessionstars.jpg)

The orange axis was the Earth's rotation axis 5000 years ago when it pointed to the star Thuban. The yellow axis, pointing to Polaris is the situation now. (official astronomical information)

(http://www.crystalinks.com/precessonstars2.jpg)

The orange axis was the Earth's rotation axis 5000 years ago when it pointed to the star Thuban. The yellow axis, pointing to Polaris is the situation now.

(http://www.aloha.net/~johnboy/chrono.htg/precession.gif)


Annual solar precession: 50 arcseconds

1 full degree every 72 years


TIME CALCULATION

The time difference between the mean solar day and "precession"(sidereal "what's real" time) is 3.141592654 (Pi) seconds (of time) per day. Pi seconds per day accumulates to 22.94884425 hours in 72 years or approximately 1 degree (day) of arc. (Precession is approximately 1 degree in 72 years.)

The 3 . 14 seconds is the mean deviation.  The actual deviation, over time, is from 3.11 seconds to 3.17 seconds daily. In other words, the TIME required for the Earth to complete one orbit around the Sun (a year) decreases daily by the rate of 3.14 seconds (of time) and accumulates, annually, to approximately 18 minutes (+-).

http://www.aloha.net/~johnboy/Preces.htg/precession.htm (http://www.aloha.net/~johnboy/Preces.htg/precession.htm)

Every (approx.) 72 years the annual 18 (+ -) minutes has accumulated to almost one full day, and has done so despite the addition of 'leap years', 'leap seconds', etc.  So, after 72 years we actually 'show up early' for the 'Vernal Equinox' and decide that the entire outer visible universe has 'mysteriously' backed-up one whole degree (day) in the last 72 years!  We call this 'backing up' The Precession of The Equinoxes.


π = 3.1416 = 2/sc per day

1146.68132 seconds per year

As I have argued before, the year really has 364 days (of a slightly different length).

1146.68132/364 = π + 1.361sc/100

For a 354 year old history, we obtain 404778.5054 seconds

404778.5054 = (1000sc)2

That is, the total precessional time for a 354 year old history amounts to exactly 1,000,000sc2 seconds or 636,619.7723sc seconds.


The reader can calculate a similar total precessional time of his/her own choosing (the choice rests upon the figure used for the total duration of history in years).


DEGREE/ARCLENGTH CALCULATION

Full arclength between the tropics: 6356.621 km

The calculation for the six gates/180 windows configuration has already been done (the figures used in the Bundahisn).

Now, the calculation for the six gates/12 window used in the Book of Enoch.

http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#Enoch_71 (http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#Enoch_71)

And in the fourth gate, through which the sun with the moon proceeds, in the first part of it, there are twelve open windows


Solar precession, 50 arcseconds per year

1 degree per 72 years

For a 354 year old history, we get 4.91666 degrees (0.02861 x 3 radians)

Total arclength of precession (using a radius of 6356.621 km) = (534 + 11.444) km


In the Flat Earth model, the effect of the precession is cumulative: that is, as the Sun moves between the summer/winter solstices, we add 4.233 meters for each day of the year.

For a 354 year old history, there will be 1.5408 km/year of arclength precessional distance.

1.5408/364 = 0.004233 km


For the 12 window configuration, there will be 2.5 days assigned for each window.

One gate arclength = 1060.86 km

One window arclength = 88.405 km (actually we could use 87.266 km and account for the difference by assuming that there is a certain distance between the gates themselves).

545.4 (total solar precessional arclength) km/6.18034 = 88.405 km

That is, in a 354 year old history, if we divide by approximately six, the total figure of 545.4 km, we get the exact arclength of a single window.


87.266/12 = 7.272166 (= the actual displacement factor the Gizeh Pyramid!)


The reader can choose a certain total duration of history and play with the figures to calculate the effect of the solar precession on any FE model.

He/she will discover that already for a 354 year old history, the total effect of the solar precession will account for exactly 1/2 the arclength of a single gate: thus we can see that our history is very short, not more than some 500 years old for its total duration.


Since the orbit of the Sun is bounded/limited between the two tropics, we can see that the solar precession can last only for a very precise amount of time (see the TIME CALCULATION section): in that very year where the solar precession will exceed the arclength of single window, it would mean that at either the summer or winter solstice, the Sun would rise BEYOND either the Tropic of Cancer or the Tropic of Capricorn, which is impossible.



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 11, 2014, 05:21:18 AM
There is one remaining possibility for the flat earth solar precessional hypothesis: the tropics and the north/south poles move also, along with the equinoxial points.

For a very nice estimate concerning this case, I will make use of the information contained here:

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/tierra_hueca/tierrahueca/Chapter5.htm (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/tierra_hueca/tierrahueca/Chapter5.htm)

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/tierra_hueca/tierrahueca/Chapter2.htm (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/tierra_hueca/tierrahueca/Chapter2.htm)

"Starting at 70 to 75 degrees north and south latitude the Earth starts to curve IN. The Pole is simply the outer rim of a magnetic circle around the polar opening. The North Magnetic Pole, once thought to be a point in the Arctic Archipelago, has been lately shown by Soviet Arctic explorers to be a line approximately 1000 miles long. However, as we stated above, instead of being a straight line it is really a circular line constituting the rim of the polar opening. When an explorer reaches this rim, he has reached the North Magnetic Pole; and though the compass will always point to it after one passes it, it is really not the North Pole even if one is deluded into thinking it is, or that he discovered the Pole due to having been misled by his compass. When one reaches this magnetic circle (the rim of the polar opening), the magnetic needle of the compass points straight down. This has been observed by many Arctic explorers who, after reaching high latitudes, near to 90 degrees, were dumbfounded by the inexplicable action of the compass and its tendency to point vertically upward. (They were then inside the polar opening and the compass pointed to the Earth's North Magnetic Pole which was along the rim of this opening."

For a circumference of approximately 1600-1800 km, the diameter can be calculated (the reader can increase the circumference by actually following the Peary/Cook expeditions as they are described in chapter 5 of Hollow Earth)


The region the HE take as the entrance to the inner earth, is actually the region on the Flat Earth which cannot be accessed by either land, sea or air, as the expeditions of both Peary and Cook proved clearly: neither could discover the North Pole at all (in Antarctica, we have already seen how R. Scott was assasinated in an earlier discussion). The curvature paradox also applied equally well to the HE hypothesis: since there is no curvature at the surface of the Earth, the Hollow Earth cannot be true.


Antarctica Maps: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_antartica.htm (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_antartica.htm)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 14, 2014, 06:50:22 AM
The Black Plague never happened. There is no way, under any conspirative scenario, for the Ebola virus to have been brought from Zair/Congo to Europe and then to have been placed in each and every well in each and every small village or city.

http://www.nature.com/scitable/blog/viruses101/could_the_black_death_actually (http://www.nature.com/scitable/blog/viruses101/could_the_black_death_actually)

http://www.rense.com/general12/bub.htm (http://www.rense.com/general12/bub.htm)


http://archive.archaeology.org/9611/newsbriefs/ebola.html (http://archive.archaeology.org/9611/newsbriefs/ebola.html) (even "ancient" Greece stood in the way of the Ebola virus)


Of course, those who falsified the history knew the exact details about the virus itself. It is not currently ackowledged by either scientists or conspiration websites that some 70 years ago, a well known biologist/physicist did discover, accidentally, the Ebola virus and its origin.


D" parameter paradox

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=58514.msg1488114#msg1488114 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=58514.msg1488114#msg1488114) (full details)

Although many exceptional books have been published in the last 200 years pertaining to this subject, the modern development of the study starts with the intriguing paper by R. Newton (1970, 'Ancient Astronomical Observations and the Accelerations of the Earth and Moon', Baltimore, Md., Johns Hopkins Press), in which the author shows that, based on the ancient records of eclipses, the values of the parameter D" (lunar elongation, second derivative) calculated for the  period 1200 BC - 1200 AD, cannot be explained in view of current geophysical theories (especially the law of gravity). This paper created quite a stir in the scientific community, and several leading astrophysicists started to actually research how the law of gravity could be modified to account for such incredible figures.

(http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/fomenko/dsec1.gif)

In 1980, the well known russian mathematician Anatoly Fomenko realized that a different, and correct, approach, would be to realize that the data for the eclipses during that period were falsified and written down much later, he says in the 15-16th centuries AD. As such, the correct graph would look like this:

(http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/fomenko/dsec2.gif)

The original paper by A. Fomenko: http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/fomenko/dsec.htm (http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/fomenko/dsec.htm)



How the tables of Nineveh (library of Ashurbanipal) were falsified

http://www.scribd.com/doc/21746049/Velikovsky-Worlds-in-Collision# (http://www.scribd.com/doc/21746049/Velikovsky-Worlds-in-Collision#)

http://www.truthseekersministries.org/files/Velikovsky-Worlds-in-Collision.pdf (http://www.truthseekersministries.org/files/Velikovsky-Worlds-in-Collision.pdf)

Part I: Venus, chapter 10: Venus moves irregularly

Part II: Mars, chapter 8, The reforming of the calendar


If the tables are true, then both the attractive law of gravity AND Kepler's third law of motion are completely wrong; if they have been falsified, then we have another extraordinary proof of how the "ancient" history has been forged, confirming the findings of Dr. Gunnar Heinsohn:

http://www.specialtyinterests.net/heinsohn.html (http://www.specialtyinterests.net/heinsohn.html) (a step by step demonstration that the period of history 2100 BC - 600 BC has been invented/falsified)
 

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 15, 2014, 05:23:02 AM
The heavenly body which does cause the lunar eclipse (same diameter as that of the Moon itself) is emitting the dextrorotatory subquarks (terrestrial gravity).

(http://www.salagram.net/small-moons.jpg)
(http://www.crystalinks.com/lunareclipsearc2.jpg)

The laevorotatory subquarks are emitted by the Black Sun, the celestial disk which is responsible for the solar eclipse.


The force of gravity is not proportional to mass and is a pushing force due to the pressure exerted by the telluric currents (the string of subquarks).


Telluric currents: the work of Dr. T. Henry Moray, Dr. Gustave Le Bon, Dr. Bruce DePalma, Dr. Nikolai Kozyrev:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1255899#msg1255899 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1255899#msg1255899)


Biohomochirality and Terrestrial Gravity:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488624#msg1488624 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488624#msg1488624)


       The Moon has astonishing synchronicity with the Sun. When the Sun is at its lowest and weakest in mid-winter, the Moon is at its highest and brightest, and the reverse occurs in mid-summer. Both set at the same point on the horizon at the equinoxes and at the opposite point at the solstices. What are the chances that the Moon would naturally find an orbit so perfect that it would cover the Sun at an eclipse and appear from Earth to be the same size? What are chances that the alignments would be so perfect at the equinoxes and solstices?

    Farouk El Baz,
    NASA


http://www.rense.com/general69/moon.htm (http://www.rense.com/general69/moon.htm)

http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss2.htm#Nebular (http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss2.htm#Nebular)
http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss2.htm#Fission (http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss2.htm#Fission)
http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss2.htm#Capture (http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss2.htm#Capture)
http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss2.htm#Accretion (http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss2.htm#Accretion)
http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss2.htm#Planetary (http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss2.htm#Planetary)


No curvature across the strait of Gibraltar, no ascending slope, no midpoint 3.5 meter visual obstacle, a perfectly flat surface of the water all the way to Africa:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x42v7ip

38:28 to 38:35


From the same spot, a splendid photograph:

(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/55/130948289_44854d63fa_b.jpg)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/carlosromero/130948289# (http://www.flickr.com/photos/carlosromero/130948289#)

No curvature whatsoever, just like the image in the video itself.


To the producers/writers of the series Cosmos: Please do your homework.

Here is the helium flash paradox:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=55861.msg1393324#msg1393324 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=55861.msg1393324#msg1393324)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=55861.msg1393326#msg1393326 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=55861.msg1393326#msg1393326)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 06, 2014, 03:32:13 AM
FLAT EARTH FIELD EQUATIONS

The greatest theoretical physicist of all time, James Clerk Maxwell, formulated a set of original equations in 1861, which unfortunately have been modified by several scientists (Gibbs, Heaviside and Lorentz).

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/57/James_Clerk_Maxwell.png)

The most important scientific paper ever published: ON PHYSICAL LINES OF FORCE, by JAMES CLERK MAXWELL - the original set of ether equations, which are almost unknown to modern physics.

http://vacuum-physics.com/Maxwell/maxwell_oplf.pdf (http://vacuum-physics.com/Maxwell/maxwell_oplf.pdf)


Dr. Frederick Tombe has undertaken a painstaking research in order to discover how the original Maxwell equations have been modified into their currently known form, and why it was done.

http://www.nanotechinnov.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Maxwell-Original-Equations.pdf (http://www.nanotechinnov.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Maxwell-Original-Equations.pdf)

While Maxwell refers to twenty equations at the end of this section, there are in fact
only eight equations as such. Maxwell arrives at the figure of twenty because he splits
six of these equations into their three Cartesian components. Maxwell’s eight original
equations,
 

(https://s2.postimg.org/c73ke0sc9/maxwell8.jpg)


will be discussed in depth in individual sections throughout this paper.


In Part I of his 1861 paper, Maxwell proposed the existence of a sea of
molecular vortices which are composed of a fluid-like aether, whereas in
Part III, he deals with the elastic solid that these molecular vortices
collectively form. Maxwell’s third equation is derived hydrodynamically,
and it appeared as equation (9) in Part I,
 
curl H = J (Electric Current) (C)
 
Once we realize that the vector A and the vector J are in fact one and the
same thing, it becomes clear that the two curl equations, (B) and (C), are
jointly pointing us to an aethereal sea in which closed solenoidal circuits
of magnetic lines of force are interlocked with closed solenoidal circuits
of electric current ‡. Part III of Maxwell’s 1861 paper deals with the
elasticity of the medium for the propagation of light and the physical
nature of the electric displacement that is involved in the electromagnetic
wave propagation mechanism within this medium. At the beginning of
Part III, Maxwell says “In the first part of this paper I have shown how
the forces acting between magnets, electric currents, and matter
capable of magnetic induction may be accounted for on the hypothesis
of the magnetic field being occupied with innumerable vortices of
revolving matter, their axes coinciding with the direction of the
magnetic force at every point of the field. The centrifugal force of these
vortices produces pressures distributed in such a way that the final
effect is a force identical in direction and magnitude with that which we
observe.” The magnetic intensity H therefore represents an angular
momentum or a vorticity.


A Lorentz transformation is an unfortunate product
of Hendrik Lorentz‟s misunderstandings regarding the subject of electromagnetism,
and these misunderstandings led to even greater misunderstandings when Albert
Einstein got unto the job. Neither Lorentz nor Einstein seemed to have been aware of
the contents of Maxwell‟s original papers, while both of them seemed to be under the
impression that they were fixing something that wasn‟t broken in the first place. In
doing so, Einstein managed to drop the luminiferous aether out of physics altogether,
claiming that he was basing his investigation on what he had read in the so-called
„Maxwell-Hertz equations for empty space‟! But whatever these Maxwell-Hertz
equations might have been, they certainly can‟t have been Maxwell‟s original
equations. This is a tragic story of confusion heaped upon more confusion. The aether
was a crucial aspect in the development of Maxwell‟s equations, yet in 1905, Albert
Einstein managed to impose Galileo‟s „Principle of Equivalence‟ upon Maxwell‟s
equations while ignoring the aether altogether. The result was the abominable
product which is hailed by modern physicists and known as „The Special Theory of
Relativity‟. Einstein himself knowing that something wasn‟t right with his special
theory of relativity, attempted to make amends in 1915 with his „General Theory of
Relativity‟. But he only made things worse by virtue of spiking Newton‟s law of
gravity with his toxic special theory of relativity. In later years, judging from his
Leyden speech in 1920, Einstein realized that the aether was indeed needed after all,
but by this time it was too late, because he already had a following.



Maxwell’s original works are pioneering works of
enormous value which pointed us in the right direction, and any
shortcomings within these works pale into insignificance when compared
with the errors that followed in Maxwell’s wake. A series of derailments
culminated with Einstein taking us into a mad world of relativity where
two clocks can both go slower than each other, and where
electromagnetic waves can propagate in a pure vacuum without the need
for any physical displacement mechanism.


The Coriolis Force in Maxwell's Equations

http://web.archive.org/web/20071006083222/http://www.wbabin.net/science/tombe4.pdf (http://web.archive.org/web/20071006083222/http://www.wbabin.net/science/tombe4.pdf)

Equations [A], [ B ], [D], [E], [F], and [H], would not normally appear in a modern
day set of Maxwell’s equations. A modern textbook would combine equation [A] with
equation [C] as per equation (112) in part III of the 1861 paper, and the combination
would be referred to as the Maxwell’s displacement current equation. In a modern day
textbook, the addition of Maxwell’s displacement current to equation [C] would not
be explained in terms of total electric current as per Maxwell’s 1861 derivation, but
rather in terms of adding on an extra term to Ampère’s circuital law, in order to retain
the solenoidal nature of electric current in a capacitor circuit. Modern day
displacement current is divorced from its dielectric origins, and it is explained as a
time varying quantity that possesses some of the characteristics of electric current, but
that is not actually a real current.

Modern day sets of Maxwell’s equations therefore only contain three of the original
set, with two of these having been amalgamated into one. Added to these two
originals in modern textbooks, are Faraday’s law of electromagnetic induction, and
the equation stating that the divergence of B is always zero. These two extra modern
day Maxwell’s equations are equations (54) and (57) respectively in part II of
Maxwell’s 1861 paper.

Also includes the appendix called Maxwell's Minor Errors discussing the wrong minus sign in equation D.


The Distortion of Maxwell's Equations

http://www.cartesio-episteme.net/ep8/distortion.pdf (http://www.cartesio-episteme.net/ep8/distortion.pdf)


Maxwell was most certainly not a stepping stone for Einstein as is often
suggested, even by some anti-relativists. Maxwell’s most important work has
been swept under the carpet and a set of equations with a partial connection to
Maxwell have been promoted in his name and used in a manner which is far
removed from Maxwell’s theory of electromagnetism.


The Aether and the Electric Sea

http://www.gsjournal.net/old/science/tombe12.pdf (http://www.gsjournal.net/old/science/tombe12.pdf)


E=mc2 and Maxwell's Fifth Equation

http://www.cartesio-episteme.net/ep8/maxwell5.pdf (http://www.cartesio-episteme.net/ep8/maxwell5.pdf)


E=vBX and Maxwell's Fourth Equation

http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Mechanics%20/%20Electrodynamics/Download/206 (http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Mechanics%20/%20Electrodynamics/Download/206)


The Connection Between Gravity and Light

http://www.gsjournal.net/old/science/tombe18.pdf (http://www.gsjournal.net/old/science/tombe18.pdf)


The Speed of Light

http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Mechanics%20/%20Electrodynamics/Download/5373 (http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Mechanics%20/%20Electrodynamics/Download/5373)


How Maxwell's original equations have been removed from the textbooks on physics:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1486130#msg1486130 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1486130#msg1486130)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1486131#msg1486131 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1486131#msg1486131)


SPINTRONICS, secret world of magnets, the most thorough work on the double helix theory of the magnetic field (double helix of the telluric currents):

http://freeenergycommunity.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/the-secret-world-of-magnets-spintronics-2006-howard-johnson.pdf (http://freeenergycommunity.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/the-secret-world-of-magnets-spintronics-2006-howard-johnson.pdf)


Therefore, the truncated Maxwell equations refer ONLY to the temporary hertzian ripples in the ether sea, and NOT to the scalar/ether waves themselves:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,58190.msg1489693.html#msg1489693 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,58190.msg1489693.html#msg1489693)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,58190.msg1489785.html#msg1489785 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,58190.msg1489785.html#msg1489785)

Needless to say, the original set of Maxwell's equations applies only to a fixed flat earth and not at all to the science-fiction hypothesis called the UA acceleration: terrestrial gravity is due to the pressure exerted by the dextrorotatory subquark strings.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 02, 2014, 01:28:24 AM
MAGNETIC MONOPOLES AND J.C. MAXWELL'S ORIGINAL SET OF EQUATIONS

Magnetic monopoles discovered for the first time:

http://www.london-nano.com/research-and-facilities/highlight/magnetic-monopoles-discovered-by-lcn-scientists (http://www.london-nano.com/research-and-facilities/highlight/magnetic-monopoles-discovered-by-lcn-scientists)
http://www.london-nano.com/research-and-facilities/highlight/%E2%80%98magnetricity%E2%80%99-observed-and-measured-for-the-first-time (http://www.london-nano.com/research-and-facilities/highlight/%E2%80%98magnetricity%E2%80%99-observed-and-measured-for-the-first-time)
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2014/jan/30/magnetic-monopoles-seen-in-the-lab (http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2014/jan/30/magnetic-monopoles-seen-in-the-lab)

In fact, no matter how many times the magnet is divided, the north and south poles remain coupled – even as far down as individual atoms, which themselves act like tiny magnets. This is reflected in Maxwell's equations, which say that isolated positive and negative electric charges exist but isolated magnetic charges do not.

NOT MAXWELL'S ORIGINAL SET OF EQUATIONS.


Here is the truncated set of "Maxwell"'s equations (actually the Heaviside/Lorentz equations):

(http://www.irregularwebcomic.net/annotations/annot1420a.gif)

"Brutally, not a single one of those Heaviside/Gibbs equations ever appeared in a paper or book by James Clerk Maxwell, even though the severely restricted Heaviside/Gibbs interpretation is universally and erroneously taught in all Western universities as Maxwell’s theory.

“Maxwell’s” vector equations taught in university are actually Heaviside’s truncated equations, and are only a simplified version of what Maxwell originally wrote."

"For the deliberate “fixing” of the already sharply curtailed Heaviside equations, see H. A. Lorentz, “La Théorie électromagnétique de Maxwell et son application aux corps mouvants,” [The Electromagnetic Theory of Maxwell and its application to moving bodies], Arch. Néerl. Sci., Vol. 25, 1892, p. 363-552. [Also in H. A. Lorentz, Collected Papers, The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, vol. 2, pp. 168-238, esp. p. 168.] This is the work that Lorentz cites later (in 1895) for his proof of the symmetrical regauging theorems (the two equations of symmetrical regauging)."


MAXWELL'S ORIGINAL SET OF EQUATIONS DESCRIBE THE VERY MAGNETIC MONOPOLES DISCOVERED BY THE BRITISH SCIENTISTS AND MUCH MORE.

(https://s2.postimg.org/c73ke0sc9/maxwell8.jpg)

http://web.archive.org/web/20071006083222/http://www.wbabin.net/science/tombe4.pdf (http://web.archive.org/web/20071006083222/http://www.wbabin.net/science/tombe4.pdf)
(also includes the appendix called Maxwell's Minor Errors discussing the wrong minus sign in equation D)

E = vXB − ∂Α/dt +gradψ



Maxwell’s third equation is derived hydrodynamically, and it appeared as equation (9) in Part I,
 
curl H = J (Electric Current) (C)
 
Once we realize that the vector A and the vector J are in fact one and the same thing, it becomes clear that the two curl equations, (B) and (C), are jointly pointing us to an aethereal sea in which closed solenoidal circuits of magnetic lines of force are interlocked with closed solenoidal circuits of electric current.

Modern day sets of Maxwell’s equations therefore only contain three of the original set, with two of these having been amalgamated into one. Added to these two originals in modern textbooks, are Faraday’s law of electromagnetic induction, and the equation stating that the divergence of B is always zero. These two extra modern day Maxwell’s equations are equations (54) and (57) respectively in part II of Maxwell’s 1861 paper (http://vacuum-physics.com/Maxwell/maxwell_oplf.pdf (http://vacuum-physics.com/Maxwell/maxwell_oplf.pdf) ).


Neither Lorentz nor Einstein seemed to have been aware of the contents of Maxwell‟s original papers, while both of them seemed to be under the impression that they were fixing something that wasn‟t broken in the first place. In doing so, Einstein managed to drop the luminiferous aether out of physics altogether, claiming that he was basing his investigation on what he had read in the so-called „Maxwell-Hertz equations for empty space‟! But whatever these Maxwell-Hertz equations might have been, they certainly can‟t have been Maxwell‟s original equations.

The Distortion of Maxwell's Equations

http://www.cartesio-episteme.net/ep8/distortion.pdf (http://www.cartesio-episteme.net/ep8/distortion.pdf)


Maxwell was most certainly not a stepping stone for Einstein as is often
suggested, even by some anti-relativists. Maxwell’s most important work has
been swept under the carpet and a set of equations with a partial connection to
Maxwell have been promoted in his name and used in a manner which is far
removed from Maxwell’s theory of electromagnetism.


MAGNETIC MONOPOLES AND MAXWELL'S ORIG. SET OF EQS.

http://www.gsjournal.net/old/science/tombe.pdf (http://www.gsjournal.net/old/science/tombe.pdf)


https://web.archive.org/web/20120303052100/http://smphillips.8m.com/pdfs/ESP_of_Quarks.pdf (https://web.archive.org/web/20120303052100/http://smphillips.8m.com/pdfs/ESP_of_Quarks.pdf) (pg 66-73)

A rigorous and extraordinary demonstration that subquarks = magnetic monopoles.


http://www.smphillips.8m.com/news.html (http://www.smphillips.8m.com/news.html)

An in-depth look at the most recent discoveries in the field of quantum mechanics which DO PROVE the correctness of the subquark ether model.



A subquark is composed of strings of bosons and antibosons. A boson = a neutrino = a photon and does have mass.

Let us remember that in one extension to the Standard Model, left- and right-handed neutrinos exist. These Dirac neutrinos acquire mass via the Higgs mechanism but right-handed neutrinos interact much more weakly than any other particles.

Aspden calls the neutrino ‘a figment of the imagination invented in order to make the books balance’ and says that it simply denotes ‘the capacity of the aether to absorb energy and momentum’.


Maxwell's original set of equations can be used immediately to explain the levitation of large blocks of granite, especially the Baalbek monoliths (see http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1539399#msg1539399 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1539399#msg1539399) ).

The weight of an object is a measure of the amount of DEXTROROTATORY MAGNETIC MONOPOLES/SUBQUARKS being subject to the pressure force exerted by the DEXTROROTATORY SUBQUARKS STRINGS (Steve Lamoreaux' negative energy).

The laevorotatory magnetic monopoles/subquarks ARE NOT subject to the terrestrial gravity law of pressure.

Therefore, any addition, by any means (torsion - Dr. Bruce DePalma, Dr. Nikolai Kozyrev, electricity - Dr. T. Townsend Brown, Dr. Francis Nipher, cymatics - Dr. Hans Jenny, tibetan acoustic levitation) of laevorotatory subquarks will result in an antigravitational effect.


Matter has a sound aspect, and when a vibration is caused it generates an acoustical wave which travels through the air working with it concurrently and resulting in oscillations of particles in the air and this causes the intermolecular space of the air to rise in vibrations and causes the atoms to eventually work into the first state of the ether.

First state of ether = baryons


https://web.archive.org/web/20120128042636/http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_09_4_phillips.pdf (https://web.archive.org/web/20120128042636/http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_09_4_phillips.pdf) (for a complete description of the atom - and how the concepts of quarks, antimatter, higgs boson/field were simply copied from the pages of the Occult Chemistry)


http://www.alliancesforhumanity.com/matter/matter.htm (http://www.alliancesforhumanity.com/matter/matter.htm) (diagrams of the etheric atom)

HYDROGEN ATOM: 18 SUBQUARKS - 9 LAEVOROTATORY AND 9 DEXTROROTATORY subquarks

A proton is made up of NINE laevorotatory subquarks - an electron is actually comprised of NINE dextrorotatory subquarks (called now preons).

However, modern science has mistakenly named a SINGLE dextrorotatory subquark as an electron and has ascribed THE TOTAL charge of the NINE corresponding subquarks as the total negative charge of a single electron, thus confusing the whole matter.


TELLURIC CURRENTS are represented by double torsion waves of BOTH laevorotatory (antigravity) and dextrorotatory (terrestrial gravity) subquarks.


Second state of ether = mesons

Third state of ether = quarks

Fourth state of ether = subquarks

Fifth state of ether = aether, the very medium used by subquark strings to propagate/travel

Astral state of ether = bosons/antibosons
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 04, 2014, 03:08:10 AM
LAMOREAUX-CASIMIR EFFECT: THE ULTIMATE PROOF OF THE EXISTENCE OF 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'.

In the following decade, and deriving from his alchemical studies, Newton came to develop his views on the workings of the gravity-ether. As communicated to the Royal Society in December of 1675 and written up in their History, it went as follows:

Newton: in which descent it may bear down with it the bodies it pervades with a force proportional to the superficies of all their parts it acts upon...

In other words, the larger the surface of body, the greater the force of gravity acting upon it. After condensing, this gravity ether descends into the bowels of the earth to be refreshed, and then arises until it ‘vanishes again into the aetherial spaces.'

Here is a letter from Newton to Halley, describing how he had independently arrived at the inverse square law using his aether hypothesis, to which he refers as the 'descending spirit':

....Now if this spirit descends from above with uniform velocity, its density and consequently its force will be reciprocally proportional to the square of its distance from the centre. But if it descended with accelerated motion, its density will everywhere diminish as much as the velocity increases, and so its force (according to the hypothesis) will be the same as before, that is still reciprocally as the square of its distance from the centre'


A clear description of PRESSURE GRAVITY.


On the real causes of the Casimir effect:

"Each of the plates in the Casimir effect displace the aether. The displaced aether which exists between the plates is pushing back toward each of the plates which causes the force associated with the aether displaced by each of the plates which exists between the plates to offset. This aether is more at rest than the aether which is displaced by the plates which encompasses the plates. The reduced force associated with the aether which exists between the plates along with the displaced aether which encompasses the plates which is pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward the plates causes the plates to be forced together.



In zero-point energy theory, it is now believed that the Casimir force works in exactly the same way. This force is created when the distance between the plates becomes so narrow that no "virtual particles" or aetheric energies are able to fit between them.

So, there is no "sucking" going on at all; in fact it is a complete absence of energy that exists between the plates, aetheric or otherwise. And so, a form of "aether vacuum" is formed between the two plates, where no aether can flow inside the crack. Then, the surrounding "virtual particle flux" or aether pressure pushes the plates together from the outside!

In Dr. Puthoff‘s model, this pressure is believed to be caused by the “virtual particles ” themselves, as they will continually emerge from the zero-point energy long enough to exert a constant force upon the plates, thus pushing them together. Either way, it all comes back to a fundamentally aetheric design, and no other model seems to adequately explain why this incredibly powerful Casimir effect would occur.

Bearing this in mind, we are continuing to see how the background aetheric energy plays a role in the world that we can observe. The Casimir effect reveals to us exactly how much pressure the aether is truly exerting on us. And yet, since Dr. Puthoff and most other theorists believe that it always "cancels out" to zero, we can never detect any major changes in the world around us."




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 7:50 - Dr. Lamoreaux explains the pushing 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.

Negative energy = effect of telluric waves/strings upon matter (see http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/9803/9803039.pdf )


(see http://milesmathis.com/caven.html (http://milesmathis.com/caven.html) for a complete presentation of the tremendous errors inherent in the experiment "performed" by Cavendish)


http://www.rexresearch.com/nipher/nipher1.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/nipher/nipher1.htm)

The relationship between gravitation and the electric field was first observed experimentally by Dr. Francis Nipher. Dr. Francis Nipher conducted extensive experiments during 1918, on a modified Cavendish experiment. He reproduced the classical arrangements for the experiment, where gravitational attraction could be measured between free-swinging masses, and a large fixed central mass. Dr. Nipher modified the Cavendish experiment by applying a large electrical field to the large central mass, which was sheilded inside a Faraday cage. When electrostatic charge was applied to the large fixed mass, the free-swinging masses exhibited a reduced attraction to the central mass, when the central mass was only slightly charged. As the electric field strength was increased, there arose a voltage threshold which resulted in no attraction at all between the fixed mass and the free-swinging masses. Increasing the potential applied to the central mass beyond that threshold, resulted in the free-swinging masses being repelled (!) from the fixed central mass. Nipher's conclusion was that sheilded electrostatic fields directly influence the action of gravitation. He further concluded that gravitation and electrical fields are absolutely linked.

Dr. Francis Nipher, one of the most distinguished physicists of the 20th century:

http://www.accessgenealogy.com/missouri/biography-of-francis-eugene-nipher-ll-d.htm (http://www.accessgenealogy.com/missouri/biography-of-francis-eugene-nipher-ll-d.htm)

Dr. Nipher has devoted his entire life to physics, largely along the line of research work, although as an educator and as a contributor to scientific literature his name is widely known. From 1870 until 1874 he was instructor in the physical laboratory of the State University of Iowa and in the latter year became professor of physics in Washington University of St. Louis, occupying that position until 1914 when he was made professor emeritus. In 1885 he was chosen president of the Academy of Science of St. Louis and continued to occupy the position for five years. He was also president of the Engineers Club of St. Louis in 1890 and became a member of the American Philosophical Society of Philadelphia, also has membership with the American Philosophical Society, the Society Francaise de Physique, the Royal Society of Arts and the Authors Club of London.


JAMES CLERK MAXWELL:

After tracing to the action of the surrounding medium both the magnetic and the electric attractions and repulsions, and finding them to depend on the inverse square of the distance, we are naturally led to inquire whether the attraction of gravitation, which follows the same law of the distance, is not also traceable to the action of a surrounding medium.


RICHARD FEYNMAN:

There is no explanation of gravitation in terms of other forces at the present time. It is not an aspect of electricity or anything like that, so we have no explanation...But is it still not very remarkable that the two laws [electrical & gravitational] involve the same function of distance? Perhaps gravitation and electricity are much more closely related than we think.


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 07, 2014, 02:37:28 AM
TORONTO - NEW PHOTOGRAPH - BEAMER FALLS CONSERVATION AREA


(https://image.ibb.co/b0Jaco/grim_zpsdba06ede.jpg)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/chris_baird/14067034302 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/chris_baird/14067034302)

Taken from a viewing stand at Beamer Memorial Conservation Area, Grimsby

DISTANCE 55 KM ; CURVATURE OF 59 METERS


Beamer's Falls #071114
River Forty Mile Creek
Class Ramp
Size Medium
Height: 45
Crest: 20
The Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority acquired Beamer Memorial Conservation Area in 1964, to protect and preserve the Niagara Escarpment and the Forty-Mile Creek valley system. The site is home to a variety of Carolinian plants and wildlife.

http://www.gowaterfalling.com/waterfalls/beamer.shtml (http://www.gowaterfalling.com/waterfalls/beamer.shtml)


Therefore, from 45 meters in altitude, we should see a huge 59 meter curvature right in front of us, and a visual obstacle of some 65 meters.


Here is the other photograph from Beamer Falls:

(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/29/53037827_fdb83b96bd_b.jpg)


http://www.flickr.com/photos/suckamc/53037827/# (http://www.flickr.com/photos/suckamc/53037827/#)

Again, no curvature whatsoever across a distance of 55 km, no 59 m midpoint visual obstacle.


Ms. Kerry Ann Lecky-Hepburn took these photographs some years ago: the RE called her, and were told they were taken at an altitude of 170 m in Grimsby.

(https://image.ibb.co/eRE3V8/Toronto_Day.jpg)

No ascending slope, no midpoint visual obstacle of 59 meters, no curvature whatsoever.

From the very same spot, Ms. Lecky-Hepburn used a reflector telescope for this zoom:

(https://image.ibb.co/fQjnq8/thor2h.jpg)

No curvature whatsoever across a distance of 55 km.


Another photograph signed Mrs. Lecky-Hepburn:

(https://image.ibb.co/ndVDxo/lakeontario53_zps743773f9.jpg)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/planetrick/487755017/# (http://www.flickr.com/photos/planetrick/487755017/#)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/planetrick/487726854/#in/photostream (http://www.flickr.com/photos/planetrick/487726854/#in/photostream)

No curvature whatsoever, from Hamilton to Lakeshore West Blvd: no visual obstacle, just a perfectly flat surface of the water all the way to the other shoreline.


(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/117/312939439_ef682e2d8a_o.jpg)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tundrabluephotography/312939439/# (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tundrabluephotography/312939439/#)

No 59 meter curvature whatsoever, a perfectly flat surface of the water.



Let us go to lake Michigan now.

 
Grand Haven Daily Tribune   April 3, 1925

COAST GUARDS SEE MILWAUKEE LIGHTS GLEAM

Captain Wm. J. Preston and Crew See Lights of Milwaukee

and Racine Clearly From Surf Boat

ANSWER TO FLARE

Crew Runs Into Lake in Search For Flashing Torch

Grand Haven Daily Tribune   April 3, 1925

Captain Wm. J. Preston and his U. S. Coast Guard crew at Grand Haven harbor witnessed a strange natural phenomenon last night, when they saw clearly the lights of both Milwaukee and Racine, shining across the lake.  As far as known this is the first time that such a freak condition has prevailed here.

 The phenomena was first noticed at shortly after seven o’clock last night, when the lookout called the keeper’s attention to what seemed to be a light flaring out on the lake.  Captain Preston examined the light, and was of the impression that some ship out in the lake was “torching” for assistance.

Launch Power Boat

   He ordered the big power boat launched and with the crew started on a cruise into the lake to locate, if possible, the cause of the light.  The power boat was headed due west and after running a distance of six or seven miles the light became clearer, but seemed to be but little nearer.  The crew kept on going, however, and at a distance of about ten and twelve miles out, a beautiful panorama of light unfolded before the eyes of the coast guards.

 Captain Preston decided that the flare came from the government lighthouse at Windy Point at Racine.  Being familiar with the Racine lights the keeper was able to identify several of the short lights at Racine, Wis.

Saw Milwaukee Also

   A little further north another set of lights were plainly visible.  Captain Preston knowing the Milwaukee lights well, easily distinguished them and identified them as the Milwaukee lights.  The lights along Juneau Park water front, the illumination of the buildings near the park and the Northwestern Railway station were clearly visible from the Coast Guard boat.  So clearly did the lights stand out that it seemed as though the boat was within a few miles of Milwaukee harbor. 

   Convinced that the phenomenon was a mirage, or a condition due to some peculiarity of the atmosphere, the keeper ordered the boat back to the station.  The lights remained visible for the greater part of the run, and the flare of the Windy Point light house could be seen after the crew reached the station here.


DISTANCE GRAND HAVEN TO MILWAUKEE: OVER 80 MILES (128 KM).

http://www.coastwatch.msu.edu/images/twomichigans2a.gif (http://www.coastwatch.msu.edu/images/twomichigans2a.gif)


Windy Point Lighthouse:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5f/Wind_Point_Lighthouse_071104_edit2.jpg/800px-Wind_Point_Lighthouse_071104_edit2.jpg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5f/Wind_Point_Lighthouse_071104_edit2.jpg/800px-Wind_Point_Lighthouse_071104_edit2.jpg)

The lighthouse stands 108 feet (33 m) tall

THE CURVATURE FOR 128 KM IS 321 METERS.

Using the well known formula for the visual obstacle, let us calculate its value:

h = 3 meters BD = 1163 METERS

h = 5 meters BD = 1129 METERS

h = 10 meters BD = 1068 METERS

h = 20 meters BD = 984 METERS

h = 50 meters BD = 827.6 METERS

h = 100 meters BD = 667.6 METERS


No terrestrial refraction formula/looming formula can account for this extraordinary proof that the surface across lake Michigan is flat.



Moreover, as we have seen, the light from Windy Point was continuously observed, during the approach, and during the return to the station:

The power boat was headed due west and after running a distance of six or seven miles the light became clearer, but seemed to be but little nearer.  The crew kept on going, however, and at a distance of about ten and twelve miles out, a beautiful panorama of light unfolded before the eyes of the coast guards.

The keeper ordered the boat back to the station.  The lights remained visible for the greater part of the run, and the flare of the Windy Point light house could be seen after the crew reached the station here.



More information on lake Michigan here:


http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1591587#msg1591587 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1591587#msg1591587)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 10, 2014, 03:03:58 AM
POMPEII/HERCULANEAUM NEW CHRONOLOGY DOCUMENTARY: A. TSCHURILOW - POMPEII DESTROYED IN 1631 AD

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=_sc5PfjuCqQ# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=_sc5PfjuCqQ#)


http://www.tschurilow.de/index.php/ru/2013-06-19-16-50-14/2-2013-05-23-07-35-05/8-2013-05-23-16-24-04 (http://www.tschurilow.de/index.php/ru/2013-06-19-16-50-14/2-2013-05-23-07-35-05/8-2013-05-23-16-24-04) (page to be translated from russian)


Pliny's letters about Vesuvius (research by A. Tschurilow):

http://bloggingpompeii.blogspot.de/2013/01/plinys-letters-about-vesuvius.html#uds-search-results (http://bloggingpompeii.blogspot.de/2013/01/plinys-letters-about-vesuvius.html#uds-search-results)


Ortelius map (1570) featuring Pompeii:

http://bloggingpompeii.blogspot.ro/2010/02/review-features-of-domenico-fontanas.html (http://bloggingpompeii.blogspot.ro/2010/02/review-features-of-domenico-fontanas.html)

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_mVSVlQXoXaQ/S3vPojv0RaI/AAAAAAAAAmg/kuovyl4UdLA/s320/Immagine3.jpg)


http://www.bergbook.com/images/22775-01.jpg (http://www.bergbook.com/images/22775-01.jpg) (REGNUM NEAPOLITANUM (THEATRUM ORBIS))


http://www.ilya.it/chrono/pages/pompejidt.htm (http://www.ilya.it/chrono/pages/pompejidt.htm) (page to be translated to English: A. Tschurilow detailing the proofs which do show that Pompeii was destroyed just a few hundreds of years ago)



http://www.vetrotech.com/us/eng/SAINT__1580.asp (http://www.vetrotech.com/us/eng/SAINT__1580.asp)

The first historical records of the glass rolling process in Saint Gobain date back to 1688.

This process involves pouring molten glass onto the rolling table, spreading it out and rolling it. It produces flat glass of an even thickness. Another advantage is that this process enables the production of glass sheets with the dimensions of 40 x 60 inches, which is ideal for mirror making.

And yet, perfectly flat glass at Herculaneum:

http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/gallery/pom15.jpg (http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/gallery/pom15.jpg)
http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/gallery/pom16.jpg (http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/gallery/pom16.jpg)


MATRIX OF ANCIENT HISTORY: CHRISTOPHER PFISTER

http://www.dillum.ch/html/pfister_christoph_matrix_der_alten_geschichte_2013.pdf (http://www.dillum.ch/html/pfister_christoph_matrix_der_alten_geschichte_2013.pdf)

PAGE 117: POMPEII FRESCO, A COPY OF THE WELL KNOWN PAINTING BY TIZIAN


Christoph Pfister archive:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg998158#msg998158 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg998158#msg998158)


http://books.google.ro/books?id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=history+science+fomenko&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=gtOWU_WQD4PDO_XjgZAP&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=history%20science%20fomenko&f=false (http://books.google.ro/books?id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=history+science+fomenko&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=gtOWU_WQD4PDO_XjgZAP&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=history%20science%20fomenko&f=false)

PAGES 61-64 POMPEII GLADIATORS WITH MOBILE VISORS (INVENTED IN THE 15TH CENTURY)


"The use of Renaissance artists of identical details, same colors decisions, motives, general composition plans, the presence in the Pompeian frescoes of the things that emerged in the 15 to 17 century, the presence in Pompeian paintings of genre painting, which is found only in the epoch of the Renaissance, and the presence of some Christian motifs on some frescoes and mosaics suggest that Pompeian frescoes and the works of artists of the Renaissance come from the same people who have lived in the epoch. "Vitas Narvidas," Pompeian Frescoes and the Renaissance: a comparison, "Electronic Almanac" Art & Fact 1 (5), 2007.



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 11, 2014, 01:30:44 AM
Quote
Spectroscopy of stars near the ecliptic shows that there is a varying doppler shift from red to blue with a period of exactly one year. This implies that we move alternately toward and away from a particular star each year. The shift is consistent with the Earth's orbital velocity in RE theory.

Similarly, there is a daily redshift consistent with the rotation of the Earth. These shifts have to be accounted for routinely by astronomers.

In FE, what is the explanation for the observed sidereal and annual doppler shifts?

From Hubble:

' … redshifts are evidence either of an expanding universe or of some hitherto unknown principle of nature…”

Nernst's Interpretation

Hubble made two mistakes:

The first one lay in choosing to research an interpretation of redshift that was exclusively within the field of Einsteinian relativity.

The second lay in the hypothesis that his 'law' was 'clearly linear', thus ignoring a fact that is well-known to any physicist, even an amateur one, namely that for small z values (redshift) a straight line constitutes a good 'first approximation' of a logarithmic curve.
The Doppler effect, star aberration, and even the change of wavelength due to the Compton effect, can be explained by taking into consideration the aether field the existence of which was confirmed by many experiments made by Nikola Tesla (see also the Airy experiment).

The aether, by definition, is the light-carrying medium.


http://freespace.virgin.net/ch.thompson1/Essays/Chubykalo.PWA.htm (http://freespace.virgin.net/ch.thompson1/Essays/Chubykalo.PWA.htm)


Einstein took as axioms that space is empty and that the speed
of light (and all other EM wave propagations) is constant c. Both
assumptions are false, due to the (some 15 years later) discovered
Hubble Redshift of star spectra, at the time (ca 1930) wrongly
interpreted as a Doppler effect (with the Big Bang hypothesis
following by time reversal;-) Hubble himself, in a footnote, admitted
that he would prefer a 'tired light' explanation, with redshift
proportional to distance, but that "new physics" would be required
to support this (i.e. an ether filling of space, hence a universal
frame). Clearly he did not want to stick his neck out against
the 'empty space' assumption of Einstein, which was mainstream by
then. Similarly Eddington, in a 1919 remark on light bending around
the Sun (thus in a gravity field), suggested that this could readily
be "simulated" by a non-homogeneous filling of space with some medium
('ether') that would have greater density near a heavy body, using
the known refraction law of Snellius. Both men saw the light, but
hesitated to go against the mainstream of the day.



AETHER REDSHIFT PHYSICS

http://www.aetherpages.com/redshift.htm (http://www.aetherpages.com/redshift.htm)

http://charles_w.tripod.com/red.html (http://charles_w.tripod.com/red.html)


Moreover, astronomers are USING THE WRONG MAXWELL EQUATIONS.

(http://www.irregularwebcomic.net/annotations/annot1420a.gif)

"In the 1880s, after Maxwell was deceased, Oliver Heaviside — a brilliant but self-taught scientist who never attended university — played a major role in converting (reducing) Maxwell's equations to what today is vector algebra. Heaviside detested potentials, and stated that they should be "murdered from the theory."

The reduction work by Heaviside, Gibbs, and Hertz resulted in the modern four vector equations in some four unknowns. These are taught — along with a further truncation by Lorentz — in every university as "Maxwell's equations." They are in fact Heaviside's equations, further truncated by Lorentz symmetrical regauging.


Today, the tremendously crippled Maxwell-Heaviside equations --- symmetrized by Lorentz --- are taught in all our universities in the electrical engineering (EE) department. Note that the EE professors still dutifully symmetrize the equations, following Lorentz, and thus they continue to arbitrarily discard all asymmetrical Maxwellian systems.



Einstein, 1905:

"The principle of the constancy of the velocity of light is of course contained in Maxwell's equations”

THEREFORE, EINSTEIN NEVER BOTHERED TO DO SOME BASIC RESEARCH REGARDING MAXWELL'S EQUATIONS; HE HAD NO IDEA ABOUT THE EXISTENCE OF THE ORIGINAL SET OF MAXWELL'S EQUATIONS, WHICH STATE VERY CLEARLY:

THE SPEED OF LIGHT IS VARIABLE, AND NOT CONSTANT.




HERE IS THE ORIGINAL SET OF JAMES CLERK MAXWELL'S EQUATIONS: THE EXISTENCE OF ETHER, AETHER AND THE VARIABILITY OF THE SPEED OF LIGHT:

(https://s2.postimg.org/c73ke0sc9/maxwell8.jpg)

At the beginning of
Part III, Maxwell says “In the first part of this paper I have shown how
the forces acting between magnets, electric currents, and matter
capable of magnetic induction may be accounted for on the hypothesis
of the magnetic field being occupied with innumerable vortices of
revolving matter, their axes coinciding with the direction of the
magnetic force at every point of the field. The centrifugal force of these
vortices produces pressures distributed in such a way that the final
effect is a force identical in direction and magnitude with that which we
observe.”


http://web.archive.org/web/20071006083222/http://www.wbabin.net/science/tombe4.pdf (http://web.archive.org/web/20071006083222/http://www.wbabin.net/science/tombe4.pdf)
(also includes the appendix called Maxwell's Minor Errors discussing the wrong minus sign in equation D)

E = vXB − ∂Α/dt +gradψ
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 16, 2014, 02:03:46 AM
Quote
So this doesn't fit in with a flat earth... Less so the proposed model.

A simple example would be tropical cyclones.

In northern hemisphere they turn counter clockwise while in the southern hemisphere they rotate clockwise. The reason we have for this is due to angular momentum relative to the equator on a round planet that is spinning on it's own axis.

The ferociousness in circulation of these storms fundamentally get's predicted via the angle above or below the equator they form.

In fact, all weather patterns, cold front's, warm fronts and currents all fall under this rule of angular momentum with a global model. Most tornado's too.


Mach's Principle/Geocentric Coriolis Effect

"The effect of the Coriolis force is an apparent deflection of the path of an object that moves within a rotating coordinate system. The object does not actually deviate from its path, but it appears to do so because of the motion of the coordinate system. On the Earth an object that moves along a north-south path, or longitudinal line, will undergo apparent deflection to the right in the Northern Hemisphere and to the left in the Southern Hemisphere."



By maintaining the relativity of all motion, especially rotational motion, E. Mach denied the existence of absolute motion and of absolute space. Accordingly, Mach maintained the equivalence of the Ptolemaic and the Copernican systems and the equivalence of rotating-system/fixed-universe and universe-rotating/fixed-system situations.

Mach's Principle: A body experiences no inertial forces when it is at rest or in uniform motion with respect to the center of mass of the entire universe. When its motion is nonuniform (accelerated) with respect to the total mass of the universe, it experiences forces such as centrifugal force and the Coriolis effect. Hence, the "local" behavior of matter is influenced by the "global" properties of the universe, i.e., those properties that describe the universe as a whole, which are studied in cosmology.


The Lense-Thirring effect as a consequence of Mach's Principle:

http://www.answers.com/topic/mach-s-principle (http://www.answers.com/topic/mach-s-principle)

H. Thirring observed that the complete equivalence between the reference frames, explaining such phenomena as the Foucault pendulum equally well in a geocentric reference frame, is secured by definition by Einstein's 1915 work: "the required equivalence appears to be guaranteed by the general co-variance of the field equations." That is, Einstein's field equations are structured to supply the necessary upward force on the geosynchronous satellite in a geocentric as well as a heliocentric framework. Thus, H. Thirring notes that: "...in an Einsteinian gravitational field, caused by distant rotating masses, forces appear which are analogous to the centrifugal and Coriolis forces."

Max Born in his famous book,"Einstein's Theory of Relativity", Dover Publications,1962, pgs. 344 & 345 says:

"...Thus we may return to Ptolemy's point of view of a 'motionless earth'...One has to show that the transformed metric can be regarded as produced according to Einstein's field equations, by distant rotating masses. This has been done by Thirring. He calculated a field due to a rotating, hollow, thick-walled sphere and proved that inside the cavity it behaved as though there were centrifugal and other inertial forces usually attributed to absolute space.

Thus from Einstein's point of view, Ptolemy and Corpenicus are equally right."

Einstein himself also says:

"The struggle, so violent in the early days of science, between the views of Ptolemy and Copernicus would then be quite meaningless. Either CS could be used with equal justification. The two sentences, 'the sun is at rest and the earth moves,' or 'the sun moves and the earth is at rest,' would simply mean two different conventions concerning two different CS. -- Einstein and Infeld, The Evolution of Physics, p.212 (p.248 in original 1938 ed.)"


Therefore, distant rotary masses can cause local inertial forces, like the Coriolis and centrifugal forces, which perfectly mimic the inertial effects of a spinning Earth . This implies that there are two possible explanations for the inertial forces whenever objects are in relative rotational motion.

Mach's principle has been confirmed in theory by Hans Thirring and no experimental test has ever disproved this principle of relative motion.

The experiment performed by J. Barbour and B. Bertotti proved that a large hollow sphere (representing the distant star fields) rotating around a small solid sphere inside (modeling the Earth) produced exactly the same pattern of Coriolis and centrifugal forces that are claimed as proof of Earth's spinning in space. If the hollow shell of matter accelerates or rotates, any object inside the shell will tend to be carried along with the acceleration or rotation to some extent. There have arisen some questions re: the Lagrangian used by Barbour and Bertotti and also about the coordinate transformations discussed in their article, but the main experiment showed, quite clearly that Mach's Principle is correct.

http://www.freelists.org/post/geocentrism/Overview-Barbour-Bertotti (http://www.freelists.org/post/geocentrism/Overview-Barbour-Bertotti)

Ernst Mach proposed that it is the weight of the stars circling the Earth that drags Foucault pendulums around, creates Coriolis forces in the air that give the cyclones to our weather etc. Barbour and Bertotti (Il Nuovo Cimento 32B(1):1-27, 11 March 1977) proved that a hollow sphere (the universe) rotating around a solid sphere inside (the Earth) produced exactly the same results of Coriolis forces, dragging of Foucault pendulums etc. that are put forward as 'proofs' of heliocentricity!


Conservation of momentum in the atmosphere is a complex process, but basically the earth/ocean/atmosphere system must conserve angular momentum. Angular momentum is transferred from the earth to the atmosphere by the tropical easterlies, where air is rotating faster than the earth and transferred from the atmosphere back to the earth by the westerlies in the mid-latitudes, where the wind is rotating slower than the earth.

"Now, the 'conventional' treatment of our atmosphere is that these molecules interact with one another, such that the angular momentum of the whole is conserved. This is wrong for at least two reasons: There are thermal convection
currents within the atmosphere (and, boy, if you lived in Caithness, you'd know all about them!) which have a great effect on the air molecules. These convection currents have absolutely nothing to do with angular momentum (these
are perhaps the greatest reason why Mike's so-called 'closed system' is invalid). They are due to the incoming heat from the Sun, heating up different  components of the World and its atmosphere at different rates, depending upon
composition. These convection currents will act so as to disrupt any alleged angular momentum of our considered molecule. Their effect upon our molecule will be totally overwhelming, compared with any possible transference of
angular momentum. ANY 'ANGULAR MOMENTUM' THAT OUR MOLECULE MAY HAVE HAD WILL BE CHANGED BY THE ACTION OF SOMETHING ORIGINATING OUTSIDE OF THE WORLD/ATMOSPHERE SYSTEM.

Once changed, the total angular momentum of the whole atmosphere (if such a thing existed) would be changed. If it has changed, then it is not conserved. I hope that you will all see that there is no way that total angular
momentum can be conserved and that we are not talking of any form of theoretical 'closed system.' The second reason is closely tied to the first. As I have said many times now, angular momentum is an attribute of rigid bodies. That is how it is DEFINED. Note that ALL the particles within a rigid body have the SAME angular frequency about a COMMON axis of rotation, irrespective of how far each of them is from that axis. Angular momentum does not apply to gases, nor, in general, to fluids.



The boundary layer (BL) in general is the interface area between 2 different
environments, the region where one environment influences the other. If
there is no effect of one env. on the other then there's no BL.

The BL between air and the earth's surface includes the transfer of heat and
moisture and wind currents (convection). The local friction of earth and air
on a flat surface is only inches thick, since the air is non-viscous. But
the irregular topography of the earth is said to produce a frictional BL of
about 6 miles - Death Valley to Mt. Everest.

The problem with this picture is that if the air is dragged along by the BL
of the rotating earth, it should display a latitude-dependent velocity
profile, with upper level winds blowing to the West, which is exactly what
is NOT observed.

If the air somehow rotates with the earth, the coupling being achieved by
some special dispensation from scientific principles, then there's no
frictional BL, since there's no relative motion between ground and air.

Here's the tricky part: the atmosphere is not attached to the Earth.
Therefore, the Earth can spin independently of the atmosphere. But we've got
these convection cells of air rotating from the equator to the poles, and an
Earth spinning beneath it. Thus, the air appears to be moving eastward as
the Earth moves eastward at a rate of 1050 miles per hour along the
equator.


Whoa, professor!
If the Earth spins independently of the air, and the N-S Hadley convection
cells prove this, then why is the E-W motion of the air NOT independent of
the Earth's rotation (sic), as the N-S circulation is? Is the air a gas when
moving along a longitude line, and a solid when moving along a latitude?
What is the origin of this astounding anisotropy? When does the 'tricky'
part become 'untricky'- it seems more like 'impossible' ?

Put another way: if the Sun's heating (insolation) at the equator provides
the thermal energy that maintains the Hadley cell N-S rotation, what
force/energy keeps the equatorial winds rotating at the same speed as the
rotating (sic) Earth?


The Earth is not rotating in space.
The Earth’s surface is composed of similar materials.
Solar heating and loss of infrared radiation cause a temperature gradient of hot air at the equator and cold air at the poles, forcing warm air away from the equator toward the poles.

The velocity should exponentially increase with altitude at the equator from 0 to 1054 mph. Based on the conventional Hadley cycle and Coriolis force model:

If there is a jet stream anywhere it should be east-to-west, at the equator, but it is not.
There is a Northern hemisphere mid-latitude west-to-east jet stream, but that is the wrong location and the wrong direction.
There is a Southern high-latitude east-to-west jet stream, which is the wrong location.
The highest steady winds at altitude anywhere seem to be about 50 knots, way below the rotational predictions.

Hence, it seems that the Earth is not rotating, but variable winds are caused by thermal and pressure gradients. Rotation only seems to be discussed in theory regarding the secondary Coriolis side effect, not the main feature, that is, the transition from an accelerated to an inertial frame. Remember, the Coriolis force is not unique to a rotating Earth; the same inertial forces would be present if the universe rotated around an immobile Earth. Mach’s principle is still in effect, as always. But how can inertial winds of 1054 mph not play a significant role in a predictive model of terrestrial air patterns? It seems that no matter which choice for the atmosphere one takes – that it turns with or does not turn with the Earth – it defies either logic or observation.

If we are on a rotating Earth with air subject only to gravity (i.e., the atmosphere is not coupled or bound by any forces to turn with the Earth), then we would experience tremendous wind problems, in which the spinning Earth encounters the full weight of the atmosphere. (NB: The atmosphere weighs more than 4 million billion tons.) The minor thermal differences between poles and equator would be wiped out by the blast of west-to-east air, that is, the collision of free air and the spinning Earth.

Conversely, if we are on a rotating Earth and somehow this atmosphere is turning with us, what is the coupling mechanism that enables it to do so? It must have some link to provide the torque to continue the coordinated rotation of the Earth with its wrapper of air. Would not a co-turning atmosphere and Earth mean nothing else could move the air? Otherwise, is not the air was acting as a solid, not a gas? No one has proposed a mechanism for this connection of the supposedly spinning Earth to the supposedly spinning air that is so strong that the atmosphere is forced to spin along with Earth, though otherwise it is free to move anywhere that gravity permits! We easily demonstrate the air’s freedom every time we walk through it or breathe it. Yet, we are told, the air obediently follows the Earth as it twirls through the heavens.



RESTORING FORCES PARADOX:

http://web.archive.org/web/20120726102954/http://www.realityreviewed.com/Restoring%20forces.htm (http://web.archive.org/web/20120726102954/http://www.realityreviewed.com/Restoring%20forces.htm)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 19, 2014, 05:33:15 AM
There is another way to prove the new radical chrononlogy hypothesis, to show to what degree history has been forged/falsified.

This one can't be denied by anybody, RE or UAFE.


John 13:1

Now before the feast of the passover, when Jesus knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end.


Matthew 26:17

Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover?


Mark 14:12

And on the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they sacrificed the Passover lamb, his disciples said to him, “Where will you have us go and prepare for you to eat the Passover?”


Of course, we are told that Matthew and John WERE IN THE SAME ROOM, AT THE TIME THE EVENTS DESCRIBED IN THE GOSPEL OF JOHN, CHAPTER 13, THE SERVILE WORK EPISODE, WERE TAKING PLACE.


However, there is a huge problem.


Numbers 28:18 (describing the laws/regulations for the Passover)

In the first day shall be an holy convocation; ye shall do no manner of servile work therein


Leviticus 23:7

In the first day ye shall have an holy convocation: ye shall do no servile work therein.


Exodus 12:8 even specifies the very first day of Passover: In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at even, ye shall eat unleavened bread, until the one and twentieth day of the month at even.


It is very obvious that the authors of the gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke had no clue, no idea, no knowledge about the commandments issued in Numbers (28) and Leviticus (23).


These commandments were added later, together with the gospel of John, AFTER the Priestly version was introduced in the Old Testament, that is why the date of the last supper was changed by a whole day.

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=45731.msg1130692#msg1130692 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=45731.msg1130692#msg1130692) (more about the four versions/documentary components of the Old Testament)


HOW COULD Clement, Origen, Ignatius, Polycarp, Paul, not to mention Augustine, Eusebius and Jerome/Hieronymus himself, miss these incredible discrepancies?

Any scribe in the 1st or 2nd century AD would have noticed these serious and grave errors and would have pointed them out.

It is inconceivable that these errors could have passed unnoticed for some 2000 years.


Since on the FIRST DAY OF PASSOVER there must no servile work done therein, the quotes cited above, from the gospels attributed to Matthew and Mark, leave no doubt whatsoever: the Old and New Testament were invented/falsified just a few hundreds of years ago, that is why the first criticisms about the Bible started to be voiced after 1830 or so: it was only a few decades earlier that this work was actually published and offered to the world.


http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488947#msg1488947 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488947#msg1488947) (correct dating of the Council of Nicaea)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1539392#msg1539392 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1539392#msg1539392) (new radical chronology = flat earth surface)


EDIT

http://www.jewishpath.org/hdshabbospesachwhyntisunre.html (http://www.jewishpath.org/hdshabbospesachwhyntisunre.html) (an extraordinary account of the events described above in the gospels, from a jewish perspective, great insights)

Also, there is a debate with regard to the dative case supposedly used in Matthew 26, Mark 14 and Luke 22; however, it can be shown  to be wrong:

I still object to interpreting the Dative in Mt26:17 for a Dative of Reference, because, if it were a Dative of Reference, the word order would have been different, and Matthew would have written, “The disciples came to Jesus and said to Him, With reference to the first day of unleavened bread, Lord, .....”.

Luke, would also have changed the Subject, and would have written, “When they sacrificed the passover, his disciples came to him, and said to him, With reference to the first day of unleavened bread .....” But as it stands, there are two Subjects in Luke, “the day”, and “He”, Jesus. “Then came the day”; “Then CAME THE DAY of un-/de-/without-leaven when the passover must be killed”; “Then came the day of un-/de-/without-leaven when the passover must be killed, and HE (Jesus), SENT Peter and John .....”

Mark even worse fits a Dative of Reference interpretation, because he identifies the specific day through his dual perception of it, “Then on the first day of de-leaven WHEN (‘hote’) the passover always gets slain, the disciples asked Him.....”




EDIT

Now, the extraordinary works which prove that EVEN THE ORIGINAL QUOTE FROM JOHN 13:1 WAS MISTRANSLATED:

John notes the time of the next event as just before the Passover Feast. According to ancient Jewish reckoning, the Passover Feast day would have run from sundown Thursday until sundown on Friday. This has caused some scholars to take the position that John understands the “Last Supper” to have taken place on Wednesday evening, just before Passover. This cannot be reconciled with the Synoptic accounts, which clearly identify the Last Supper as a Passover meal (e.g., Luke 22:15). But this is an easily explained contradiction. John does not say “the day before Passover” but “just before.” The episode he relates next, Jesus washing the disciples’ feet, is done immediately before the meal really begins (1998, p. 285, emp. in orig.).

“Before the Passover” could mean months, days, hours, or seconds before the meal took place. Considering all the evidence, John 13:1 makes reference to only a few minutes before the actual Passover lamb was eaten.

www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?...=11&article=1196 (http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?...=11&article=1196)

What, then, shall we make of John’s statement that Jesus was crucified on “the Preparation of the Passover?” At first glance, we assume that John means that the “preparation” concerns the actual Passover lamb. However, that assumption is not correct. The “preparation” described by John simply was the day before the Sabbath that fell during the Passover festival. Lenski noted: “When John uses the exceptional combination paraskuea tou pascha, ‘Preparation of the Passover,’ he simply has in mind the Friday of the Passover festival, the one that occurs during the festival week. The Sabbath of this great week was considered especially holy, and preparation was made accordingly” (p. 1271).

In fact, the translators of the NIV were so confident of this meaning that they rendered the verse: “It was the day of Preparation of Passover week, about the sixth hour.” In their commentary on the NIV passage, Bryant and Krause remarked:

The force of the NIV’s interpretation is that this is “Friday of Passover Week.” While this may be what John intends (and I believe he does), it is possible to interpret this as “Preparation for the Passover,” i.e., Thursday. This is the translation of the NRSV and others, but this is every bit as guilty as the NIV of overtranslation…. Actually, the text is ambiguous and cannot answer the day of the week by itself. It is from other considerations that we should conclude that this is Friday… (1998, p. 376).

If John 19:14-18 could mean simply the preparation day during the Passover feast, then John’s timetable would match perfectly with that of the other three Gospels—almost.



THEREFORE, even John tells us that the Last Supper was celebrated ON NISSAN 14 (Thursday evening - Friday evening).

https://books.google.ro/books?id=dfogiEOQdckC&pg=PA376&lpg=PA376&dq=john+preparation+day+passover+actually+friday+bryant+krause&source=bl&ots=9Oo7kcGcL5&sig=hltpYk2Yq1I1RzKDB-H_0V-88IY&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=WvTVVNmTFaWeywOzjoHoDw&ved=0CCEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=john%20preparation%20day%20passover%20actually%20friday%20bryant%20krause&f=false (https://books.google.ro/books?id=dfogiEOQdckC&pg=PA376&lpg=PA376&dq=john+preparation+day+passover+actually+friday+bryant+krause&source=bl&ots=9Oo7kcGcL5&sig=hltpYk2Yq1I1RzKDB-H_0V-88IY&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=WvTVVNmTFaWeywOzjoHoDw&ved=0CCEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=john%20preparation%20day%20passover%20actually%20friday%20bryant%20krause&f=false)


There were several attempts to move the Last Supper to Nissan 13, but these works rely mostly on the misleading translation from John 13:1 - more on the Last Supper:

http://biblelight.net/pasover.htm (http://biblelight.net/pasover.htm)

http://jimmyakin.com/was-the-last-supper-a-passover-meal (http://jimmyakin.com/was-the-last-supper-a-passover-meal)


Again, Dr. Akiva Belk:

Dear reader, these types of problems are generally unknown to most Christians / Messianics because they do not truly understand the Torah or the correct process of the Pesach seder. They haven't consider that Jesus took leavened bread instead of matzoh. They don't know that one does not begin the Pesach meal without first saying kiddush. How would they know that kiddush is not said in the middle of the Pesach meal? How would they know that the blessing is first said on the wine and then on the matzoh?

Holy reader, what these contradictions to the Torah show is that either the writers did not know the most basic precepts of Torah or that they openly violated the very concept of Pesach. Why would they go to prepare? Why would they rid the house of chometz? Why would they bother if they were going to eat chometz, bread anyway?

Holy reader, these are just a few of the many problems presented within the New Testament. There are many more.



Later during the Pesach meal we read that Jesus, according to John, "He {Jesus} arose from supper, and laid aside his garments and took a towel and girded himself and that he poured water into a basin and began to WASH THE DISCIPLES feet, and to wipe them with the towel..." John 13:3,4

Again, holy reader, this sin is so obvious to observant Jews. Bathing oneself during Pesach is prohibited. Even washing one's clothes is prohibited during the eight days of Pesach. This should be a clear sign to any Jew like the other aforementioned problems that Jesus and his disciples were NOT TORAH OBSERVANT They openly disobeyed the commands of G-d! There is no missing this! It is blatant!

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 20, 2014, 01:18:42 AM
NEW RADICAL CHRONOLOGY PROOFS (SUMMARY)

Pompeii/Herculaneum destroyed during the Renaissance

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1617557#msg1617557 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1617557#msg1617557)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1470359#msg1470359 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1470359#msg1470359)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1243598#msg1243598 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1243598#msg1243598)


Christoph Pfister archive

C. Pfister, one of the very best european historians, has discovered that there was no human settlement prior to 1700 AD in Switzerland, and that all gothic/medieval buildings and all ancients documents pertaining to the period 500 AD - 1600 AD were actually created in the 18th Century AD. He also found out that the printing press was invented around 1730 AD, and wrote the exceptional book Matrix of Ancient History: http://www.dillum.ch/html/matrix_werbeblatt.htm (http://www.dillum.ch/html/matrix_werbeblatt.htm)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg998158#msg998158 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg998158#msg998158)


Gregorian Calendar Reform hoax:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1480194#msg1480194 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1480194#msg1480194)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1487888#msg1487888 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1487888#msg1487888)


Mozart, Bach, Euler, B. Franklin:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1483598#msg1483598 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1483598#msg1483598)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1483917#msg1483917 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1483917#msg1483917)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1484659#msg1484659 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1484659#msg1484659)


Great Wall of China, constructed after 1900 AD:


http://www.breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=27892#27892 (http://www.breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=27892#27892) (not so ancient china 1)

http://www.breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=27945#27945 (http://www.breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=27945#27945) (not so ancient china 2)

http://www.breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=27981#27981 (http://www.breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=27981#27981) (not so ancient china 3)


http://de.geschichte-chronologie.de/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=83:chronological-revolution-part-1&catid=2:2008-11-13-21-58-51&Itemid=90 (section Glorious Chinese History is a Fake) - on google search with eugen gabowitsch a historical analysis )


Council of Nicaea: could not have taken place before the 876-877 AD, best proofs

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488947#msg1488947 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488947#msg1488947)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1461577#msg1461577 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1461577#msg1461577)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1131770#msg1131770 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1131770#msg1131770)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1085104#msg1085104 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1085104#msg1085104)


Stone Age Hoax/Dinosaurs at Pompeii

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1567565#msg1567565 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1567565#msg1567565)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1413765#msg1413765 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1413765#msg1413765)


Almagest by Ptolemy, written at least after 1300 AD

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1431788#msg1431788 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1431788#msg1431788)


Gizeh Pyramid Radian Measure/Natural Logarithm

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1573684#msg1573684 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1573684#msg1573684)


Origin of Calculus: 18th Century

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1574605#msg1574605 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1574605#msg1574605)


D" Parameter Paradox

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1601887#msg1601887 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1601887#msg1601887)


Temple of Solomon, human forms

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1538404#msg1538404 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1538404#msg1538404)


New radical chronology = flat surface of the Earth

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1539392#msg1539392 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1539392#msg1539392)


Age of the heliocentric solar system paradox

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1546493#msg1546493 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1546493#msg1546493)


Gospel eclipses fiction

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1469190#msg1469190 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1469190#msg1469190)


Templars in the 18th century

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1371774#msg1371774 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1371774#msg1371774)


Napoleon

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1372513#msg1372513 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1372513#msg1372513)


Egyptian Pteranodon

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1412429#msg1412429 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1412429#msg1412429)



MYSTERIES OF EGYPTIAN ZODIACS/ZODIACS TIMELINE OF EGYPT BY A. FOMENKO:

http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/freebooks/history/Zodiacs.html (http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/freebooks/history/Zodiacs.html)
http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/freebooks/history/timeline.html (http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/freebooks/history/timeline.html)

(see the table of contents I posted earlier, with quotes from the books)


Here is the superb work done by Gunnar Heinsohn re: the ancient civilizations:

http://www.specialtyinterests.net/heinsohn.html (http://www.specialtyinterests.net/heinsohn.html)
http://www.chrono-rekonstruktion.de/beitraege/cyaxares.pdf (http://www.chrono-rekonstruktion.de/beitraege/cyaxares.pdf)

Heinsohn is not a radical new chronologist, but does prove very conclusively that the period 2100 BC - 600 BC NEVER ACTUALLY OCCURRED, and was invented in later times.


Isotopic dating/Ice core dating

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg969919#msg969919 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg969919#msg969919)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg967986#msg967986 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg967986#msg967986)
Who wrote the Bible

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg986690#msg986690 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg986690#msg986690)




TOTAL DEMOLITION OF THE "THEORY" OF RELATIVITY

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=61477.msg1605624#msg1605624 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=61477.msg1605624#msg1605624)


Maxwell's original set of equations tell us a very simple fact: THE SPEED OF LIGHT IS VARIABLE.

Therefore, the annual/daily shift is a MEASURE OF THE EXISTENCE OF A VARIABLE ETHER FIELD.

The measurements taken by Dr. Dayton Miller meant that they were latitude-dependent (see http://www.orgonelab.org/miller.htm (http://www.orgonelab.org/miller.htm) ).


The greatest scientific catastrophe of the 19th century: the Michelson-Morley "experiment":

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1476294#msg1476294 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1476294#msg1476294)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 20, 2014, 02:21:43 AM
ELECTRIC COMET THEORY

"Comets are perhaps at once the most spectacular and the least well understood members of the solar system."
M. Neugebauer, Jet Propulsion Laboratory


From English Mechanic & World of Science, 11 Aug 1882, pp. 516-7:

COMET’S TAILS”…There seems to be a rapidly growing feeling amongst physicists that both the self-light of comets and the phenomena of their tails belong to the order of electrical phenomena.”

"At the end of the nineteenth century there was considerable interest in electricity and the phenomena of electric discharges in evacuated glass tubes.

Scientists of the day could see the many parallels between the behavior of the luminous comet and a laboratory glow discharge. But in the following decades they abandoned that vision. Electrified comets required an electrified Sun. Astronomers in the 20th century were never taught the physics of gas discharges, and the idea of electricity in space was anathema to them. They turned their eyes away from the signs of electrical activity and adapted the older mechanical theories to explain comet behavior as buffetings in a solar “wind.” The gas discharge model was passed over for Fred Whipple”s ‘dirty ice ball’ model of comets."

Wal Thornhill


COMET WILD 2

As anticipated, Comet Wild 2 provided more puzzling questions for astronomers while adding confirmation to the Electric Universe model.

http://www.holoscience.com/wp/comet-wild-2/?article=ayxpdjcb (http://www.holoscience.com/wp/comet-wild-2/?article=ayxpdjcb) (EXCEPTIONAL DOCUMENTATION)


On the jets of comet Wild 2:

http://www.holoscience.com/wp/comets-impact-cosmology/ (http://www.holoscience.com/wp/comets-impact-cosmology/)


COMETS LOVEJOY AND ISON

http://www.sott.net/article/269357-Why-didnt-Comet-ISON-melt-in-the-Sun-How-NASA-and-Official-Science-got-it-all-wrong-again (http://www.sott.net/article/269357-Why-didnt-Comet-ISON-melt-in-the-Sun-How-NASA-and-Official-Science-got-it-all-wrong-again)


Here's what the Stardust program director said when the images came back:

"We thought Comet Wild 2 would be like a dirty, black, fluffy snowball," said Stardust Principal Investigator Dr. Donald Brownlee of the University of Washington, Seattle. "Instead, it was mind-boggling to see the diverse landscape in the first pictures from Stardust, including spires, pits and craters, which must be supported by a cohesive surface."

What differentiates 'comets' from asteroids' is their electrical activity.

When the electric potential difference between an asteroid and the surrounding plasma is not too high, the asteroid exhibits a dark discharge mode8 or no discharge at all. But when the potential difference is high enough, the comet switches to a glowing discharge mode.9 At this point the asteroid is a comet. From this perspective, a comet is simply a glowing asteroid and an asteroid is a non-glowing comet. Thus the very same body can, successively, be a comet, then an asteroid, then a comet, etc., depending on variation in the ambient electric field it is subjected to.

Note that a comet can also exhibit the third plasma discharge mode, namely lightning or 'arc mode discharge', which is probably what happened when Comet Shoemaker-Levy entered the vicinity of Jupiter in July 1994:
Astronomers expected the encounter to be a trivial event. "You won't see anything. The comet crash will probably amount to nothing more than a bunch of pebbles falling into an ocean 500 million miles from Earth." Then came the encounter and an about face. As reported by Sky & Telescope, "When Fragment 'A' hit the giant planet, it threw up a fireball so unexpectedly bright that it seemed to knock the world's astronomical community off its feet ..."

The Hubble Space Telescope (HST) detected a flare-up of fragment "G" of Shoemaker-Levy long before impact at a distance of 2.3 million miles from Jupiter. For the electrical theorists, this flash would occur as the fragment crossed Jupiter's plasma sheath, or magnetosphere boundary.

Pierre Lescaudron


More on Electric Comet Wild 2:

http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2004/arch/040805electric-comet.htm (http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2004/arch/040805electric-comet.htm)


Comets, Gravity, and Electricity:

http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/arch05/050523halleyborrelly.htm (http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/arch05/050523halleyborrelly.htm)


Electric Comet Proofs:

http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/00subjectx.htm#Comets (http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/00subjectx.htm#Comets)



K. Vshekhsviatsky was the leading expert in comet astrophysics as his works clearly demonstrate this.

Two months after the discovery of the ring around Jupiter, the Soviet Union claimed joint credit for the discovery, contending that Vsekhsviatskii had predicted the ring’s existence as early as 1960 in a journal called Izvestia of the Armenian Academy of Sciences. The passage from the relevant paper is as follows:

‘The existence of active ejection processes in the Jupiter system, demonstrated by comet astronomy, gives grounds for assuming that Jupiter is encircled by comet and meteorite material in the form of a ring similar to the ring of Saturn.’

Despite the fact of his priority, Vsekhsviatskii’s name has remained conspicuously absent from the scientific literature pertaining to comets and planetary rings.


He did demonstrate that the capture theory is completely wrong.

On page 107 he estimates with great accuracy the age of the Halley comet:


http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1962PASP...74..106V/0000107.000.html (http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1962PASP...74..106V/0000107.000.html)

Comets, Small Bodies, and Problems of the Solar System, full article
K. Vshekhsviatsky, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific Vol. 74 (1962)



http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1958SvA.....2..433V&classic=YES (http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1958SvA.....2..433V&classic=YES)

ON THE CAPTURE HYPOTHESIS OF SHORT PERIOD COMETS


His demonstration stands correct to this day.


His expulsion theory of comets was considered to be too advanced for the scientific period of the 60s, and was put on hold, until a better understanding the subject was to be gained.

But today we have the electric comet theory: Comets are the result of electrical discharge machining of planetary bodies that occurs in the catastrophic evolution of planetary orbits. It is far too simplistic to assume that the planets were formed along with the Sun and remained in their present orbits ever since.

Now finally his expulsion theory can be explained.


When passing close to the sun, comets emit tails. It is assumed that the material of the tail does not return to the comet's head but is dispersed in space; consequently, the comets as luminous bodies must have a limited life. If Halley's comet has pursued its present orbit since late pre-Cambrian times, it must "have grown and lost eight million tails, which seems improbable." If comets are wasted, their number in the solar system must permanently diminish, and no comet of short period could have preserved its tail since geological times.

But as there are many luminous comets of short period, they must have been produced or acquired at some time when other members of the system, the planets and the satellites, were already in their places.


Dr. D. Russell Humphreys:

According to evolutionary theory, comets are supposed to be the same age as the solar system, about five billion years. Yet each time a comet orbits close to the sun, it loses so much of its material that it could not survive much longer than about 100,000 years. Many comets have typical ages of less than 10,000 years.

Evolutionists explain this discrepancy by assuming that (a) comets come from an unobserved spherical "Oort cloud" well beyond the orbit of Pluto, (b) improbable gravitational interactions with infrequently passing stars often knock comets into the solar system, and (c) other improbable interactions with planets slow down the incoming comets often enough to account for the hundreds of comets observed. So far, none of these assumptions has been substantiated either by observations or realistic calculations. Lately, there has been much talk of the "Kuiper Belt," a disc of supposed comet sources lying in the plane of the solar system just outside the orbit of Pluto. Some asteroid-sized bodies of ice exist in that location, but they do not solve the evolutionists' problem, since according to evolutionary theory, the Kuiper Belt would quickly become exhausted if there were no Oort cloud to supply it.


Dr. Danny Faulkner:

http://creation.com/comets-and-the-age-of-the-solar-system (http://creation.com/comets-and-the-age-of-the-solar-system) (very well documented)

The standard model of a comet is one in which all of the material observed is released by an icy nucleus only a few kilometres across. This model strongly suggests that comets are very fragile, losing much of their material during each close pass to the Sun. Most comets follow orbits that take them vast distances from the Sun. If a comet’s orbit takes it too far from the Sun, then the comet could easily be captured by the gravitational attraction of other stars and thus would be lost to the Solar System. This places a maximum distance from the Sun that a comet may orbit. If this maximum distance can be estimated, Kepler's third law of planetary motion can be used to deduce the greatest possible orbital period that a comet may possess (about 11 million years). When combined with an estimate of how many trips around the Sun that a comet can survive, we can estimate the maximum age of comets. This figure is far less than the adopted 4.6 Ga age of the Solar System. Because no source of creation for comets has been identified, comets are assumed to be primordial. If this is true, then the age of the Solar System must be less than the estimated upper age of comets.


COMET HOLMES P17

The unpredictable behavior of comets continually contradicts the tenets of traditional comet theory - to the point that some experts now wonder if a theory even exists. “It's a mystery to me how comets work at all,” said Donald Brownlee, principle investigator of NASA's Stardust Mission.
 
One need only review the extraordinary spectacle provided by Comet Holmes 17P to see how deep the crisis in cometology reaches. In October of 2007, Holmes suddenly and unexpectedly brightened by a factor of a million. In less then 24 hours, it grew from a small 17th magnitude comet to a magnitude of 2.5, so large it was easily visible to the naked eye on Earth. Holmes' coma continued expanding until by mid-November of '07 it had become the largest object in the solar system, vastly larger than the Sun. The coma's diameter had grown from 28 thousand kilometers to 7 million km.
 
At the time of Holmes' extraordinary display, the comet was actually moving away from the Sun, and therefore cooling.

Among the common sense questions posed by the enigma: how does such a gravitationally minuscule body hold in place a uniform, spherical coma 7 million kilometers in diameter?

If Holmes' flare-up was the result of a collapse or explosion (as some scientists speculated) why was the ejected material not asymmetrical (as one would anticipate from an explosion)? Why did the claimed explosion not produce a variety of fragmentary sizes instead of the extremely fine dust that was actually observed? What explosive event could have caused the comet to luminate for MONTHS, rather than the SECONDS typical of an explosion's luminescence? Why did the comet's gaseous, dusty, spherical cloud persist for months, rather than dispersing quickly away from the comet?
 

“The remarkable properties of comets are not even remotely explicable by any of the numerous ad hoc assumptions of ‘modern’ comet theory.”
— R A Lyttleton, FRS, Journey to the Centre of Uncertainty, Speculations in Science & Technology.

Therefore, for example, the ‘Oort Shell’ hypothesis of comets surrounding the Solar System is considered an unnecessary fiction. Indeed, Professor Ray Lyttleton described the Oort Shell theory as ‘a piece of trash.’

Professor S. Vsekhsviatskii, Director of the Kiev Observatory and Head of the Faculty of Astronomy, University of Kiev, has concluded from his studies of comets that:

i). Celestial mechanics, the distribution and statistics of cometary orbits, and consideration of the kinematics of the cometary system leave no doubt whatsoever that all comets, and therefore the products of their decay, were formed inside the Solar System, and were formed a little later, on the average, than were the planets.

ii). The existence of the families of short-period comets of Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune, and the peculiarities of their motion and nature – their chemistry, the presence of ice in their nuclei, their close association with Jupiter prior to discovery, etc. – demonstrates the recent origin of comets.

This is in accord with the theory of the eruptive development of planets, as developed by Lagrange, Proctor, Crommelin and Vsekhsviatskii. Recent, comprehensive investigations by Everhart (1969) confirmed once more that peculiarities of the observed distribution of short-period comet orbits cannot be explained on the basis of the ‘gravitational capture’ hypothesis.


Comet Holmes 17P in the shape of a sphere

http://www.racingshadow.com/CometMet/17P_Holmes/17P_Holmes.html (http://www.racingshadow.com/CometMet/17P_Holmes/17P_Holmes.html)

1 and 4 show Comet Holmes as a circular disk, in reality a sphere, of dust with a well defined explosion front.

(http://www.racingshadow.com/CometMet/17P_Holmes/17PHolmesMontage_31Oct2007.jpg)


(http://d366w3m5tf0813.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/Cook-Web.jpg)

It also has a slight but definite ring appearance, as if some of the light is coming from a hollow, spherical, glowing shell.


(http://d366w3m5tf0813.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/Sherrod-Web.jpg)

This 12-arcminute-wide frame from Arkansas Sky Observatory shows the comet as a brilliant, near-circular disk on the morning of October 25th. Clay Sherrod used a 0.4-meter (16-inch) Schmidt-Cassegrain telescope at f/3.


(http://www.tboeckel.de/EFSF/efsf_ps/P17_holmes/8_11/end.jpg)

(http://www.tboeckel.de/EFSF/efsf_ps/P17_holmes/baader/2m-tec-8xgamm-mask-kl_m.jpg)

(http://www.tboeckel.de/EFSF/efsf_ps/P17_holmes/1_11_07/IMG_3583_b.jpg)

(http://www.tboeckel.de/EFSF/efsf_ps/P17_holmes/baader/kernstruktur-31-10_m.jpg)

(http://www.cloudbait.com/gallery/comet/holmes_532s_pc_1026.jpg)

(http://www.cloudbait.com/gallery/comet/holmes_41m_1029.jpg)

(http://www.cloudbait.com/gallery/comet/holmes_30m_1107.jpg)


http://www.rense.com/general79/cmet.htm (http://www.rense.com/general79/cmet.htm) (solar wind/gravity of comets paradox)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 21, 2014, 12:57:17 AM
WHEN DID SHAKESPEARE LIVE?

"William Shakespeare" did not write a single word from the plays attributed to his name.

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/biggestsecret/bigsec/biggestsecret08.htm (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/biggestsecret/bigsec/biggestsecret08.htm)

It may have been Francis Bacon who communicated some of the secret knowledge ‘for those who have ears’ in ciphers and symbolism in the works called the Shakespeare plays. He, like the writers of the Old and New Testaments and the King Arthur ‘Grail’ stories, was a high initiate of the secret mysteries communicating through code and hidden meaning. Manly P. Hall says that Bacon indicated that he was the true author in a series of codes. His esoteric number was 33 and on one page in the first part of the ‘Shakespeare’ play, Henry The Fourth, the name ‘Francis’ appears 33 times.
 
Bacon also used watermarks in paper to transmit his symbols, as did the Rosicrucians and secret societies in general. These included the rose and the cross and bunches of grapes - the vine, the bloodlines.14 Bacon also used Tarot symbolism in his codes, including the numbers 21, 56 and 78, which are related to divisions in the Tarot deck. In a Shakespearean Folio of 1623, the Christian name of Bacon appears 21 times on page 56.
 
The term Rota Mundi frequently occurs in the early manifestos of the Fraternity of the Rose Cross. Rearrange the letters in Rota and you get Taro, the ancient name for the tarot cards.’ Shakespeare is known as the Bard. A Bard was a Druidic initiate of the secret knowledge and, the Concise Oxford Dictionary tells me, there is another definition of bard... “a slice of bacon placed on meat or game before roasting”.
 
The famous Globe Theatre in London where the plays were performed was built according to the principles of sacred geometry and the last ‘Shakespeare’ play, The Tempest, included many Rosicrucian concepts. It is equally possible that the ‘Shakespeare’ plays were written by another initiate of Elizabethan society, Edward De Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford, who also fitted the bill and some believe even more so than Bacon.

The idea that the world famous plays were written by an illiterate from Stratford-upon-Avon called William Shakespeare is patently ridiculous and, like so much accepted ‘truth’, does not survive the most basic research. Shakespeare, the ‘Bard’, grew up in Stratford, a town with no school capable of communicating such a high degree of learning. His parents were illiterate and he showed a total disregard for study.
 
Yet the plays were written by someone with a great knowledge of the world which could be gleaned only from a fantastic range of books and personal experience through travel. Shakespeare had no such library, not that he could have used it if he had, and he is never known to have left the country. Bacon had just such a library and travelled widely to many of the places featured in the plays. Where did Shakespeare acquire his knowledge of French, Italian, Spanish, Danish and classic Latin and Greek? Answer, he didn’t.
 

Ben Jonson, a close friend of Shakespeare, said that the ‘Bard’ understood: “small Latin and less Greek!” But Bacon and DeVere were learned in these languages. Shakespeare’s daughter, Judith, was known to be illiterate and could not even write her name at the age of 27. It really makes sense that a man who wrote so eloquently would have a daughter who could not write her signature.
 
There are only six known examples of Shakespeare’s own handwriting, all signatures, and three of these are on his will. They reveal a man unfamiliar with a pen and a hand that was probably guided by another. His will included his second best bed and a broad silver gilt bowl, but nothing whatsoever to suggest that he wrote or owned a single work of literature! Nor is there one authentic portrait of Shakespeare.
 
The differences in the depiction of him by artists confirm that no-one has any idea what he looked like. Yet the power of conditioning and accepting the official line attracts millions of people to Stratford from all over the world to see the home of the man who didn’t write the Shakespeare plays! This is only one small example of how the official fairy story called ‘history’ is used to control current behaviour and perception. What else in history isn’t true? Just about everything. Behind the Shakespeare plays was the hidden hand behind most historical events of significance - the Brotherhood networks.
 
And nothing sums up the attitude of this group better than the words Bacon/DeVere wrote in his play, Macbeth:

“Fair is foul and foul is fair.”

As Manly P. Hall, the Freemasonic historian, wrote of Bacon:

“He was a Rosicrucian, some have intimated the Rosicrucian. If not actually the Illustrious Father C.R.C. referred to in the Rosicrucian manifestos, he was certainly a high initiate of the Rosicrucian Order... those enthusiasts who for years have struggled to identify Sir Francis Bacon as the true “Bard of Avon” might long since have won their case had they emphasized its most important angle, namely, that Sir Francis Bacon, the Rosicrucian initiate, wrote into the Shakespearean plays the secret teachings of the Fraternity of R.C. and the true rituals of the Freemasonic Order, of which order it may be discovered that he was the actual founder.“


Shakespeare's plays include abundant references to Paul's epistles.

http://www.shmoop.com/comedy-of-errors/marriage-quotes.html (http://www.shmoop.com/comedy-of-errors/marriage-quotes.html)
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+law+made+flesh%3A+St.+Paul's+Corinth+and+Shakespeare's+Vienna.-a0353319364 (http://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+law+made+flesh%3A+St.+Paul's+Corinth+and+Shakespeare's+Vienna.-a0353319364)


EDWIN JOHNSON, THE GREATEST OF ALL BRITISH HISTORIANS, DEMONSTRATES WITH EXTRAORDINARY PROOFS THAT NOBODY IN WESTERN EUROPE KNEW ANYTHING ABOUT THE FOUR GOSPELS/PAULINE EPISTLES BEFORE 1550 AD.

MOREOVER, HE DEMONSTRATES THAT, AS LATE AS 1592 THERE WAS NO VULGATE (LATIN BIBLE).

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459891 (http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459891)

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459991 (http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459991)

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459997 (http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459997)


http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459974 (http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459974)

But the Post-Apostolic Men Do Not Know Their Alleged Apostolic Masters, Which Is Absurd!

It is, however, part of the mistaken view of the subject, arising from the acceptance of the false chronology, to suppose that the alleged "Apostolic Fathers" quote from and build upon the Apostles. The discovery of this it was which led me first to see the enormous fictions that had been at work in the Christian literature, for it is absurd to suppose that Paul, after making a vast reputation as a literary man in the first century, was afterwards almost lost in oblivion in the second century. And the like applies to the deeds and sufferings of Christ himself, and to the whole fable of the origins. After all, these mythologists have made some great blunders in their system.

They Do Not Know the Epistle to the Romans

Take the richest theological Epistle ascribed to Paul: that to the Romans. Positively these so-called post-Apostolic men do not know it. They have merely some faint echoes of its contents; which is a very different thing. And it is the merest sophistry to confound them, or to talk of "Reminiscences," where there is no proof of anything of the kind. I must distinctly warn my readers against this fallacy of the handbooks and introductions to the New Testament, the only thorough cure for which is to read these "post-Apostolic" men for themselves. They will then discover that these writers, assumed to be following in the steps of their forerunners, and to be diligently perusing their writings as we have them, are doing nothing of the kind. They are dreaming, rambling, and raving; but they do not know that romantic figure of Paul that is known to us, nor yet his alleged writings as we have them.

In the interests of devout belief, it would be well that none should ever read this so-called "second-century literature." But, in the interest of literary science, it should be denounced as a discreditable falsehood on the part of any scholar, who has studied that literature, to assert that the writers know anything of the tremendous events which are described in the Canonical Gospels and Acts and Epistles as having taken place in the preceding age. No student who follows the path of science can possibly, when this matter is understood, adhere any longer to the ecclesiastically "orthodox" opinion of Christianity.

Had they calculated upon intelligent readers, they would have felt the necessity of enlarging the "post-Apostolic" men pari passu with the "Apostolic" men. Barnabas and Hermas and Clement and the rest ought not to be left so deeply in the dark, after the brilliancy that has been made to flash upon Paul!

It is beyond expression ludicrous, when you inquire of an Ignatius, or a Polycarp, "what interesting traits have you to narrate of those great Apostles and their writings, and those Epistles which you are so fond of alluding to?" to listen in reply to their maunderings and mutterings, as if they were in a dream, or moving about and groping in a world half realised. You demand a fact or two, and you are offered a theory, a creed expressed in language the most flatulent and vague that can be devised. The truth is, that the outlines of this creed and theory are at the bases of both the alleged "Apostolic" and "post-Apostolic" writing, and can be clearly detected; but the Apostolic writings, as we have them in the New Testament, are later than the "post-Apostolic" writings as we have them. Consequently, the notion that our New Testament is the earliest source for Christian origins is absurd; and equally so the notion that our Pauline Epistles are earlier than those of Clement, Ignatius, and the rest. The converse is nearer the truth.


He also discovered the following incredible fact about what was known in the alleged XVIth century about ancient history:

Polydore has only before him a slight version of the tale about Hieronymus or Jerome, showing that our List was not in his hands. He says that the monk was well educated in Greek and Latin at Rome; that, for the sake of a holier life, he repaired to Judea, and learned the Hebrew tongue; that his writings on Divinity were accepted and approved by the Fathers as holy.

Then follows this remarkable criticism: "I know there are some who falsely assign that deed to the pontiff Damasus, who had died a very long time before Jerome."

I am the first to call attention to this passage, which, once for all, explodes the whole Jerome fable, and proves it to be a recent invention of Polydore's own time. Moreover, it proves his ignorance of the tale which "Jerome" is made to tell of himself, that he had rendered the New Testament from the Greek; and, once more, it proves that Church chronology and history were not yet fixed, for the dates of Jerome and Damasus are not yet agreed upon. The Preface to Damasus must be later than 1533.

IN THE OFFICIAL CHRONOLOGY, JEROME AND DAMASUS ARE CONTEMPORARIES.




J. Scaliger (De Emendatione Temporum - 1583, Thesaurus Temporum - 1606), D. Petavius (De Doctrina Temporum, 1627), P. Crusius (Liber de Epochis - 1578) mention Pompeii and Herculaneum as having been destroyed in the year 79 AD (Vesuvius eruption).

And yet, in the SAME DECADE,  in the official chronology, the famed cartographer Abraham Ortelius depicts Pompeii as a city in full activity in his Regno de Napoli maps (published in several editions from 1570 to 1578):

http://www.antiquarius-sb.com/Catalogue_c.asp?page=4&area=115&subarea=27 (http://www.antiquarius-sb.com/Catalogue_c.asp?page=4&area=115&subarea=27)

http://www.bergbook.com/images/22775-01.jpg (http://www.bergbook.com/images/22775-01.jpg)

http://www.antiquarius-sb.com/Details_c.asp?ID=8669 (http://www.antiquarius-sb.com/Details_c.asp?ID=8669)

http://www.answers.com/topic/abraham-ortelius (http://www.answers.com/topic/abraham-ortelius) (biography of A. Ortelius)

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_mVSVlQXoXaQ/S3vPMSZ8QQI/AAAAAAAAAmQ/xYuaLXK5ry4/s320/Immagine1.jpg)

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_mVSVlQXoXaQ/S3vPojv0RaI/AAAAAAAAAmg/kuovyl4UdLA/s320/Immagine3.jpg)


http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1243598.html#msg1243598 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1243598.html#msg1243598) (Plutarch, Josephus, Dio Cassius, Pliny the Elder, Eusebius - fictional characters invented at least after 1700 AD)

"Shakespeare" did own a copy of Ortelius' maps.

http://www.windowsonwarwickshire.org.uk/spotlights/shakespeares_study/world01.htm (http://www.windowsonwarwickshire.org.uk/spotlights/shakespeares_study/world01.htm)

Since Pompeii must have been a city in full activity in 1570 AD, this makes Shakespeare and Josephus contemporaries.


http://www.vetrotech.com/us/eng/SAINT__1580.asp (http://www.vetrotech.com/us/eng/SAINT__1580.asp)

The first historical records of the glass rolling process in Saint Gobain date back to 1688.

This process involves pouring molten glass onto the rolling table, spreading it out and rolling it. It produces flat glass of an even thickness. Another advantage is that this process enables the production of glass sheets with the dimensions of 40 x 60 inches, which is ideal for mirror making.

And yet, perfectly flat glass at Herculaneum:

http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/gallery/pom15.jpg (http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/gallery/pom15.jpg)
http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/gallery/pom16.jpg (http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/gallery/pom16.jpg)

"The use of Renaissance artists of identical details, same colors decisions, motives, general composition plans, the presence in the Pompeian frescoes of the things that emerged in the 15 to 17 century, the presence in Pompeian paintings of genre painting, which is found only in the epoch of the Renaissance, and the presence of some Christian motifs on some frescoes and mosaics suggest that Pompeian frescoes and the works of artists of the Renaissance come from the same people who have lived in the epoch. "Vitas Narvidas," Pompeian Frescoes and the Renaissance: a comparison, "Electronic Almanac" Art & Fact 1 (5), 2007.

(http://o.quizlet.com/iPQhqCgX5uzryo3XrcOUXw.jpg)

(https://s2.postimg.org/vmgnvf13d/titian.jpg)

Abbildung 11: Italienische oder pompejanische Renaissance:
Tizian: Liegende Kurtisane (oben) und liegende Mänade aus
Pompeji (unten)
Abbildung der Mänade aus: Pietro Giovanni Guzzo: Pompei, Ercolano, Stabiae, Oplontis;
Napoli 2003, 75

Figure 11: Italian Renaissance and Pompeian:
Titian: Horizontal courtesan (top) and from lying maenad
Pompeii (below)
Figure out the maenad: Pietro Giovanni Guzzo: Pompei, Ercolano, Stabia, Oplontis;
Napoli 2003, 75

The well-known painting by Titian copied perfectly at Pompeii...


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 23, 2014, 06:22:11 AM
CADUCEUS COILS

(http://jnaudin.free.fr/spgen/images/caduceus2.jpg)

The caduceus coil illustrated in Fig.1, basically consists of ordinary insulated copper wire wound in a double-helix around a ferrite core. THIS COIL HAS REPEATEDLY BEEN FOUND TO VIOLATE ESTABLISHED LAWS OF ELECTROMAGNETICS AND HERTZIAN WAVE THEORY WHEN A HIGH FREQUENCY CURRENT IS INJECTED INTO IT.

http://www.zamandayolculuk.com/cetinbal/caduceusexp.htm (http://www.zamandayolculuk.com/cetinbal/caduceusexp.htm)

A few investigators have also reported unexpected bizarre inertial effects in conjunction with these coils. One researcher activated his caduceus coil with pulsed bursts of microwave frequency whereupon it appeared to lift itself up by its own bootstraps executing a periodic series of little hops off the ground. Why the coil would jump like this or exhibit the other weird effects noted above, has no explanation under standard electromagnetic theory, and must be attributed to the field effect produced by the unique coil winding.


SCALAR WAVES WITH CADUCEUS/TENSOR COILS EXPERIMENTS:


http://jnaudin.free.fr/spgen/ (http://jnaudin.free.fr/spgen/)

http://jnaudin.free.fr/spgen/spg_shield.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/spgen/spg_shield.htm)

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/sclxmtr.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/sclxmtr.htm)

http://jnaudin.free.fr/spgen/index.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/spgen/index.htm)


Expérience basique pour produire des « solitons » électromagnétiques à partir d’une bobine d’induction en Caducée par Jean-Michel Cour:

http://jnaudin.free.fr/spgen/images/jmc_soliton.pdf (http://jnaudin.free.fr/spgen/images/jmc_soliton.pdf)


Scalar waves were originally detected by a Scottish mathematical genius called James Clerk Maxwell (1831-1879) He linked electricity and magnetism and laid the foundation for modern physics, but unfortunately the very fine scalar waves (which he included in his research) were deliberately left out of his work by the 3 men, including Heinrich Hertz, who laid down the laws taught for physics as a discipline at colleges. They dismissed Maxwell's scalar waves or potentials as "mystical" because they were physically unmanifest and only existed in the "ethers" and so were determined to be too ineffectual for further study. These enigmatic (but more powerful than even microwaves when harnessed and concentrated into a beam) scalar waves may have been forgotten except that Nicola Tesla accidentally rediscovered them. He'd originally worked with Thomas Edison who discovered direct current, but Tesla discovered alternating current. The two men disagreed and
 eventually parted ways and Tesla later experimented using the research of the German Heinrich Hertz, who was proving the existence of electromagnetic waves. Tesla found, while experimenting with violently abrupt direct current electrical charges, that a new form of energy (scalar) came through.

By 1904, Tesla had developed transmitters to harness scalar energy from one transmitter to another, undetectably bypassing time and space. He could just materialize it from one place to another through hyperspace, without the use of wires, it was just sucked right out of the space-time/vacuum and into a transmitter and into a beam which could be targeted to another transmitter. Unfortunately he got no financial support for replacing electricity, which used wires and therefore earned money, and to this day, this is the reason why scalar energy is still not acknowledged in mainstream physics. Tesla, even though he discovered more for mankind in science than many others, is still not credited in science books for his discovery of scalar waves, a source of "free-energy" obtainable as a limitless source of power that costs nothing.

CADUCEUS/TENSOR COIL TEXTBOOK:

http://portal.groupkos.com/index.php?title=Electromagnetic_Coils (http://portal.groupkos.com/index.php?title=Electromagnetic_Coils)



BALL LIGHTNING: PARADOX OF PHYSICS

http://books.google.ro/books?id=OLbvX5UnxXoC&pg=PA1&dq=ball+lightning+gravity+mystery&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=4COoU6iDGoGc0AX0pIGwCA&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=ball%20lightning%20gravity%20mystery&f=false (http://books.google.ro/books?id=OLbvX5UnxXoC&pg=PA1&dq=ball+lightning+gravity+mystery&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=4COoU6iDGoGc0AX0pIGwCA&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=ball%20lightning%20gravity%20mystery&f=false)
 

VIKTOR SCHAUBERGER: GENIUS OF DOUBLE TORSION PHYSICS

http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/Viktor%20Schauberger.htm (http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/Viktor%20Schauberger.htm)

"If water or air is rotated into a twisting form of oscillation known as ‘colloidal’, a build up of energy results, which, with immense power, can cause levitation. This form of movement is able to carry with it its own means of power generation. This principle leads logically to its application in the design of the ideal airplane or submarine... requiring almost no motive power."  V. Schauberger

(http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/picturesaa/Scp1.jpg)
(http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/picturesaa/Scp2.jpg)
(http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/picturesc/sch251.jpg)

WHO WAS VIKTOR SCHAUBERGER?

https://web.archive.org/web/20170611101930/http://free-energy.xf.cz/SCHAUBERGER/Living_Energies.pdf (best work on double torsion/implosion)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 08, 2014, 01:29:23 AM
CHICXULUB SUPERVOLCANO

Evidence against the impact-extinction hypothesis, superb documentation:

http://creation.com/book-review-the-great-dinosaur-extinction-controversy (http://creation.com/book-review-the-great-dinosaur-extinction-controversy)

‘The non-excavating impact: … It’s probably true to say that … most Earth scientists have come to accept that an asteroid impact directly or indirectly did for the dinosaurs and other species 65 million years ago, if only because they’ve been beaten into submission by the endless barrage of propaganda in its favour. And the word that’s been in their ears constantly for the past few years is “Chicxulub” … But wait—hear the other side first …’


Why the Chicxulub-impact was an explosive supervolcano

http://www.b14643.de/Chicxulub_event/index.htm (http://www.b14643.de/Chicxulub_event/index.htm)


Egyptian Pteranodon

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1412429#msg1412429 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1412429#msg1412429)


Stone Age Hoax/Dinosaurs at Pompeii

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1567565#msg1567565 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1567565#msg1567565)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1413765#msg1413765 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1413765#msg1413765)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 15, 2014, 07:14:44 AM
THE ALLAIS EFFECT: EXISTENCE OF ETHER


"During the total eclipses of the sun on June 30, 1954, and October 22, 1959, quite analogous deviations of the plane of oscillation of the paraconical pendulum were observed..." - Maurice Allais, 1988 Nobel autobiographical lecture.

In a marathon experiment, Maurice Allais released a Foucault pendulum every 14 minutes - for 30 days and nights -without missing a data point. He recorded the direction of rotation (in degrees) at his Paris laboratory. This energetic show of human endurance happened to overlap with the 1954 solar eclipse. During the eclipse, the pendulum took an unexpected turn, changing its angle of rotation by 13.5 degrees.

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.

Dr. Maurice Allais:  Should the laws of gravitation be reconsidered?

http://allais.maurice.free.fr/English/media10-12.htm (http://allais.maurice.free.fr/English/media10-12.htm)

In the present status of the discussion, the abnormalities observed can be accounted for only by considering the existence of a new field. (page 12)


Dr. Maurice Allais report to Nasa:

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

Orders of magnitude incompatible with current theory

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 (pp. 118-129 and Table VII, p. 129).

In the case of the paraconical pendulum with isotropic support, this relation is about a hundred million (pp. 285-328).
The discrepancies discovered are enormous, and, as far as I know, unmatched in the literature.

In fact, the results of the experiments of July 1958 confirmed in an electrifying manner my previous reasoning, leading to the conclusion that, in the movement of the paraconical pendulum with anisotropic support, there are anomalies of a periodic character which are totally inexplicable in the framework of currently accepted theories.


http://davidpratt.info/gravity.htm (http://davidpratt.info/gravity.htm)

A similar gravity anomaly was measured using a two-pendula system during the line-up of Earth-Sun-Jupiter-Saturn in May 2001. During the total solar eclipse in 1997, a Chinese team performed measurements with a high-precision gravimeter. However, in contrast to the Allais effect, they detected a decrease in the earth’s gravity. Moreover, the effect occurred immediately before and after the eclipse but not at its height. In the course of observations conducted since 1987, Shu-wen Zhou and his collaborators have confirmed the occurrence of an anomalous force of horizontal oscillation when the sun, moon, and earth are aligned, and have shown that it affects the pattern of grain sequence in crystals, the spectral wavelengths of atoms and molecules, and the rate of atomic clocks.

    Various conventional explanations have been put forward to account for gravity anomalies during eclipses, such as instrument errors, gravity effects of denser air due to cooling of the upper atmosphere, seismic disturbances caused by sightseers moving into and out of a place where an eclipse is visible, and tilting of the ground due to cooling. Physicist Chris Duif has argued that none of them are convincing. He believes that gravitational shielding, too, cannot explain the results, as it would be far too weak (if it exists at all).

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0408023 (http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0408023)

http://arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/0408/0408023.pdf (http://arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/0408/0408023.pdf)



The Allais pendulum effect confirmed in an experiment performed in 1961:

http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf074/sf074a05.htm (http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf074/sf074a05.htm)


Dr. Allais' thoughts on terrestrial gravity and aether:

No Action at a Distance


     No action at a distance is conceivable without the existence
    of intermediary medium.

    All known actions, gravitational, optical, electromagnetic,
    propagate through a medium, the aether.

      The attraction according to Newton's law of the inverse
    square of the distance or Ampere's formulas are not actions at
    a distance.  They result from local actions which propagate
    progressively across space through the aether.


      Contrary to what was assumed in XIXth century and early XXth
    century, the aether is subject to movements and local deformations,
    in other words, the aether is an anisotropic medium.  This anisotropy
    varies over time and space.

     The properties of the "vacuum" are nothing else than aether properties.

         The movements and deformations of the aether influence the
     different phenomena observed and all these phenomena are influenced
     in the same way.

        Atoms, particles, photons ... are but (local) singularities of
     the aether which remian to be explained by differential equations.



The Black Sun emits the laevorotatory subquarks; during a solar eclipse its influence upon the telluric currents, and thus upon terrestrial gravity, can be detected as was done by Dr. Maurice Allais and the other researchers.

The Allais effect confirms the geocentric Coriolis force hypothesis:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg953747#msg953747 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg953747#msg953747)

Trying to use Foucault's pendulum as proof for heliocentricity really backfired when Maurice Allais repeatedly observed pendulums slowing their motion during eclipses! This implies that either the "rotating Earth" decelerates during eclipses or the firmament does.

Moreover, since at times the Moon can be seen in the afternoon or evening sky, at the same time as the orbiting Sun (https://paulgreci.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/dscn3140.jpg (https://paulgreci.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/dscn3140.jpg) ), without the Allais effect manifesting itself, it means we have another proof or clear indication that the heavenly body which does cause the solar eclipse is not the Moon, but the Black Sun.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 24, 2014, 08:44:03 AM
MYSTERY OF LAKE BOLSENA

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ee/Lago_di_Bolsena.jpg/800px-Lago_di_Bolsena.jpg)

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/Bolsenasee_nordhaelfte_panorama.jpg/800px-Bolsenasee_nordhaelfte_panorama.jpg)

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b0/Panoramica_lago_bolsena.jpg/600px-Panoramica_lago_bolsena.jpg)


Near Bolsena, or Volsinium, is a lake of the same name. This lake fills a basin nine miles long, seven miles wide, and 285 feet deep. For a long time this basin was regarded as the water-filled  crater of a volcano. However, its area of 117 square kilometers exceeds by far that of the largest  known craters on the earth—those in the Andes in South America and those in the Hawaiian (Sandwich) Islands in the Pacific. Hence, the idea that the lake is the crater of an extinct volcano has recently been questioned. Moreover, although the bottom of the lake is of lava, and the  ground around the lake abounds with ashes and lava and columns of basalt, the talus of a volcano is lacking.

Taking what local legends say of an interplanetary discharge together with what has actually been found at Volsinium, one may wonder whether the cinders and the lava and the columns of basalt could possibly be the remains of the contact mentioned in these legends: a thunderbolt from Mars destroyed the region.

(from Worlds in Collision)



Iron Age Of Mars

http://www.grazian-archive.com/quantavolution/QUANTAVOL/IRON_AGE_OF_MARS.pdf (http://www.grazian-archive.com/quantavolution/QUANTAVOL/IRON_AGE_OF_MARS.pdf)


(it shows that the meteor/comet crater theory is wrong in the An Asteroid Impact? section of Chapter Fourteen, The Extermination of Volsinium; also includes a superb documentation on the whole subject)




Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 26, 2014, 02:11:47 AM
GIZEH PYRAMID: WHEN WAS IT ACTUALLY BUILT?

The best proofs that the Gizeh Pyramid complex was built WELL BEFORE the beginning of the first dynasty of the Egyptian Pharaohs, in fact, BEFORE the civilization of Sumer (official chronology). Dr. Gunnar Heinsohn has already demonstrated in his best known work that the entire historical period of 2100 BC - 600 BC was invented:

https://web.archive.org/web/20110517042728/http://www.specialtyinterests.net/heinsohn.html

"Heinsohn has made a very important contribution to the revisionist debate by focussing attention on the evidence of stratigraphy outside Egypt. Dayton had uncovered many examples in museums around the world where near identical ancient artefacts of very similar styles and manufacturing techniques were given dates which varied sometimes by as much as 1000-1500 years. Heinsohn, from an extensive study of archaeological reports from most of the better known sites across Asia Minor, showed how these anachronisms had arisen. At site after site, archaeologists had artificially increased the age of the lower strata by inserting, without supporting evidence, 'occupation gaps' of many centuries. They did this in order to meet the expectations of excessive antiquity among historians, who had used Biblically derived dates for Abraham (c. 2100), initially seen as broadly contemporary with the great Assyrian king Hammurabi. Using this elongated time frame, great empires of the past such as the Sumerians, Akkadians and Old Babylonians were invented by late 19th C and early 20th C scholars to fill the historical voids. The ancient Greek and Roman historians, not surprisingly, knew nothing of these ancient peoples. Sumerian, said Heinsohn, 'is the language of the well known Kassite/Chaldeans, whose literacy deserves its fame'.

He showed that the Bronze Age started in China and Mesoamerica some 1500 years later than in the Near East and proposed this gap be largely closed by lowering the ages of the Mediterranean civilisations. He cited the Indus Valley where the early period civilisations, dated from Mesopotamian seals to c. 2400BC, sit right underneath the Buddhist strata of 7-6C. Seals from Mesopotamia are found in the Indus valley and in Mesopotamia there are seals from the Indus Valley. So the excavators have to say they have an occupation gap of some 1700 years. Thus some sites only about 30km apart have chronologies some 1500 years apart. But in the same strata, supposedly 1500 years apart, they frequently find the same pottery.

C&CR had insufficient space to provide a full forum for Heinsohn's work, but a volume entitled Ghost Empires of the Past was published in C&CR format in 1988, thanks to help from SIS stalwarts Birgit Liesching and Derek Shelley-Pearce. In this, Heinsohn set out many chronological 'problems' and 'riddles', and argued persuasively for equating, among others, the Mittani with the Medes and the Empire Hittites with the Late Chaldeans.
His excellent paper on the archaeology of Hazor (C&CR 1996:1) revealed some important anachronisms. For example, two cuneiform tablets written in Old-Babylonian Akkadian and two more written in the Akaddian of the Amarna era were found in the upper layers of the site. Heinsohn asks 'How did tablets from the early second millennium end up in a stratum reaching its peak in the period of the Persian Empire (550-330 BC)?'. The tablets were, of course, immediately labelled 'heirlooms' by their finders. But, as Heinsohn pointed out, it seems strange that the later Hazoreans kept tablets for over 1000yr as heirlooms from the MBA or LBA, yet were apparently incapable of producing any texts of their own. Also, a clay jar inscribed in 23C Old-Akkadian was found in the Hyksos layer c17C. Yes, you've guessed - this was explained as yet another boring old 'heirloom'. Heinsohn makes a plea to archaeologists to 'set textbooks aside and allow oneself the liberty of following reason and hard stratigraphical evidence'. The textbook schemes 'separate by enormous time spans what is found in parallel stratigraphical locations, exhibiting very similar material cultures.' Unfortunately for archaeologists, the writers of the textbooks are often the 'Guardians of the Dogma' who control the funding for archaeological research. As a result, an archaeologist brave enough to confront conventional thinking may quickly find himself both professionally discredited and out of a job.
Heinsohn has presented many well-researched papers exposing stratigraphical problems, and suggesting much lower chronologies for Near Eastern civilisations. His stratigraphy and stylistic-based chronologies and, more recently his explanation for the 'lost' Persian layer throughout the Persian Empire have generated much debate and some unanswered controversy among revisionists."



We have seen already that the constructors of the pyramid had at their disposal all the details needed from advanced calculus: radian measure, Taylor series expansion, natural logarithm, gamma function, Stirling series (complete with realistic error bounds), and much more:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1573684#msg1573684 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1573684#msg1573684)


The Gizeh pyramid is actually a large scale model of the smallest particle of quantum physics (the interior structure of a boson/antiboson):

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1570956#msg1570956 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1570956#msg1570956)



(https://image.ibb.co/cKKa0e/pir1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/cmNjtz/pir2.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/bJy2fe/pir3.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/fDTA0e/pir4.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/fR3omK/pir5.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/fkOztz/pir6.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/hjXaYz/pir7.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/gycnfe/pir8.jpg)

https://worldtracker.org/media/library/Supernatural/1985%20-%20Wars%20of%20Gods%20and%20Men%20(Book%203%20of%20Earth%20Chronicles)%20-%20Zecharia%20Sitchin.pdf (https://worldtracker.org/media/library/Supernatural/1985%20-%20Wars%20of%20Gods%20and%20Men%20(Book%203%20of%20Earth%20Chronicles)%20-%20Zecharia%20Sitchin.pdf)




Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 31, 2014, 01:35:05 AM
THE ALLAIS EFFECT II


CONFIRMATION OF THE ALLAIS EFFECT DURING THE 2003 SOLAR ECLIPSE:

http://www.acad.ro/sectii2002/proceedings/doc3_2004/03_Mihaila.pdf (http://www.acad.ro/sectii2002/proceedings/doc3_2004/03_Mihaila.pdf)

(it also shows that the effect was confirmed during the August 1999 solar eclipse)


CONFIRMATION OF THE ALLAIS EFFECT DURING THE SEPT. 2006 SOLAR ECLIPSE:

http://www.hessdalen.org/sse/program/Articol.pdf (http://www.hessdalen.org/sse/program/Articol.pdf)


CONFIRMATION OF THE ALLAIS EFFECT DURING THE 2008 SOLAR ECLIPSE:

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


Given the above, the authors consider that it is an inescapable conclusion from our experiments that after the end of the visible eclipse, as the Moon departed the angular vicinity of the Sun, 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.



We therefore are compelled to the opinion that some currently unknown physical influence was at work.


The Allais pendulum effect confirmed in an experiment performed in 1961:

http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf074/sf074a05.htm (http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf074/sf074a05.htm)



Observations of Correlated Behavior of Two Light Torsion Balances and a Paraconical Pendulum in Separate Locations during the Solar Eclipse of January 26th, 2009:


http://www.researchgate.net/publication/235701910_Observations_of_Correlated_Behavior_of_Two_Light_TorsionBalances_and_a_Paraconical_Pendulum_in_Separate_Locationsduring_the_Solar_Eclipse_of_January_26th_2009 (http://www.researchgate.net/publication/235701910_Observations_of_Correlated_Behavior_of_Two_Light_TorsionBalances_and_a_Paraconical_Pendulum_in_Separate_Locationsduring_the_Solar_Eclipse_of_January_26th_2009)

http://www.hindawi.com/journals/aa/2012/263818/ (http://www.hindawi.com/journals/aa/2012/263818/)



CONFIRMATION OF THE ALLAIS EFFECT DURING THE JULY 2010 SOLAR ECLIPSE:

http://www.diaspora-stiintifica.ro/diaspora2010/prezentari/wks18/Dimitrie%20Olenici%20-%20Anomalii%20in%20comportarea%20pendului%20Foucault%20in%20timpul%20unor%20evenimente%20astronomic.pdf (http://www.diaspora-stiintifica.ro/diaspora2010/prezentari/wks18/Dimitrie%20Olenici%20-%20Anomalii%20in%20comportarea%20pendului%20Foucault%20in%20timpul%20unor%20evenimente%20astronomic.pdf) (LAST PAGE)

More information on Professor D. Olenici's experiments here: http://www.allais.info/priorartdocs/olenici.htm (http://www.allais.info/priorartdocs/olenici.htm)



Precise Underground Observations of the Partial Solar Eclipse of 1 June 2011 Using a Foucault Pendulum and a Very Light Torsion Balance


http://www.researchgate.net/publication/235701885_Precise_Underground_Observations_of_the_Partial_Solar_Eclipse_of_1_June_2011_Using_a_Foucault_Pendulum_and_a_Very_Light_Torsion_Balance (http://www.researchgate.net/publication/235701885_Precise_Underground_Observations_of_the_Partial_Solar_Eclipse_of_1_June_2011_Using_a_Foucault_Pendulum_and_a_Very_Light_Torsion_Balance)

http://file.scirp.org/Html/3-4500094_26045.htm (http://file.scirp.org/Html/3-4500094_26045.htm)

http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=26045 (http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=26045)


Simultaneous observations of the solar eclipse on 06/01/2011 were carried out using a Foucault pendulum and a torsion balance. The instruments were installed in a salt mine, where the interference was minimal. Both instruments clearly reacted to the eclipse. We conclude that these reactions should not be considered as being gravitational effects.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 11, 2014, 02:09:21 AM
THE ALLAIS EFFECT III

Book of Enoch, chapter 71

In which gates also the moon rises and sets; and I beheld the conductors of the stars, among those who precede them; six gates were at the rising, and six at the setting of the sun.

All these respectively, one after another, are on a level; and numerous windows are on the right and on the left sides of those gates.

And in the fourth gate, through which the sun with the moon proceeds, in the first part of it,  there are twelve open windows; from which issues out a flame, when they are opened in their proper periods.



This is the very reason why the Allais effect can be observed only before, during and after a solar eclipse: the Black Sun's radiation which activates the laevorotatory subquarks can affect the telluric waves/strings for only a very short period of time (that is, it can pass through those openings in the Aether shield/barrier for a brief interval of time).


That many such bodies exist in the firmament is almost a matter of certainty; and that one such as that which
eclipses the moon exists at no great distance above the earth's surface, is a matter admitted by many of the leading astronomers of the day. In the report of the council of the Royal Astronomical Society, for June 1850, it is said:--

"We may well doubt whether that body which we call the moon is the only satellite of the earth."

In the report of the Academy of Sciences for October 12th, 1846, and again for August, 1847, the director of one of the French observatories gives a number of observations and calculations which have led him to conclude that,--

"There is at least one non-luminous body of considerable magnitude which is attached as a satellite to this earth."

Sir John Herschel admits that:--

"Invisible moons exist in the firmament."

Sir John Lubbock is of the same opinion, and gives rules and formulæ for calculating their distances, periods.

Lambert in his cosmological letters admits the existence of "dark cosmical bodies of great size."



There is an extraordinary way to prove why the solar eclipse does happen during the new moon phase: the 1662, March 20, total solar eclipse.


http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEsearch/SEsearchmap.php?Ecl=16620320 (http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEsearch/SEsearchmap.php?Ecl=16620320) (official astronomical information)

(http://moonblink.info/EclipseResources//Maps/1662-03-20.gif)


Believe it or not, there are no astronomical/historical records for this total solar eclipse, by far what should have been the most important astronomical event of the millenium, a chance to settle once and for all the Gregorian calendar reform controversy.

The Jesuits in India/China, F. Verbiest, J. Schall von Bell, G. Domenico Cassini (Jean Dominique Cassini), even the young N. Flamsteed fail to notice/record this most important of all the total solar eclipses.

We are told that G.D. Cassini published new tables of the sun, based on his observations at San Petronio in 1662: these observations are published in the Catalogue général des livres imprimés de la Bibliothèque Nationale, XXIV (Paris, 1905), cols. 678–682, or in the Table générale des maturès continuesdans l’Histoire et dans les Mémoires de l’Académic Royaledes Sciences, I–III (Paris, 1729–1734).

Let us remember the details concerning the D" parameter paradox:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg854193#msg854193 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg854193#msg854193)

http://books.google.ro/books?id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=history+science+or+fiction&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=pXroU_CyDKne4QTO5IDwCQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=history%20science%20or%20fiction&f=false (http://books.google.ro/books?id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=history+science+or+fiction&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=pXroU_CyDKne4QTO5IDwCQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=history%20science%20or%20fiction&f=false)

PG. 93-94


R. Newton is one of the most prestigious astrophysicists of the 20th century, here is the impecable analysis of the ancient astronomical records:

http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/atext/newton1.htm (http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/atext/newton1.htm)

http://hbar.phys.msu.ru/gorm/atext/newton2.htm (http://hbar.phys.msu.ru/gorm/atext/newton2.htm)


The D" parameter dating does show that each and every astronomical record attributed to the period 300 BC - 1200 AD has been falsified later in time.


http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/fomenko/dsec.htm (http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/fomenko/dsec.htm)


Since the falsification of Cassini's work did take place at the end of the 18th century/beginning of the 19th century, at that point in time it still was not possible to account for the D" parameter calculation during solar eclipses: any official records to be found in Paris, if they do indeed contain any information pertaining to the 1662 March 20 solar eclipse, will also reveal the controversy regarding the D" parameter (the second derivative of the Moon's elongation).



In the new radical chronology, we can explain why there are no astronomical/historical records for the 1662 March 20 total solar eclipse:

The Bundahishn (the most fantastic treatise in pre-Flood cosmology and astronomy) tells that at a certain time in the past, the Earth had 24 hour a day light, coming from two Suns (the visible Sun and our present Moon) and that there were no solar or lunar eclipses.

Then, the Black Sun and its companion (the heavenly body which does bring about now the lunar eclipse) caused the first solar and lunar eclipses, in a cosmic catastrophe which is still recalled in various legends around the world.

Aborigines of the New World: “the Sun and the moon had equal light in the past."


At the other end of the world the Japanese asserted the same: the Nihongi Chronicle says that in the past "the radiance of the moon was next to that of the sun in splendor."


Traditions of many peoples maintain that the Moon lost a large part of its light and became much dimmer than it had been in earlier ages.


The memory of a world without a moon lives in oral tradition among the Indians. The Indians of the Bogota highlands in the eastern Cordilleras of Colombia relate some of their tribal reminiscences to the time before there was a moon. "In the earliest times, when the moon was not yet in the heavens," say the tribesmen of Chibchas.


Traditions of diverse peoples offer corroborative testimony to the effect that in a very early age, but still in the memory of mankind, no moon accompanied the Earth.


At 12:00 o'clock on March 20, 1662, the year 1 in the new radical chronology timeline, this is what happened (as recorded in the Bundahishn):

"The evil spirit [Ahriman] went toward the luminaries." "He stood upon one-third of the inside of the sky, and he sprang,
like a snake, out of the sky down to the earth." It was the day of the vernal equinox. "He rushed in at noon," and "the sky was shattered and frightened." "Like a fly, he rushed out upon the whole creation, and he injured the world and made it dark at midday as though it were in dark night. And noxious creatures were diffused by him over the earth, biting and venomous, such as the snake, scorpion, frog, and lizard, so that not so much as the point of a needle remained free from noxious creatures."

EDIT

There is another work on the Bundahis which gives a different opinion as to the vernal equinox date:

http://www.iranchamber.com/calendar/articles/old_iranian_calendars1.php (http://www.iranchamber.com/calendar/articles/old_iranian_calendars1.php)

A. Olrik, in the classic work Ragnarok, says that the account given by the Eskimos is as follows: a darkening of the sun and of the moon precedes the end of a world age.



This is what the people all over the flat earth could see at that time (the drawing, of course, is not to scale):

(https://web.archive.org/web/20060210162648im_/http://geocities.com/jesuselcristos/sunmoon180.gif)





Those who have a problem with SIMULTANEOUS SOLAR/LUNAR ECLIPSES should read the following:


From America, Christopher Columbus also wrote to the king and the queen of Spain about the simultaneous eclipses:

This that I have said is what I have heard. What I know is that the year 94 I sailed in 24 degrees to the west in 9 hours, and it could not be mistake because there were eclipses: the sun was in Libra and the moon in Ariete.

http://www.mgar.net/docs/colon4.htm (http://www.mgar.net/docs/colon4.htm)

Esto que yo he dicho es lo que he oído. Lo que yo sé es que el ańo de 94 navegué en 24° al Poniente en término de nueve horas, y no pudo haber yerro porque hubo eclipses: el sol estaba en Libra y la luna en Ariete.


Now, "Columbus" is NOT describing a selenelion (both the Sun and the eclipsed Moon can be observed at the same time in the RE theory): he used the words "hubo eclipses" (were eclipses), there were a solar and a lunar eclipse occurring at the same time.






Solid Sun Surface theory:

http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/index.html (http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/index.html)

http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/model.htm (http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/model.htm)

http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/sunquakes.htm (http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/sunquakes.htm)

http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/moss.htm (http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/moss.htm)


solid core + plasma cloud, based only on official photographs given by Nasa:
www.omatumr.com/abstracts2005/The_Suns_Origin.pdf (http://www.omatumr.com/abstracts2005/The_Suns_Origin.pdf)

about the fact that O. Manuel's article includes the wrong hypotheses, (imploding supernova), on:
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch06/060124solar3.htm (http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch06/060124solar3.htm)

http://www.the-electric-universe.info/Scripts/5th_state_of_matter.html (http://www.the-electric-universe.info/Scripts/5th_state_of_matter.html) (more info)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 16, 2014, 12:54:30 AM
THE ALLAIS EFFECT IV


"Allais used the phrase “a brutal displacement” … to describe the “sudden, extraordinary backwards movement” of the pendulum his laboratory chief had seen (and carefully recorded!), even while not knowing its “mysterious” cause ... until later that same afternoon.

Here (below) is what those “anomalous eclipse motions” in Allias’ pendulum looked like; this graphic, adapted from Scientific American, depicts the mechanical arrangement of Allais’ unique paraconical pendulum (below – left).

The three vertical panels to its right illustrate the pendulum’s “highly anomalous motions” -- recorded during two partial solar eclipses to cross Allais’ Paris laboratory in the 1950’s (the first in 1954, the second in 1959); the phase of each eclipse that corresponded with these “anomalous motions,” is depicted in the last three vertical strips (far right)."


(http://www.enterprisemission.com/Eclipse-Allais-Pendulum-motions.jpg)


"This normal, downward-sloping trend is abruptly REVERSED!

From there, things rapidly got even more bizarre--

As the pendulum’s azimuth motion continues in an accelerating, COUNTER-clockwise direction … 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” (the central green line)] -- before abruptly reversing once more, accelerating again in a CLOCKWISE direction … before eventually “bottoming out” … parallel to the ORIGINAL “Foucault/Earth rotation” downward-sloping trend line!"


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].”

In other words, the pendulum motions Allais observed during his two eclipses – 1954 and 1959 -- were physically IMPOSSIBLE … according to all known “textbook physics!”

Allais’ ultimate “physical explanation” for the dramatic and totally anomalous paraconical pendulum behavior he observed, is summed up thus (below):

(http://www.enterprisemission.com/Eclipse-Allais-explanation.jpg)


The heart of all good science is “replication.”

By repeating his “anomalous 1954 observations” five years later, during another solar eclipse over Paris (in October, 1959), Allais fulfilled every essence of “good science” – even if the mainstream theoretical community was (and still is!) completely baffled by his remarkable, physically replicable ... meticulously empirical observations.

The overlaid graph (below), containing the paraconical pendulum data from BOTH sets of eclipse observations, proves the elemental point:


(http://www.enterprisemission.com/Allais-Comparison-54&59.jpg)


Dr. Erwin Saxl experiment (1970)

"Saxl's lab equipment for these long-running "gravitational experiments" consisted of a horizontally rotating weight -- termed a "torsion pendulum" (as opposed to the vertically mounted "paraconical" pendulums of Allias) -- which, instead of swinging "to and fro," rotated horizontally "left, then right" ... on a fine, pre-stressed, vertically suspended, specially-made ("Ni-span C") steel wire ... during each run of Saxl's rotational experiment.

The concept behind Saxl's device was simple:

The full period of "one clockwise/counter-clockwise partial rotation" of the vertically-suspended weight (below) -- through a small angle -- was optically measured from the pendulum's initial release point; the subsequent "left/right" rotational motion of the "bob" -- driven by the weight of the bob and the "twisting tension" in the wire from which the massive bob was hung -- determined the length of time (the "period") of one "torsion measurement" [an overall schematic, from his original patent, of Saxl's massive machine (to eliminate unwanted vibrations) is illustrated below]. "

(http://www.enterprisemission.com/Saxl-torsion-pendulum.jpg)

Saxl's torsion pendulum readings (below) -- taken before, during and after the actual March 7 eclipse -- are most revealing; as he and Allen later reported, in "1970 Solar Eclipse as 'Seen' by a Torsion Pendulum," published in the February 15, 1971 issue of the peer-reviewed scientific journal, "Physical Review D":

"... Significant variations in the recorded times [of one "left/right" oscillation] were observed during the course of the eclipse, as is shown by the full line in Figure 1. Each point in this figure is the result of five consecutive [electrically] grounded readings. The limited vertical lines indicate the average deviations of the five readings from the averaged circled values. The beginning of the eclipse at 12:31 p.m., its mid-point at 1:40 p.m. and its end at 2:58 p.m. are also indicated [by the three vertical yellow lines, marked "a" ... "b" ... and "c" ] on the graph. It is to be noted that these observed time intervals [of pendulum bob partial rotations/oscillations] level off at about 29.581 sec [for one full oscillation] after the end of the eclipse, whereas in the morning [4:00 AM EST] they had started at about 29.570 sec, an appreciable difference inasmuch as the ["full period"] times can be read to 0.00001 sec and are significant to about 0.0001 sec. The precision of the quartz-crystal-controlled oscillator in the Beckman EPUT (events per unit time) counter is one part in '10 to the exponent 8' ...."


(http://www.enterprisemission.com/Saxl-70-Graph-red&green.jpg)


"As with Allais' first startling observations of his eclipse, sixteen years earlier, Saxl and Allen also noted "peculiar waves" in the torsion pendulum's behavior ... seen well before the eclipse had even begun locally in the Boston area (above - bottom left) ....

They wrote:

"... the irregularities occurring before the start of the eclipse might be considered accidental, except that data taken two weeks later at the same hour of the day (dashed green curve - above) show corresponding humps -- an indication, by the way, that the observations are reproducible. These maxima and minima may indicate a kind of gravitational [sic] fine structure which is reproducible even when the positions of the sun and moon relative to the earth are quite different. This apparent wavelike structure has been observed over the course of many years at our Harvard laboratory. It cannot be predicted on the basis of classical gravitational theory nor has it been observed in the quasistationary experiments underlying this theory (e.g., spring-operated gravimeters, seismographs, and interferometer devices) ... [emphasis added] ...."

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) for even the 180-degree, "opposite" alignment of the sun and moon ... which, as previously noted, was also directly measured via the torsion pendulum (dasned green line - above) two weeks after the March 7 eclipse!

The two scientists then observed:

"... It is further to be noted that the greatest change [in the torsion pendulum oscillation period] occurs between the [local] onset of the eclipse and its midpoint [below - right]. This agrees qualitatively with Allais with a paraconical pendulum, where the change of azimuth increased substantially in the first half of the eclipse of 30 June 1954 [below - left]. Both these effects would seem to have a gravitational basis [sic] which cannot be explained by accepted classical theory [emphasis added] ....""



We know for sure the identity of two of the three heavenly bodies which take part in a solar eclipse: the Sun and the Earth.

However, the photographs taken in Antarctica by Fred Bruenjes, during the November 2003 total solar eclipse show us that the Moon COULD NOT POSSIBLY cause the solar eclipse.

(http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0805/antarcticeclipse_bruenjes_big.jpg)

(http://www.moonglow.net/eclipse/2003nov23/CRW_4623.jpg)(http://www.moonglow.net/eclipse/2003nov23/composite2.jpg)

(http://www.moonglow.net/eclipse/2003nov23/CRW_4632a.jpg)(http://www.moonglow.net/eclipse/2003nov23/3rdcontact_vidcap.jpg)

http://www.moonglow.net/eclipse/2003nov23/ (http://www.moonglow.net/eclipse/2003nov23/)


It is the radiation of the Black Sun which does cause the Allais/Saxl effect, by activating the laevorotatory subquarks (the antigravitational subquarks, as opposed to the dextrorotatory subquarks = terrestrial gravity) in order to produce the visible effects on the pendulum.

“… 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].”

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) for even the 180-degree, "opposite" alignment of the sun and moon ... which, as previously noted, was also directly measured via the torsion pendulum (dasned green line - above) two weeks after the March 7 eclipse!



Dr. Erwin Saxl, "1970 Solar Eclipse as 'Seen' by a Torsion Pendulum"

(https://i.ibb.co/cg8bBmN/saxl1-zps070aa4af.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/BtWcp0X/saxl2-zps0b759d09.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/fxWtLh5/saxl3-zpsaf4b573b.jpg)



EDIT

In recent years, a new kind of theory has emerged (TGD - Topological GeometroDynamics) which attempts to explain the Allais effect.

http://www.emergentmind.org/pitkanen_i.htm (http://www.emergentmind.org/pitkanen_i.htm)

However, the entire theory is based on the official results of the Michelson-Morley experiment (in fact, one of the main proponents of TGD, M. Pitkanen, states emphatically: "The famous Michelson-Morley experiment carried out for about century ago demonstrated that the velocity of light does not depend on the velocity of the source with respect to the receiver and killed the ether hypothesis.", and as a reference he uses the wikipedia article on the subject.

Moreover, TGD is based on the space-time continuum hypothesis and even multiple space-time sheets; furthermore, it only takes into consideration the MODIFIED/CENSORED Maxwell equations, and NOT the original set of equations which is based entirely on the ether/aether concept.


The complete demolition of the Michelson-Morley experiment (the greatest scientific catastrophe of the 19th century) and of the space-time continuum notion:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=59837.msg1545683#msg1545683 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=59837.msg1545683#msg1545683)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 25, 2014, 11:02:58 AM
THE ALLAIS EFFECT V


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

ABSTRACT

"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."


CONCLUSIONS

"Given the above, the authors consider that it is an inescapable conclusion from our experiments that after the end of the visible eclipse, as the Moon departed the angular vicinity of the Sun, 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. We therefore are compelled to the opinion that some currently unknown physical influence was at work."
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 18, 2014, 02:47:20 AM
POLARIS DHRUVA PRECESSION AND THE SIX GATES SACRED CUBIT MEASUREMENTS

Flat Earth Solar Precession Facts:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1598852#msg1598852 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1598852#msg1598852)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1601061#msg1601061 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1601061#msg1601061)


(from Worlds in Collision)

In Jaiminiya-Upanisad-Brahmana it is written that the center of the sky, or the point around which the firmament revolves, is in the Great Bear.

Hindu astronomical tablets composed by the Brahmans in the first half of the first millennium before the present era show a uniform deviation from the expected position of the stars at the time the observations were made (the precession of the equinoxes being taken into consideration). Modern scholars wondered at this, in their opinion inexplicable, error. In view of the geometrical methods employed by Hindu astronomy and its detailed method of calculation, a mistake in observation equal to even a fraction of a degree would be difficult to account for.

Could it be that the precession of equinoxes shifted the direction of the axis so that, three or four thousand years ago, the polar star was among the stars of the Great Bear?  No. If the earth moved all the time as it moves now, four thousand years ago the star nearest the North Pole must have been a-Draconis. The change was sudden; the Great Bear "came bowing down." In the Hindu sources it is said that the earth receded from its wonted place by 100 yojanas,10 a yojana being five to nine miles. Thus the displacement was estimated at from 500 to 900 miles. The origin of the polar star is told in many traditions all over the world. The Hindus of the Vedas worshiped the polar star, Dhrura, "the fixed" or "immovable." In the Puranas it is narrated how Dhrura became the polar star. The Lapps venerate the polar star and believe that if it should leave its place, the earth would be destroyed in a great conflagration.


The length of the longest day in a year depends on the latitude, or the distance from the pole, and is different at different places. Gnomons or sundials can be built with great precision. The Babylonian astronomical tablets of the eighth century provide exact data, according to which the longest day at Babylon was equal to 14 hours 24 minutes, whereas the modern determination is 14 hours 10 minutes and 54 seconds. "The difference between the two figures is too great to be attributable to refraction, which makes the sun still visible over the horizon after it has set. Thus, the greater length of the day corresponds to latitude 34° 57', and points to a place 2/2° further to the north; we stand therefore before a strange riddle [vor einem merkwiirdigen Ratsel]. One tries to decide: either the tablets of System II do not originate from Babylon [though referring to Babylon], or this city actually was situated far [farther] to the north, about 35° away from the equator."


Claudius Ptolemy, who, in his Almagest, made computation for contemporaneous and ancient Babylon, arrived at two different estimates of the longest day at that city, and consequently of the latitude at which it was located, one of his estimates being practically of the present-day value, the other coinciding with the figure of the ancient Babylonian tables, 14 hours 24 minutes. The Arabian medieval scholar Arzachel computed from ancient codices that in more ancient
times Babylon was situated at a latitude of 35° 0' from the equator, while in later times it was situated more to the south. Johannes Kepler drew attention to this calculation of Arzachel and to the fact that between ancient and modern Babylon there was a difference in latitude. Thus Ptolemy, and likewise Arzachel, computed that in historical times Babylon was situated at latitude 35°. Modern scholars arrived at identical results on the basis of ancient Babylonian
computations. "This much, therefore, is certain: our tables [System II, and I also], and the astronomers mentioned as well, point to a place about 35° north latitude. Is it possible that they were mistaken by 2° to 2M°? This is scarcely believable."



Gizeh Pyramid and the Axial Precession

http://www.starclock.org/bookdls/Proof.pdf (http://www.starclock.org/bookdls/Proof.pdf)


Ammizaduga Venus tables which show that the orbit followed by Venus in the past was markedly different from that observed in the present.


http://www.skepticfiles.org/neocat/ammi.htm (http://www.skepticfiles.org/neocat/ammi.htm)

Charles Ginenthal (Sagan and Velikovsky) has a great deal to
say about the Ammizaduga tablets, pp 281 - 284, quoting Livio C.
Stecchini's "The Velikovsky Affair":

     "The Venus tablets of Ammizaduga is the most striking document
     of early Babylonian astronomy.  These tablets, of which we
     possess several copies of different origin, report the dates
     of the helical rising and setting of the planet Venus during
     a period of 21 years...

     "Since the first effort at explanation of Archibald Henry
     Sayce in 1874, these figures have challenged the wit of a
     score of experts of astronomy and cuneiform philology.
     (Father Franz Xavier) Kugler (1862 - 1929), a recognized major
     authority on Babylonian and biblical astronomy, chronology and
     mythology, opposed the contention of those who claim that
     these documents must be dismissed as nonsense."  [because they
     do not conform to present orbital patterns for Venus]

 "Let me give some typical passages from the tablet:

 
     "In the month of Sivan, on the twenty fifth day, Ninsianna
     [that is, Venus] disappeared in the east; she remained absent
     from the sky for two months, six days; in the month Ulul on
     the 24'th day, Ninsianna appeared in the West - the heart of
     the land is happy. In the month Nisan on the 27'th day,
     Ninsianna disappeared in the West; she remained absent from
     the sky for seven days; in the month Ayar on the third day,
     Ninsianna appeared in the east - hostilities occur in the
     land, the harvest of the land is successful.


     "The first invisibility mentioned in these lines involves a
     disappearance in the east, an invisibility of two months, six
     days, and a reappearance in the west.  This seems to be a
     superior conjunction. The second invisibility involves a
     disappearance in the west, an invisibility of seven days, and
     a reappearance in the east.  This seems to be an inferior
     conjunction.  Most of the data in groups one and three on the
     tablet are of this form.  But the lengths and spacings of
     these invisibilities have a certain irregularity about them,
     and they do not conform to the manner in which Venus moves at
     present.

     "The data given in the second group on the tablet do have
     regularity - even too much regularity to be believable, - but
     they do not conform to the present state of affairs
     either.....


'How explain these observations of the ancient astronomers, modern astronomers and historians have asked. Were they written in a conditional form ("If Venus disappeared on the 11th of Sivan . . .") ? No, they were expressed categorically.
The observations were "inaccurately" registered, decided some authors. However, inaccuracy may account for a few days' difference but not for a difference of months.

The observations were "inaccurately" registered, decided some authors. However, inaccuracy may account for a few days' difference but not for a difference of months. "The invisibility of Venus at superior conjunction is given as 5 months 16 days instead of the correct difference of 2 months 6 days," noted the translators of the text, wonderingly."



If the tables are true, then both the attractive law of gravity AND Kepler's third law of motion are completely wrong; if they have been falsified, then we have another extraordinary proof of how the "ancient" history has been forged, confirming the findings of Dr. Gunnar Heinsohn:

http://www.specialtyinterests.net/heinsohn.html (http://www.specialtyinterests.net/heinsohn.html) (a step by step demonstration that the period of history 2100 BC - 600 BC has been invented/falsified)


Full arclength between the tropics: 6356.621 km

Since the orbit of the Sun is bounded/limited between the two tropics, we can see that the solar precession can last only for a very precise amount of time (see the TIME CALCULATION section): in that very year where the solar precession will exceed the arclength of single window, it would mean that at either the summer or winter solstice, the Sun would rise BEYOND either the Tropic of Cancer or the Tropic of Capricorn, which is impossible.


500 miles = 800 km

Since for each gate we have an assigned 1047 to 1060 km, we get:

6 x 63.566 km = 381.4 km

381.4 x 2 = 762.8 km (total possible figure for the  displacement of the Polaris as noted in the Puranas)

762.8 + 286.1 (displacement factor for the Gizeh Pyramid) = 1048.9 km

Therefore we have a third possibility for the solar flat earth axial precession: for each gate, we have a mobile section which now moves westward until it reaches the 286.1 km limit (that is, it can only move/travel for 381.4 km).



EDIT

381.48/1047.19 = 0.3642 = 1 - 1sacred cubit = 1 - 0.63566

286.1/10472. = 7.2732 - 7

0.2732 x  π  = (2.5 x   π) - 7

(0.2732 + 1)/2 = 1 sacred cubit

381.48/87.266 = 7.2842 x 0.6


Circumference of the flat earth = 104.7 x 381.4

1144.44/3 = 381.48


(again, from Worlds in Collision)


Why did the glaciers of the Ice Age cover the greater part of North America and Europe, while the north of Asia remained free? In America the plateau of ice stretched up to latitude 40° and even passed across this line; in Europe it reached latitude 50°; while northeastern Siberia, above the polar circle, even above latitude 75°, was not covered with this perennial ice.

If we look at the distribution of the ice sheet in the Northern Hemisphere, we see that a circle, with its center somewhere near the east shore of Greenland or in the strait between Greenland and Baffin Land near the present north magnetic pole, and a radius of about 3,600 kilometers, embraces the region of the ice sheet of the last glacial age. Northeastern Siberia is outside the circle; the valley of the Missouri down to 39° north latitude is within the circle. The eastern part of Alaska is included, but not its western part. Northwestern Europe is well within the circle; some distance behind the Ural Mountains, the line curves toward the north and crosses the present polar circle. Now we reflect: Was not the North Pole at some time in the past 20° or more distant from the point it now occupies—and closer to America? In like manner, the old South Pole would have been roughly the same 20° from the present pole.

Billions of tons of ice would have fallen on the polar regions, flash-freezing everything in little more than an instant.
 
This, at last, would explain the mystery of the mammoths found frozen where they stood. The mammoth, contrary to belief, was not a cold region animal, but one which lived in temperate grasslands.
 
Somehow those temperate regions were frozen in a moment. Some mammoths have been found frozen in the middle of eating! There you are munching away and the next thing you know you’re an ice lolly. If this ionized ice did rain down, the biggest build up would have been nearest to the magnetic poles because they would have had the most powerful attraction. Again, that is the case. The ice mass in the polar regions is greater at the poles than at the periphery and yet there is less snow and rain at the poles to create such a build up.


It is proposed that the carefully documented proofs of the catastrophe actually describe the end of the last Ice Age, which occurred some 3.500 years ago (and not 5.200 years ago) - [official chronology, of course; in the new radical chronology, the last Ice Age ended around 1740 AD, exactly the period discovered by Christopher Pfister, the great Swiss historian: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg998158#msg998158 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg998158#msg998158) ]


http://www.immanuelvelikovsky.com/mammoth.pdf (http://www.immanuelvelikovsky.com/mammoth.pdf) (THE EXTINCTION OF THE MAMMOTH) PAGES 382, 389-390

"The sudden extermination of mammoths was caused by a catastrophe
and probably resulted from asphyxiation or electrocution. The immediately
subsequent movement of the Siberian continent into the polar region is probably
responsible for the preservation of the corpses.

"It appears that the mammoths, along with other animals, were killed by
a tempest of gases accompanied by a spontaneous lack of oxygen caused by fires
raging high in the atmosphere. A few instances later their dying or dead bodies
were moving into the polar circle. In a few hours northeastern America moved
from the frigid zone of the polar circle into a moderate zone; northeastern Siberia
moved in the opposite direction from a moderate zone to the polar circle. The
present cold climate of northern Siberia started when the glacial age in Europe
and America came to a sudden end."

http://asis.com/users/stag/starchiv/transcriptions/ST110Velikovsky.html (http://asis.com/users/stag/starchiv/transcriptions/ST110Velikovsky.html) (exceptionally documented)

The sudden shift in the direction of the axis of Earth would have meant a slowing down of the velocity of the diurnal rotation of the Earth, and there would have no way for the Earth to regain the same velocity of the diurnal rotation as before, after Venus departed to a different orbit.

http://www.world-mysteries.com/sci_2.htm (http://www.world-mysteries.com/sci_2.htm) (superb documentation)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 10, 2014, 06:23:32 AM
NEW RADICAL CHRONOLOGY: THE ULTIMATE PROOF


Dionysius Exiguus, On Easter (translation from Latin to English)

(https://s18.postimg.org/rtodqfxux/dio2.jpg)
(https://s8.postimg.org/5p6td6wo5/dio1.jpg)

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/pearse/morefathers/files/dionysius_exiguus_easter_01.htm (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/pearse/morefathers/files/dionysius_exiguus_easter_01.htm)


Exiguus assigns the date of March 24, year 563 AD, for the Passover.


(https://s15.postimg.org/q1wqtvofv/dio3.jpg)

http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~gent0113/easter/easter_text4a.htm (http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~gent0113/easter/easter_text4a.htm)

However, in the year 563 AD, the Passover fell on March 25.


Dr. G.V. Nosovsky:

Ecclesiastical tradition, in accordance with the New Testament, tells that Christ was resurrected on March 25 on Sunday, on the next day after Passover, which, therefore, fell in that time on March 24 (Saturday). These are exactly the conditions used by Dionisius in his calculation of the date of the First Easter.

Dionysius supposedly conducted all these arguments and calculations working with the Easter Book. Having discovered that in the contemporary year 563 (the year 279 of the Diocletian era) the First Easter conditions held, he made a 532-year shift back (the duration of the great indiction, the shift after which the Easter Book entirely recurs) and got the date for the First Easter. But he did not know that Passover (the 14th moon) could not be shifted by 532 years (because of the inaccuracy of the Metonian cycle) and made a mistake: "Dionysius failed, though he did not know that. Indeed, if he really supposed that the First Easter fell on March 25, 31 A.D., then he made a rough mistake as he extrapolated the inaccurate Metonian cycle to 28 previous cycles (that is, for 532 years: 28 x 19 = 532). In fact, Nisan 15, the Passover festival, in the year 31 fell not on Saturday, March 24, but on Tuesday, March 27!". [335, pg. 243: I.A. Klimishin, Calendar and Chronology, in Russian, Nauka, Moscow, 1985]


That is a modern reconstruction of what Dionysius the Little did in the 6th century. It would be all right, but it presupposes that near Dionysius' date of 563 A.D. the 14th moon (Passover) really fell on March 24. It could be that Dionysius was not aware of the inaccuracy of the Metonian cycle and made the mistake shifting Passover from 563 to the same day of March in 31 A.D.

But he could not have been unaware of the date of Passover in the the almost contemporary year 563! To that end it was sufficient to apply the Metonian cycle to the coming 30-40 years; the inaccuracy of the Metonian cycle does not show up for such intervals.


But in 563 Passover (the 14th moon) fell not on March 24, but on Sunday, March 25, that is, it coincided with Easter as determined by the Easter Book.



As he specially worked with the calendar situation of almost contemporary year 563 and as he based his calculation of the era "since the birth of Christ" on this situation, Dionysius could not help seeing that, first, the calendar situation in the year 563 did not conform to the Gospels' description and, second, that the coincidence of Easter with Passover in 563 contradicts the essence of the determination of Easter the Easter Book is based on.



Therefore, it appears absolutely incredible that the calculations of the First Easter and of the Birth of Christ had been carried out in the 6th century on the basis of the calendar situation of the year 563. It was shown in Sec. 1 that the Easter Book, used by Dionysius, had not been compiled before the 8th century and had been canonized only at the end of the 9th century. Therefore, the calculations carried out by (or ascribed to) Dionysius the Little had not been carried out before the lOth century.

www.chronologia.org/en/es_analysis2/index.html (http://www.chronologia.org/en/es_analysis2/index.html) (pages 390 - 401 and 401 - 405)


Exiguus, the central  pillar of the official historical chronology, could not have made such a colossal mistake UNLESS his works/biography were forged/falsified at least five centuries later in time.

In the official chronology, Bede, Syncellus, Scaliger, Blastares, and Petavius base their calculations on Exiguus' methods and data.



(https://s15.postimg.org/fp895wfvf/sky19.jpg)
(https://s8.postimg.org/fmg8h0dsl/sky20o.jpg)
(https://s15.postimg.org/ci71hmqmz/sky21v.jpg)
(https://s1.postimg.org/4nhwrkzen/sky22.jpg)
(https://s3.postimg.org/dy3rh17oj/sky23.jpg)
(https://s1.postimg.org/z30wy31pr/sky24.jpg)
(https://s12.postimg.org/5qg47u5m5/sky25.jpg)
(https://s8.postimg.org/6jaau9ij9/sky26.jpg)
(https://s13.postimg.org/3vg7icdaf/sky27.jpg)
(https://s15.postimg.org/lntryjvzv/sky28.jpg)


Dr. G.V. Nosovksy verified the interval of 100 BC - 1700 AD, using the exact conditions stipulated by Exiguus, and found that ONLY the date of 1095 AD corresponds exactly.


The complete demonstration that the Council of Nicaea could not have taken place before the year 876-877 AD:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=52083.0#.VGDISjSsXJcA (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=52083.0#.VGDISjSsXJcA)


A briefer version:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488947#msg1488947 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488947#msg1488947)


Since Exiguus' work was obviously falsified by persons who had no knowledge of Gauss' Easter formulas, it means that the entire edifice of modern historical chronology comes crashing down: we have already seen the proofs that place Pompeii and Herculaneum as cities in full activity in the 18th century.


Summary of other new radical chronology proofs:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1619875#msg1619875 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1619875#msg1619875)








Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 11, 2014, 07:56:31 AM
NEW RADICAL CHRONOLOGY: THE ULTIMATE PROOF II

In the official chronology of history we find one of the most perplexing mysteries.

Kepler advocated the adoption of the reformed calendar in a work entitled "Dialogue on the Gregorian Calendar" published in 1612.

http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1920PA.....28...18L/0000021.000.html (http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1920PA.....28...18L/0000021.000.html)

In 1613, the Emperor Matthias asked Kepler to attend the Reichstag at Regensburg to counsel on the issue of adopting the Gregorian calendar reform in Germany. In Germany, the Protestant princes had refused to accept the calendar on confessional grounds. Kepler believed that the new calendar was sufficiently exact to satisfy all needs for many centuries. Thus, he proposed that the Emperor issue a general imperial decree to implement the calendar.


Moreover, the arch enemy of the Vatican, Galileo Galilei, also agrees with the changes instituted by the Gregorian calendar.

Clavius was the senior mathematician on the commission for the reform of the calendar that led, in 1582, to the institution of the Gregorian calendar.
 
From his university days, Galileo was familiar with Clavius's books, and he visited the famous man during his first trip to Rome in 1587. After that they corresponded from time to time about mathematical problems, and Clavius sent Galileo copies of his books as they appeared.


http://books.google.ro/books?id=o6-8BAAAQBAJ&pg=PA24&lpg=PA24&dq=galileo+galilei+gregorian+calendar&source=bl&ots=ORPJHVLJB5&sig=MMjwonnPkIE6XYnFrcMCS3Yow20&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=UStiVO3mFY2zaczhgMAN&ved=0CB4Q6AEwADgK#v=onepage&q=galileo%20galilei%20gregorian%20calendar&f=false (http://books.google.ro/books?id=o6-8BAAAQBAJ&pg=PA24&lpg=PA24&dq=galileo+galilei+gregorian+calendar&source=bl&ots=ORPJHVLJB5&sig=MMjwonnPkIE6XYnFrcMCS3Yow20&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=UStiVO3mFY2zaczhgMAN&ved=0CB4Q6AEwADgK#v=onepage&q=galileo%20galilei%20gregorian%20calendar&f=false)


Thesaurus Temporum, published by Joseph Scaliger, which was based almost entirely on the calculations of Dionysius Exiguus and Matthew Blastares, received criticism from Johannes Kepler.


However, it is absolutely impossible (and amazing at the same time) for Johannes Kepler to have agreed with the Gregorian calendar reform, given the fact that he was familiar with the popular work attributed to Matthew Blastares.

It would have been perfectly simple for Kepler and Galilei to show the humongous errors inherent in the Gregorian calendar reform, to publicize these results, and thus have a very solid base on which to express their opinions regarding the planetary system.

All Kepler had to do is to refer each and every historian/astronomer/researcher of his time to the familiar quote signed Matthew Blastares:


"By about AD 1330, the medieval scholar Matthew Vlastar wrote the following about how to determine the anniversary of Christ's resurrection in the Collection of Rules of the Holy Fathers of the Church:

The rule on Easter has two restrictions: not to celebrate together with the Israelites and to celebrate after the spring equinox. Two more were added by necessity: to have the festival after the very first full Moon after the equinox and not on any day but on the first Sunday after the full Moon. All the restrictions except the last one have been kept firmly until now, but now we often change for a later Sunday. We always count two days after the Passover [full Moon] and then turn to the following Sunday. This happened not by ignorance or inability of the Church fathers who confirmed the rules, but because of the lunar motion.

In Vlastar's time, the last condition of Easter was violated: if the first Sunday took place within two days after the full moon, the celebration of Easter was postponed until the next weekend. This change was necessary because of the difference between the real full moon and the one computed in the Easter Book. The error, of which Vlastar knew, is twenty-four hours in 304 years.

Therefore the Easter Book must have been written around AD 722. Had Vlastar been aware of the Easter Book's AD 325 canonization, he would have noticed the three-day gap that had accumulated between the dates of the real and the computed full moon in more than 1,000 years."

(https://s21.postimg.org/yo8i6jqjb/sky10.jpg)


And yet, to the amazement and uncomprehending stupor of modern historians, no such thing happened.

Not only Kepler or Galilei, but every reader of Scaliger's works could have brought forward the quote from Blastares, and reveal the errors made by Luigi Lilio (the Gregorian reform of the calendar was carried out on the basis of the project of the
Italian "physician and mathematician" Luigi Lilio).

As we have seen, in the year 1582, the winter solstice would have arrived on December 16, not at all on December 11:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488947#msg1488947 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488947#msg1488947)


Newton agrees with the date of December 11, 1582 as well; moreover, Britain and the British Empire adopted the Gregorian calendar in 1752 (official chronology).

http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1920PA.....28...18L/0000024.000.html (http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1920PA.....28...18L/0000024.000.html)

No less a figure than Isaac Newton (1642-1727) also took an active interest in the field, publishing "The Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms Amended", a substantial monograph disputing several key conclusions in Scaliger's work.

But Newton couldn't possibly have missed the work done by Blastares, and the quote attributed to the same author.


Benjamin Franklin told his readers of the Poor Richard's Almanac to enjoy the extra 11 days in bed and that losing 11 days did not worry him--after all, Europe had managed since 1582.

http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1920PA.....28...18L/0000024.000.html (http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1920PA.....28...18L/0000024.000.html)

But in 1752 AD, the error/discrepancy between the false Gregorian calendar reform and the real calendar would have amounted to a full 3 (three) days difference, a thing that could not have been missed by any researcher.



In 1806, Napoleon, we are told, ordered a return to the Gregorian calendar.

In accordance with the Concordat with Pope Pius VII (1742-1823), signed July 15, 1801, a decree put an end to the revolutionary calendar. On 17 Brumaire Year 14 (November 8, 1805) the Minister of Finance announced the January 1, 1806, return to the Gregorian calendar which had been outlawed in October 1793.

But in 1806 AD, the error would have been at least a full 2 (two) days, and no one could have missed this huge discrepancy.

The 10 day cumulative error in the Vernal Equinox date since the Council of Nicaea until the year 1582 AD is due just to the reform of the Julian calendar: if we add the axial precession argument, then  the cumulative errors would have added to even more than 10 days, because of the reverse precessional movement. No RE axial precession means that the Earth did not ever orbit around the Sun, as we have been led to believe. And it means that the entire chronology of the official history has been forged at least after 1750 AD.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 13, 2014, 06:22:20 AM
141.34725 = TRUE HEIGHT OF THE GIZEH PYRAMID (14.134725 = VALUE OF THE FIRST ZERO OF RIEMANN'S ZETA FUNCTION)


Up until 1985, it was estimated that the height of the pyramid frustum at Gizeh is 140.3 to 140.7 meters.

But, nothing seemed to fit in with the other measurements involving the sacred cubit:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1573684#msg1573684 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1573684#msg1573684) (part I)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1573998#msg1573998 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1573998#msg1573998) (part II)


Sacred cubit structure of the zeros of the Zeta function:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1584725#msg1584725 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1584725#msg1584725)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1589204#msg1589204 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1589204#msg1589204)


In 1985, The Wars of Gods and Men was published with a new, crucial piece of information:

http://eindtijdinbeeld.nl/EiB-Bibliotheek/Boeken/Sitchin%20-%20The%20Wars%20of%20Gods%20and%20Men%20(3rd%20Book%20of%20Earth%20Chronicles)%20(2002).pdf (http://eindtijdinbeeld.nl/EiB-Bibliotheek/Boeken/Sitchin%20-%20The%20Wars%20of%20Gods%20and%20Men%20(3rd%20Book%20of%20Earth%20Chronicles)%20(2002).pdf) (chapter 10)


Before 1985, it was evaluated that the height of the masonry base was 4 meters.

Using the most precise measurements (see figure below), that height increases to some 4.86 meters, therefore, a very important difference.

(https://s12.postimg.org/viaku97pp/pyr1.jpg)

http://emhotep.net/2011/01/03/locations/lower-egypt/giza-plateau-lower-egypt/hemienu-to-houdin-phase-two-part-a%E2%80%94the-king%E2%80%99s-chamber-of-the-great-pyramid/ (http://emhotep.net/2011/01/03/locations/lower-egypt/giza-plateau-lower-egypt/hemienu-to-houdin-phase-two-part-a%E2%80%94the-king%E2%80%99s-chamber-of-the-great-pyramid/) (43 - 38.1496 = 4.8604 meters)


This is the real height of the Gizeh pyramid frustum: 141.134725 meters.

Now, everything fits in perfectly.


141.34725/π = 45

141.34725 - 136.1 = length of the queen's chamber = length of the king's chamber


total height of the pyramid (frustum + missing apex) = 141.34725 + 7.2738 = 148.62105 meters

(where 7.2738 = 286.1 sacred inches)

286.1 - 148.62105 = 1/0.00727384 = 1/(7.2738 x 10-3)


Speed of sound/24 = 14.134725

4.5 x 14.134725 = 100 sacred cubits

14.134725 x 0.114472 = PHI

(11.444 = 4 x 2.861, where 286.1 is the displacement factor)

14.134725 x 180 = 100,000 sacred inches

More calculations re: 14.134725 here: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1589204#msg1589204 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1589204#msg1589204)


14.134725 - 4π = 1.568354 (value of the width of the first section from the queen chamber niche)

1.568354 x 68.05 = 106.726

Let us now find further sacred cubit equations featuring 14.134725

Ln 14.134725 = 14.134725/5.3366


14.134725 – 21/2 = 12.7205 = 20sc

14.134725 - 5π = -1/sc

26.666 x 4 = 106.666

106.726sc = 14.134725 + 5.332


Therefore, the builders of the Gizeh Pyramid KNEW the value of the first zero of Riemann's Zeta function.

However, in order to calculate this value, we need the Riemann-Siegel formula, considered to be the top achievement in mathematics of the 19th century and one of the most complex formulas ever (its derivation by G.F. Riemann is considered to be in the same category with J. Moser's proof of the Twist Theorem, or the Ramanujan-Hardy asymptotic expansion for the partitions of a natural number).

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Riemann-SiegelFormula.html (http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Riemann-SiegelFormula.html)

https://michaelberryphysics.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/berry265.pdf (https://michaelberryphysics.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/berry265.pdf)

http://www.gauge-institute.org/riemann/RiemannZetaFunction.pdf (http://www.gauge-institute.org/riemann/RiemannZetaFunction.pdf)

(http://web.mit.edu/kenta/www/six/parallel/other-files/siegel1.png)


Gizeh Pyramid was NOT built by the Egyptian Pharaohs:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1625605#msg1625605 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1625605#msg1625605)


Origin of Calculus:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1574605#msg1574605 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1574605#msg1574605)


EDIT

The actual dimension of the height of the masonry base may be as high as 5.23 meters (which would match the length of the king's chamber figure)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 15, 2014, 02:01:00 AM
MAXWELL'S ORIGINAL ETHER EQUATIONS AND MODERN SCIENCE


http://www.cheniere.org/correspondence/030706.htm (http://www.cheniere.org/correspondence/030706.htm)

(step by step demonstration how the set of Maxwell's original equations was censored/modified)

The much-reduced Heaviside-Gibbs-Hertz limited version of Maxwell's theory, with the added Lorentz symmetrization and arbitrary discarding of all asymmetrical Maxwellian systems, has since been taught as "Maxwell's theory". It is Heaviside's equations and Heaviside's notations, as further limited by Lorentz.

In 1892 Lorentz added the coup de grace to even this much-reduced Heaviside vector theory with simple equations and much fewer potentials. Lorentz arbitrarily symmetrized the equations to make them simpler yet, so that closed algebraic solutions could usually be found and one would not have to use numerical methods so widely. He did it merely to simplify the equations to NEW equations having much easier solutions! That he changed the potentials was considered of no consequence, so long as no NET translation force field emerged (even though two new force fields were arbitrarily introduced).




http://www.cheniere.org/articles/Deliberate%20Discard.htm (http://www.cheniere.org/articles/Deliberate%20Discard.htm)

(superb documentation on the reasons why Maxwell's original set of equations was deliberately eliminated from textbooks)


(https://image.ibb.co/d6p7rJ/mxl1_zps4aef76b3.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/nmM3WJ/mxl2_zpsa4365261.jpg)

Here is the transcript from episode 10 (The electric boy) from the Cosmos series, hosted by NdG Tyson:

http://www.springfieldspringfield.co.uk/view_episode_scripts.php?tv-show=cosmos-a-spacetime-odyssey-2014&episode=s01e10 (http://www.springfieldspringfield.co.uk/view_episode_scripts.php?tv-show=cosmos-a-spacetime-odyssey-2014&episode=s01e10)

When Maxwell translated Faraday's experimental observation on electromagnetic fields into equations, he discovered an asymmetry.


In the video itself, of episode 10, The Electric Boy, at 37:37, Tyson shows this:

(http://www.irregularwebcomic.net/annotations/annot1420a.gif)


In 1881 Heaviside replaced the electromagnetic potential field by force fields as the centerpiece of electromagnetic theory. According to him, the electromagnetic potential field was arbitrary and needed to be "assassinated" (sic).


Today, the tremendously crippled Maxwell-Heaviside equations --- symmetrized by Lorentz --- are taught in all our universities in the electrical engineering (EE) department. Note that the EE professors still dutifully symmetrize the equations, following Lorentz, and thus they continue to arbitrarily discard all asymmetrical Maxwellian systems.


Tyson has no idea whatsoever that the four equations shown by him, in fact, DO NOT belong to Maxwell at all.

Had he done the proper research, he would have discovered the original set of equations, Maxwell's ether equations, as published in the work On Lines of Force.


Einstein, 1905:

"The principle of the constancy of the velocity of light is of course contained in Maxwell's equations”

THEREFORE, EINSTEIN NEVER BOTHERED TO DO SOME BASIC RESEARCH REGARDING MAXWELL'S EQUATIONS. THE ORIGINAL SET OF MAXWELL'S EQUATIONS STATE VERY CLEARLY:

THE SPEED OF LIGHT IS VARIABLE, AND NOT CONSTANT.

The Speed of Light

http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Mechanics%20/%20Electrodynamics/Download/5373 (http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Mechanics%20/%20Electrodynamics/Download/5373)



HERE IS THE ORIGINAL SET OF JAMES CLERK MAXWELL'S EQUATIONS: THE EXISTENCE OF ETHER, AETHER AND THE VARIABILITY OF THE SPEED OF LIGHT:

(https://image.ibb.co/f1Coyy/88.jpg)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1608815#msg1608815 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1608815#msg1608815) (more information on the set of original Maxwell equations)


http://web.archive.org/web/20071006083222/http://www.wbabin.net/science/tombe4.pdf (http://web.archive.org/web/20071006083222/http://www.wbabin.net/science/tombe4.pdf)
(also includes the appendix called Maxwell's Minor Errors discussing the wrong minus sign in equation D)

E = vXB − ∂Α/dt +gradψ

The most important scientific paper ever published: ON PHYSICAL LINES OF FORCE, by JAMES CLERK MAXWELL - the original set of ether equations, which are almost unknown to modern physics.

http://vacuum-physics.com/Maxwell/maxwell_oplf.pdf (http://vacuum-physics.com/Maxwell/maxwell_oplf.pdf)


Dr. Frederick Tombe has undertaken a painstaking research in order to discover how the original Maxwell equations have been modified into their currently known form, and why it was done.

http://www.nanotechinnov.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Maxwell-Original-Equations.pdf (http://www.nanotechinnov.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Maxwell-Original-Equations.pdf)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 19, 2014, 06:33:32 AM
DATING METHODS OF THE PAST: ISOTOPES VS. COMETS

Dr. Anatoly Fomenko:

We have cross-checked archaeological, astronomical, dendro-chronological, paleo-graphical and radiocarbon methods of dating of ancient sources and artefacts. We found them ALL to be non-independent, non-exact, statistically implausible, contradictory and inevitably viciously circular because they are based or calibrated on the same consensual chronology.

Unbelievable as it may seem, there is not a single piece of firm written evidence or artefact that could be reliably and independently dated earlier than the XI century. Classical history is firmly based on copies made in the XV-XVII centuries of 'unfortunately lost' originals.

It just happens that there is no valid irrefutable scientific proof that ALL ‘ancient’ artefacts are much older than 1000 years contrary to the self fulfilling radiocarbon dating obligingly rubber-stamped by radiocarbon labs to the prescriptions of the mainstream historians. How heartbreaking is that the oldest ORIGINAL written documents that can be reliably, irrefutably and unambiguously dated belong only to the 11th century! All dirty and worn out originals have somehow disappeared in the Very Dark Ages, as illiterate but tidy monks kept only brand new copies. Better yet, most of the very old original document of 11th-13th tell very peculiar stories completely out of line with the consensual history.

Radio-carbon method:

Very sorry about c14 radiocarbon dating methods, the poor Nobel Libby must be turning in his grave after ‘calibration’ of his method (pity that!). By ‘calibration’ on statistically non-significant number of wood samples from Egypt with ARBITRARELY suggested alleged age of 3100 B.C. the Arizona university radiocarbon team simply smuggled the consensual chronology into c14 method of dating, turning it into a sheer fallacy.

The c14 radiocarbon dating procedure runs as follows: archaeologist sends an artefact to a radiocarbon dating laboratory with his idea of the age of the object to get a to ‘scientific’ rubber-stamp. Laboratory gladly complies and makes required radio dating, confirming the date suggested by archaeologist. Everybody’s happy: lab makes good money by making an expensive test, archaeologist by reaping the laurels for his earth shattering discovery. The in-built low precision (because of sensitivity) of this method allows cooking scientifically looking results desired by the customer archaeologist. General public doesn’t realize that it was duped again.

Just try to submit to any c14 lab a sample of organic matter and ask them to date it. The lab will ask your idea of the age of the sample, then it fiddles with the lots of knobs (‘fine-tuning’) and gives you the result as you’ve ‘expected’. With c14 dating method being so mind bogglingly precise C14 labs decline making 'black box' test of any kind absolutely. Nah, they assert that because their method is SO very sensitive they must have maximum information about the sample. This much touted method often produces reliable dating of objects of organic origin with exactitude (mistakes that) of up to plus minus 1500 years, therefore it is too crude for dating of historical events in the 3000 years timeframe!

History: Fiction or Science? volume I:

http://books.google.ro/books?id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=history+science+or+fiction&cd=2&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=history%20science%20or%20fiction&f=false (http://books.google.ro/books?id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=history+science+or+fiction&cd=2&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=history%20science%20or%20fiction&f=false)

chapter 1, sections 15 and 16

Isotopic dating: science or fiction?

https://web.archive.org/web/20080514235945/http://www.atenizo.org/evolution-c14-kar.htm (https://web.archive.org/web/20080514235945/http://www.atenizo.org/evolution-c14-kar.htm)


Thermochronology/geochemical analysis errors:

http://tasc-creationscience.org/other/plaisted/www.cs.unc.edu/_plaisted/ce/dating2.html (http://tasc-creationscience.org/other/plaisted/www.cs.unc.edu/_plaisted/ce/dating2.html)

https://answersingenesis.org/geology/radiometric-dating/u-th-pb-dating-an-example-of-false-isochrons/ (https://answersingenesis.org/geology/radiometric-dating/u-th-pb-dating-an-example-of-false-isochrons/)

https://web.archive.org/web/20110808123827/http://www.gennet.org/facts/metro14.html (https://web.archive.org/web/20110808123827/http://www.gennet.org/facts/metro14.html)

http://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/dating.html (http://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/dating.html) (superb documentation)

http://web.archive.org/web/20110301201543/http://www.ridgecrest.ca.us/~do_while/sage/v8i9f.htm (http://web.archive.org/web/20110301201543/http://www.ridgecrest.ca.us/~do_while/sage/v8i9f.htm)

http://itotd.com/articles/349/carbon-dating/ (http://itotd.com/articles/349/carbon-dating/)


http://evolutionfacts.com/Ev-V1/1evlch07a.htm (http://evolutionfacts.com/Ev-V1/1evlch07a.htm)
http://evolutionfacts.com/Ev-V1/1evlch07b.htm (http://evolutionfacts.com/Ev-V1/1evlch07b.htm)
http://evolutionfacts.com/Appendix/a07.htm (http://evolutionfacts.com/Appendix/a07.htm)
(must read)

http://www.parentcompany.com/great_dinosaur_mistake/tgdm9.htm (http://www.parentcompany.com/great_dinosaur_mistake/tgdm9.htm)


Spectroscopy methods errors:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,58190.msg1489346.html#msg1489346 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,58190.msg1489346.html#msg1489346)

http://www.ldolphin.org/univ-age.html (http://www.ldolphin.org/univ-age.html)


Ice core dating errors:

http://www.detectingdesign.com/ancientice.html (http://www.detectingdesign.com/ancientice.html)


Collapsing Tests of Time:

http://grazian-archive.com/quantavolution/vol_03/chaos_creation_03.htm (http://grazian-archive.com/quantavolution/vol_03/chaos_creation_03.htm)


The methods described above cannot be used to date anything.


The only accurate and direct method is: comets as luminous bodes MUST have limited lives.

When passing close to the sun, comets emit tails. It is assumed that the material of the tail does not return to the comet's head but is dispersed in space; consequently, the comets as luminous bodies must have a limited life. If Halley's comet has pursued its present orbit since late pre-Cambrian times, it must "have grown and lost eight million tails, which seems improbable." If comets are wasted, their number in the solar system must permanently diminish, and no comet of short period could have preserved its tail since geological times.

But as there are many luminous comets of short period, they must have been produced or acquired at some time when other members of the system, the planets and the satellites, were already in their places.

(from Worlds in Collision)


The age of the Solar System must be less than the estimated upper age of comets.

From the work Saturnian Comets:

The usual explanation for the Saturnian and Jovian families of comets is that they had originally traveled on extremely elongated or even parabolic orbits and, passing close to one of the large planets, were changed into short-period comets, traveling on ellipses—it is usual to say that they were “captured.” However, the Russian astronomer K. Vshekhsviatsky of the Kiev Observatory, one of the leading authorities on comets, has brought strong arguments to show that the comets of the solar system are very youthful bodies—only a few thousand years old—and that they originated in explosions from the planets, especially from the major planets Saturn and Jupiter or their moons. By comparing the observed luminosity of the periodic comets on their subsequent returns, he found it failing and their masses rapidly diminishing by loss of matter to the space through which they travel; the head of the comet emits tails on each passage close to the sun and then dissipates the matter of the tails without recovery. Thus Vshekhsviatsky concluded that comets of short duration originated in the solar system, were not captured from outside of that system—a point to which the majority of astronomers still adhere—and that they came into existence by explosion from Jupiter and Saturn, and to a smaller extent by explosion from the smaller planets, like Venus and Mars.


http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1962PASP...74..106V/0000107.000.html (http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1962PASP...74..106V/0000107.000.html)]1962PASP...74..106V


K. Vshekhsviatsky was the leading expert in comet astrophysics as his works clearly demonstrate this.

Two months after the discovery of the ring around Jupiter, the Soviet Union claimed joint credit for the discovery, contending that Vsekhsviatskii had predicted the ring’s existence as early as 1960 in a journal called Izvestia of the Armenian Academy of Sciences. The passage from the relevant paper is as follows:

‘The existence of active ejection processes in the Jupiter system, demonstrated by comet astronomy, gives grounds for assuming that Jupiter is encircled by comet and meteorite material in the form of a ring similar to the ring of Saturn.’


PAGE 107: Halley's comet, for example, could not exist as a comet for more than 120 revolutions.

120 x 75 = 9000 years


Halley's Comet, official astrophysics information

15 kilometers long, 8 kilometers wide and perhaps 8 kilometers thick.

Based strictly on this data, we have the following results:

Comet Halley, as well as other comets, may have only been orbiting in its present orbit for only a few thousand years.

Comet Halley may have been in its current orbit for as little as 3,000 years (http://creation.com/comets-and-the-age-of-the-solar-system (http://creation.com/comets-and-the-age-of-the-solar-system) )



That is, the age of the entire solar system cannot be more than 2,500-3,000 years old - an extraordinary agreement with the results of the facts that can be deduced from the new chronology subject.


However, as we have seen, the size of the Sun/Moon/planets/comets in the fixed flat earth context (see the proofs using the Solar ISS transit videos/Antarctica photographs) is much smaller than in the assumed heliocentric framework.

In the full fixed flat earth context, a comet has only some 20-30 meters in diameter: thus the dissipation rate of the material in a comet's tail (Halley's comet for example) does prove that Halley's comet has pursued its present orbit for only a few hundred years (another proof for the new radical chronology theory).


http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1567565#msg1567565 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1567565#msg1567565)


ELECTRIC COMET THEORY:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1619877#msg1619877



https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1546493#msg1546493 (four consecutive messages)



See also the Faint Young Sun Paradox:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1707290#msg1707290
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 21, 2014, 06:54:24 AM
LUTHER'S BILL OF RIGHTS

Recently, quite a few papers have appeared questioning the official history of the American Revolution:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/americas-history-and-the-constitutional-hoax/5371668 (http://www.globalresearch.ca/americas-history-and-the-constitutional-hoax/5371668) (superb documentation)

For centuries, the United States Constitution has been held up to the world as one of civilization’s greatest achievements. It has been exalted and extolled at home and abroad, emulated and imitated by countries in both hemispheres. In some broad sense, it has provided a foundation for our belief in man’s perfectibility and the possibility of government that serves the common good.

Is it conceivable that this document so revered was conceived in perfidy and that its primary purpose was the installation of a powerful moneyed oligarchy, that it was neither created by “We the people,” nor designed to serve them? As historian Woody Holton observes, “It is an unsettling but inescapable fact that several of the principal authors of the U.S. Constitution, which has served as a model for representative government all over the world, would never had made it to Philadelphia if their constituents had known their real intentions” (Holton, 181). What were their real intentions? Let’s go back to the beginning and find out.



http://cyberjournal.org/authors/fresia/ (http://cyberjournal.org/authors/fresia/)

http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/v1/index166.htm (http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/v1/index166.htm)


Many other authors/historians have had a hard time understanding how slave owners could have had the audacity to concoct a Bill of Rights; Jefferson himself, while in Paris (official chronology), became the laughing stock of Europe as he could not answer some very interesting and disturbing questions addressed to him also by European philosophers:

http://consortiumnews.com/2014/07/04/thomas-jefferson-americas-founding-sociopath/ (http://consortiumnews.com/2014/07/04/thomas-jefferson-americas-founding-sociopath/)


And, of course, we have the astronomical proof that Franklin is a historical figure invented decades later in time:

Benjamin Franklin told his readers of the Poor Richard's Almanac to enjoy the extra 11 days in bed and that losing 11 days did not worry him--after all, Europe had managed since 1582.

http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1920PA.....28...18L/0000024.000.html (http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1920PA.....28...18L/0000024.000.html)

But in 1752 AD, the error/discrepancy between the false Gregorian calendar reform and the real calendar would have amounted to a full 3 (three) days difference, a thing that could not have been missed by any researcher.


The best account of the secret history of the American Revolution is given in chapter 9 of The Biggest Secret, here is a brief excerpt:

"The situation came to a head with the passing of the Tea Act which allowed that Brotherhood operation, the British East India Company, to unload its surplus tea in the colonies without paying duty. This clearly destroyed the market for everyone else. Official history to this day says that a group of Mohawk Indians boarded a ship called the Dartmouth in Boston Harbour and threw its cargo of tea into the water. This was dubbed: the Boston Tea Party. In fact the ‘rebels’ were not Mohawk Indians, but members of the St Andrew’s Freemasons Lodge in Boston dressed up as Indians.
 
They were led by their junior warden, Paul Revere. This event could not have happened without support from the British-controlled Colonial Militia who had been detailed to guard the Dartmouth. The captain of one detachment, Edward Proctor, was a member of... the St Andrew’s Lodge. This lodge was the first in the world to confer a new Freemasonic degree called the Knights Templar Degree. The Grand Master, Joseph Warren, was appointed Grand Master of the whole of North America by the Grand Lodge of Scotland.
 
Other members of the St Andrew’s Lodge included John Hancock. He would be a leader of the so-called Continental Congress who signed the Declaration of Independence. At least three members of the St Andrew’s Lodge, including Paul Revere, were members of the ‘loyal nine’, the inner elite of an important revolutionary group called the Sons of Liberty. It was this group which organized the Boston Tea Party."

Why would the masons stage such an elaborate act, the details of which were known or could have been known to any serious researcher/historian in the field?


Perhaps the new radical chronology will offer a new perspective on the whole matter.


As explained earlier, Edwin Johnson was able to prove, back in 1894, that no one in Europe knew anything about the Gospels or the Pauline Epistles before 1500 AD.

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm (http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm)

Moreover, he was able to identify three major groups which invented the New Testament (each group infusing its own agenda in the Gospels/Epistles).

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54460019 (http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54460019)

D'Aubigny observes that "the monastic orders were perhaps more in favor of the Reformation than against it. This observation applies more particularly to the Augustinian order." I agree, and explain it by reference to the temperament and habits of the Northern peoples that influenced and forcefully compelled the monks. The Northern peoples and the monks led a popular movement of revolt against the tyranny of the Pope.  In rejecting the vow of celibacy, these monks also followed the current of popular sympathy.

The more enlightened religionists wanted to establish a book religion; the opposed party wasn't so eager, yet were strong enough to make themselves felt in the books. The Pauline Epistles and the rest of the books have all the appearance of documents that have passed through the hands of an editorial board which comprised the various opinions held by the monastic Orders. This accounts for the Augustinian or Lutheran construction of the Paul figure.


http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54460017 (http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54460017)

But since the Pauline Epistles were written in the monasteries by men vowed to celibacy, and Luther and his fellows were held to be the first monks who broke their vows, we can deduce that certain passages were actually authored by Luther or his party. Who put into the mouth of Paul the denunciation of liars and hypocrites and enemies of marriage?


http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54460010 (http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54460010)

By contrast, Paul is also made the mouthpiece of catholic dogma.

What can you infer but that, at the time the Pauline Epistles were coming to be known, the mind of the Church was divided, and that some of the priesthood desired to make him the advocate, others the enemy, of the institution of priestly matrimony? The times of Paul are, in short, the times of Luther.

Polydore's citations from the monks show precisely the same duplicity on the question that is seen in the Epistles themselves. We cannot divorce the idea of. the monk from that of the vow of chastity; and we can therefore only infer that monkdom was a recent institution when such sentiments could be published.


It is this northern group of members of secret societies who invented Luther and Protestantism, that arrived first in America: I estimate 1790 AD to be a very good figure (Christ was crucified sometime during the period 1770 - 1775 AD, after which the falsification of the religious books started immediately).

They wrote the Bill of Rights, and thought they could get away with it, not understanding that the other two groups were waiting to rip it into shreds the first chance they got.

I believe that when the Bill of Rights was invented, there was no slavery as yet in America; slaves began to be brought to America at least after 1800 AD: this of course means that Jefferson, Paine, Locke, La Fayette, Washington and Madison are fictional characters invented at least after 1800 AD, in order to convey the idea of a glorious American revolution which actually never did take place at all.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 24, 2014, 06:33:43 AM
THIRTY TALENTS OF SILVER


The original/initial version of the Gospels was supposed to read like this:

http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/gno/gjb/gjb-3.htm (http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/gno/gjb/gjb-3.htm)

The Ministry, Trial and Execution of Jesus

1. At that time also a man came forward,—if even it is fitting to call him a man [simply].
2. His nature as well as his form were a man's; but his showing forth was more than [that] of a man.
3. His works, that is to say, were godly, and he wrought wonder-deeds amazing and full of power.
4. Therefore it is not possible for me to call him a man [simply].
5. But again, looking at the existence he shared with all, I would also not call him an angel.
6. And all that he wrought through some kind of invisible power, he wrought by word and command.
7. Some said of him, that our first Lawgiver has risen from the dead and shows forth many cures and arts.
8. But others supposed [less definitely] that he is sent by God.
9. Now he opposed himself in much to the Law and did not observe the Sabbath according to ancestral custom.
10. Yet, on the other hand, he did nothing reprehensible nor any crime; but by word solely he effected everything.
11. And many from the folk followed him and received his teachings.
12. And many souls became wavering, supposing that thereby the Jewish tribes would set themselves free from the Roman hands.

13. Now it was his custom often to stop on the Mount of Olives facing the city.
14. And there also he avouched his cures to the people.
15. And there gathered themselves to him of servants (Knechten) a hundred and fifty, but of the folk a multitude.
16. But when they saw his power, that he accomplished everything that he would by word, they urged him that he should enter the city and cut down the Roman soldiers and Pilate and rule over us.
17. But that one scorned it.
18. And thereafter, when knowledge of it came to the Jewish leaders, they gathered together with the High-priest and spake: "We are powerless and weak to withstand the Romans.
19. But as withal the bow is bent, we will go and tell Pilate what we have heard, and we will be without distress, lest if he hear it from others, we be robbed of our substance and ourselves be put to the sword and our children ruined."
20. And they went and told it to Pilate.
21. And he sent and had many of the people cut down.
22. And he had that wonder-doer brought up. And when he had instituted a trial concerning him, he perceived that he is a doer of good, but not an evildoer, nor a revolutionary, nor one who aimed at power, and set him free.
23. He had, you should know, healed his dying wife.
24. And he went to his accustomed place and wrought his accustomed works.
25. And as again more folk gathered themselves together round him, then did he win glory through his works more than all.
26. The teachers of the Law were [therefore] envenomed with envy and gave thirty talents to Pilate, in order that he should put him to death.
27. And he, after he had taken [the money], gave them consent that they should themselves carry out their purpose.
28. And they took him and crucified him according to the ancestral law.



PORTENTS AT THE DEATH OF JESUS AND RUMOURS OF HIS RESURRECTION.

   1. This curtain (katapetasma) was prior to this generation entire, because the people were pious; but now it was lamentable to look at. 2. It had, you should know, been suddenly rent from the top to the ground, when they delivered over to death through bribery the doer of good, the man—yea, him who through his doing was no man.

   3. And of many other signs they tell which came to pass at that time.

   4. And it was said that after he was put to death, yea after burial in the grave, he was not found.

   5. Some then assert that he is risen; but others, that he has been stolen by his friends. 6. I, however, do not know which speak more correctly.

   7. For a dead man cannot rise of himself—though possibly with the help of another righteous man; unless it (lit. he) will be an angel or another of the heavenly authorities, or God himself appears as a man and accomplishes what he will,—both walks with men and falls, and lies down and rises up, as it is according to his will.

   8. But others said that it was not possible to steal him, because they had put guards all round his grave,—thirty Romans, but a thousand Jews.


http://www.nazoreans.com/slavonic_josephus.html (http://www.nazoreans.com/slavonic_josephus.html)


Therefore, the falsified/forged works attributed to Josephus contained a very different version of the Gospels, omitted later in time, similar to the findings made by Edwin Johnson.

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459902 (http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459902)

"I cannot forbear to point out how ridiculous are the blunders which our clerical writers have made, either in their ignorance of this literature, or in their desire to defend it. They assume that this "Eusebius" is writing 200 years or more after the New Testament writers. That is the primary blunder. They then assume that he must be following the New Testament writers, though every page shows that this is impossible. That is the next blunder -- a consequence of the first. And here, where he quotes an alleged fragment of "Origen" about Paul, they say Eusebius has alone preserved this fragment, and they proceed to insert it in Origen's works! A third blunder; or rather it is one comprehensive blunder they have made in supporting an utterly impossible theory of Church Letters, instead of attending to the curious phenomena themselves.

The explanation that I have given removes all difficulties and covers all cases, so far as I know. Here you have a knot of men, or round table, presided over in all probability by one or two or a few directors. They have plotted, and are executing a system of fiction. The method is to write down short sentences, to place them in imaginary mouths, to call them "testimonies," to put dates to them, and then to quote them as if they were authoritative and external to themselves.

The whole thing is perfectly transparent to the attentive student. Any writer of even moderate skill in fiction could construct a story with a considerable number of characters, who should all be made in one way or another to be interested in a set of ideas or in a common story, whether as believers or as unbelievers, supporters or opponents. A great impression may thus be produced upon the reader, even though he is aware that he is dealing with fiction. But where, as in the case of this Church History, the representations made have been announced as the greatest and most awful truths, and a mighty organisation has been supporting them, the impression has become all but irresistible, for any except the awakened and sceptical inquirer."

Now we can understand that the book of Zechariah was forged at the same time with the Gospels, so that the quote/prophecy concerning the "thirty pieces of silver" would coincide with its "fulfillment" narrated in the Gospel of Matthew.

Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 24, 2014, 07:07:17 AM
The author of Revelation 11:8 tells us that Christ was not crucified in Jerusalem.

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)

And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.


King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)

And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication. (Rev. 14:8 )


Here is the mind which has wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits (Rev. 17:9 )

The woman whom you saw is the great city, which reigns over the kings of the earth. (Rev. 17:18 )



Great city on seven hills - either Rome or Constantinopole (also built in seven hills - http://www.istanbulguide.net/insolite/english/seven_hills.htm (http://www.istanbulguide.net/insolite/english/seven_hills.htm) )


"Furthermore, the crucifixion did not even take place in Jerusalem! According to the book of Revelations, Jesus was crucified in Rome:

And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. (Revelations 11:8, KJV)

The Christians would probably argue that the “great city” refers to Jerusalem, yet the renowned Bible scholar John Gill disagrees:

And their dead bodies [shall lie] in the street of the great city,.... Not Jerusalem, which was destroyed when John had this vision, and which will not be rebuilt at the time it refers to; nor is it ever called the great city, though the city of the great King; however, not in this book, though the new Jerusalem is so called, Revelation 21:10; but that can never be designed here; but the city of Rome, or the Roman jurisdiction, the whole empire of the Romish antichrist, which is often called the great city in this book; see Revelation 16:19."


Two works which agree that Constantinople is actually described in the well-known quotes from the book of Revelations:

http://heavenawaits.wordpress.com/revelation-17-who-is-the-woman-who-sits-on-7-hills/ (http://heavenawaits.wordpress.com/revelation-17-who-is-the-woman-who-sits-on-7-hills/)

https://gofishministries.wordpress.com/2012/11/28/is-istanbul-the-rome-of-revelation-part-2/ (https://gofishministries.wordpress.com/2012/11/28/is-istanbul-the-rome-of-revelation-part-2/)


Another important clue, which shows that the description can only be fulfilled by Constantinople and not by Rome or Jerusalem:

The woman (city) in Revelation 17:1 also sits on many waters. Istanbul “sits” on or near the Sea of Marmara, the Golden Horn Rver, the Bosphorus Strait, the Black Sea, the Aegean Sea, the sea of Crete, and the Mediteranean Sea.



Babylon = Constantinople = Troy

http://books.google.ro/books?id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=history+science+fiction&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=4zNzVJrhEIb5ywO69YDYCA&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=babylon&f=false (http://books.google.ro/books?id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=history+science+fiction&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=4zNzVJrhEIb5ywO69YDYCA&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=babylon&f=false)

Chapter I, section 10,  the locations of Troy and Babylon, pg. 42 - 44


"Oros", greek translation for mount/hill:

http://books.google.ro/books?id=31VmBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA677&lpg=PA677&dq=seven+mountains+hills+greek+translation+17:9+horos&source=bl&ots=mzPpTI7obx&sig=EWCcYxuxLDrabA3e4CZ50Erq8rc&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=tV1wVMPmCcjeaoSKgNAK&ved=0CFYQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=seven%20mountains%20hills%20greek%20translation%2017%3A9%20horos&f=false (http://books.google.ro/books?id=31VmBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA677&lpg=PA677&dq=seven+mountains+hills+greek+translation+17:9+horos&source=bl&ots=mzPpTI7obx&sig=EWCcYxuxLDrabA3e4CZ50Erq8rc&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=tV1wVMPmCcjeaoSKgNAK&ved=0CFYQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=seven%20mountains%20hills%20greek%20translation%2017%3A9%20horos&f=false)

www.eternalgod.org/qa/5229 (http://www.eternalgod.org/qa/5229)


The Book of Apocalypse/Revelations dated astronomically to no earlier than 1486 AD:

http://books.google.ro/books?id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=history+science+fiction&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=puptVJaKMIXWariugvgE&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=history%20science%20fiction&f=false (http://books.google.ro/books?id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=history+science+fiction&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=puptVJaKMIXWariugvgE&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=history%20science%20fiction&f=false)

Chapter 3: The new dating of the astronomical horoscope as described in the Apocalypse, pg. 134-166


Christ entering Constantinople:

(https://image.ibb.co/kLSwJy/ch1_zps41988551.jpg)

Pilate wearing a turban:

(https://image.ibb.co/hx8srJ/ch2_zps19cee9be.jpg)

(from History: Fiction or Science?, volume II)


Original quote from the epistle to the Galatians:

(https://image.ibb.co/krfNrJ/ch3_zps5dbcd85c.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/gvBCrJ/ch4_zpse3592f27.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/bzWvBJ/ch5_zpseaf756c0.jpg)


Jerusalem = Constantinople/Hagia Sophia = Temple of Solomon

(https://image.ibb.co/e4EFBJ/ch6_zps5cf3db61.jpg)

https://web.archive.org/web/20120122024755/http://www.revisedhistory.org/Book%20of%20Civilization.pdf (https://web.archive.org/web/20120122024755/http://www.revisedhistory.org/Book%20of%20Civilization.pdf) (pages 349 - 351, also includes a preface written by Garry Kasparov)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 25, 2014, 01:37:14 AM
AXIAL PRECESSION IS NOT RELATED TO NEWTONIAN MECHANICS: THE ALLAIS EFFECT VI


Dr. Bruce DePalma gyroscope experiments:

http://divinecosmos.com/start-here/books-free-online/19-the-science-of-oneness/84-the-science-of-oneness-chapter-06-gravity-magnetism-and-rotation-the-missing-link (http://divinecosmos.com/start-here/books-free-online/19-the-science-of-oneness/84-the-science-of-oneness-chapter-06-gravity-magnetism-and-rotation-the-missing-link)

http://divinecosmos.com/index.php/start-here/books-free-online/20-the-divine-cosmos/95-the-divine-cosmos-chapter-01-the-breakthroughs-of-dr-na-kozyrev (http://divinecosmos.com/index.php/start-here/books-free-online/20-the-divine-cosmos/95-the-divine-cosmos-chapter-01-the-breakthroughs-of-dr-na-kozyrev)


Conclusions:

A precessing gyroscope has a measurable anomalous inertial mass, greater than its stationary mass.

An anomalous field phenomenon has been discovered, the OD field, which confers inertia on objects immersed within it. This field is generated by the constrained forced precession of a rotating gyroscope.




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

The detailed behavior of both pendulums over the eclipse period shown in Fig. 8 was remarkable. 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.


Analysis. This long Foucault-type pendulum behaved in a very stable manner. However well after the end of the locally visible eclipse, at around 11:33 (to the recording resolution, i.e. between the readings at 11:29 and 11:36), some influence clearly acted for a short period to increase the precession rate. This influence was no longer apparent during the next inter-reading interval (from 11:36 to 11:43), and then reversed itself to some extent during the next interval (from 11:43 to 11:50).


We have already seen that the Allais effect is NOT caused by the Moon, that is, the Moon does not cause the solar eclipse:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1623305#msg1623305 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1623305#msg1623305)

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

Given the above, the authors consider that it is an inescapable conclusion from our experiments that after the end of the visible eclipse, as the Moon departed the angular vicinity of the Sun, 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.



http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1628430#msg1628430 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1628430#msg1628430)


http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1629054#msg1629054 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1629054#msg1629054)



(http://science.nasa.gov/media/medialibrary/1999/10/08/ast12oct99_1_resources/allais.gif)

The eclipse and the pendulum - How the pendulum's swing angle changed during the 1954 eclipse
The plane of the oscillation of the pendulum shifted approximately 15 centesimal degrees during the eclipse (approximately 13.5 degrees)


Thus we can explain the inexistence of historical records/astronomical data which would prove that the Earth underwent any axial precession in the past 2,000 years; we can also explain why and how the Gregorian calendar reform was a forgery/hoax perpetrated at least two hundred years later in time (during the XVIII century).

The Earth is completely stationary: it is the Sun and the stars which undergo a precessional movement/orbit, completely explained only within the framework/context of a Flat Earth.

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1635693#msg1635693 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1635693#msg1635693)


Now, as an example, we can understand that Howard Carter knew exactly where to dig back in 1922, as Tutankhamun's tomb had been prepared in a haste just a few decades earlier, in order to fool the entire world as to the antiquity of Egypt.

In fact, modern researchers were stunned when they investigated the tomb:

https://web.archive.org/web/20130924202815/https://www.mediaupdate.co.za/?idstory=55006

Visiting Tutankhamun’s tomb, Naunton and his team take in the ancient pharaoh’s haphazard burial site. With little decoration, modest size and absence of esoteric text, the tomb hardly feels fit for a king. Even more unusual, King Tutankhamun’s famous death mask seems to have been hastily fashioned from a woman’s headdress.

See also: http://thewaxconspiracy.com/pulp/the-tutankhamun-deception (http://thewaxconspiracy.com/pulp/the-tutankhamun-deception)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 28, 2014, 06:50:03 AM
FOUCAULT'S PENDULUM ANOMALIES - STATIONARY EARTH: THE ALLAIS EFFECT VII


A review of Mach's Principle, the Bertotti experiment, and the geocentric Coriolis force:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39197.msg977456#msg977456 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39197.msg977456#msg977456)


Trying to use Foucault's pendulum as proof for heliocentricity really backfired when Maurice Allais repeatedly observed pendulums slowing their motion during eclipses! This implies that either the "rotating Earth" decelerates during eclipses or the firmament does.


http://www.researchgate.net/publication/235701885_Precise_Underground_Observations_of_the_Partial_Solar_Eclipse_of_1_June_2011_Using_a_Foucault_Pendulum_and_a_Very_Light_Torsion_Balance (http://www.researchgate.net/publication/235701885_Precise_Underground_Observations_of_the_Partial_Solar_Eclipse_of_1_June_2011_Using_a_Foucault_Pendulum_and_a_Very_Light_Torsion_Balance)

Precise Underground Observations of the Partial Solar Eclipse of 1 June 2011 Using a Foucault Pendulum and a Very Light Torsion Balance:

International Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics 12/2012; 2012(2):204-209.

ABSTRACT Simultaneous observations of the solar eclipse on 06/01/2011 were carried out using a Foucault pendulum and a torsion balance. The instruments were installed in a salt mine, where the interference was minimal. Both instruments clearly reacted to the eclipse. We conclude that these reactions should not be considered as being gravitational effects.


PDF document of the article can be downloaded here:

http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=26045#.VHiEM9KsWCo (http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=26045#.VHiEM9KsWCo)


A torsion balance was installed in a small isolated chamber at a depth of 40 m, and a Fou- cault pendulum was set up in a huge chamber of area more than 1000 m2 at a depth of about 75 m.

We therefore affirm that in this experiment the Allais effect was again confirmed. Speed of precession of the oscillation plane of a pendulum during a solar eclipse does change.




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

A NEW CONFIRMATION OF THE ALLAIS EFFECT DURING THE SOLAR ECLIPSE OF 31 MAY 2003

Using the Foucault pendulum, the authors observed that the period of oscillation did not remain constant during the eclipse, this passing through the minimum value at the maximum of the eclipse. Later, during the Sun eclipse of 7 March 1970, E.J. Saxl and M. Allen [9], using a torsion pendulum, made evident that when the eclipse began the period grew and reached its extreme value at the maximum of the eclipse and then it decreased. The authors obtained a relative increase of the period of 2.7×10^−4. On the other hand, at the eclipse of July 1991 it was observed that the period presents a minimum at the maximum of the eclipse, the relative variation being of the order of 1.15×10^−4 .

Our measurements showed that during the sun eclipse, the motion of the plane of oscillation of the pendulum is really slower than the motion predicted by the Foucault effect. Thus we obtained a new confirmation of the Allais effect. On the other hand, the period of oscillation of the pendulum presents a small increase during the maximum of the eclipse.



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

Correlated anomalous effects observed during the August 1st 2008 solar eclipse

Abstract — 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.


Analysis. This long Foucault-type pendulum behaved in a very stable manner, which is quite typical for long pendulums. However well after the end of the locally visible eclipse, at around 11:33 (to the recording resolution, i.e.between the readings at 11:29 and 11:36), some influence clearly acted for a short period to increase the precession rate. This influence no longer acted during the next interval between readings (from 11:36 to 11:43), and then reversed itself to some extent during the next interval (from 11:43 to 11:50).


Comments. This striking deviation during the episode starting at 11:15 is unexplained. Structurally it closely resembles Allais's 1954 observation (Refs. 8, 9, and 10): first an increase of the precession rate, then a plateau, and then a decrease back to the original trend. However it occurred after the end of the visible eclipse, whereas the deviation observed by Allais occurred during the eclipse.

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. We therefore are compelled to the opinion that some currently unknown physical influence was at work.


http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf074/sf074a05.htm (http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf074/sf074a05.htm)

The period of a Foucault pendulum located at Jassy University, Romania, was carefully monitored during the solar eclipse of February 15, 1961. The pendulum's length was 25.008 meters; its spherical bob weighed 5.5 kilograms. The eclipse commenced at 8h 49m 3s and terminated at 11h 16m 50s. Observations are recorded in the table below left:

(http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf074/p074-05.gif)



The Allais effect proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the anomalies registered during the solar eclipses discussed above show that Foucault's pendulum is actually the very best proof that the Earth is stationary: it is the effect of the telluric currents/subquark strings/ether upon the pendulum which is responsible for the movement of the Foucault's pendulum, this effect was carefully documented also by Dr. Dayton Miller, as discussed earlier.


http://johnmartin2010.blogspot.ro/2011/06/some-experimental-evidence-to.html (http://johnmartin2010.blogspot.ro/2011/06/some-experimental-evidence-to.html)
http://www.freelists.org/post/geocentrism/Tides-and-the-moon-and-MM,19 (http://www.freelists.org/post/geocentrism/Tides-and-the-moon-and-MM,19)

The physical reality is this. The Allais effect noticed can be due to either a momentary fluctuation in the earths rotation, or in the aethers rotation over that area of space where the alignment occurs.  The former for obvious reasons (the energy factor) is illogical.

"Nobel prize winner Maurice Allais had to go and throw another monkey wrench in the spokes of the heliocentric bicycle. Allais performed a marathon 30 day Foucault Pendulum experiment in 1954. During the experiment an eclipse occurred. Surprisingly, the pendulum changed angles by a significant 13.5 degrees! This suggests something in space was affecting the pendulum, not the motion of the earth."


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 04, 2014, 06:25:44 AM
NEW RADICAL CHRONOLOGY: THE ULTIMATE PROOF III


History: Fiction or Science? volumul III, A. Fomenko and  G. Nosovsky

Pgs. 302 - 327

J. Kepler = N. Copernicus = T. Brahe = C. Ptolemy

THE WORKS OF COPERNICUS WRITTEN AT LEAST AFTER 1600 E.N.; HISTORICAL FIGURE J. KEPLER AUTHOR OF DE REVOLUTIONIBUS ORBIUM COELESTIUM

(https://s24.postimg.org/sokukerit/kop1b_zps44ab3970.jpg)
(https://s8.postimg.org/43yzp0gyt/kop2_zpse3605288.jpg)
(https://s22.postimg.org/lguri6e35/kop3e_zps19f0a31d.jpg)
(https://s16.postimg.org/rfen9p7hx/kop4_zps9b2b89d8.jpg)
(https://s21.postimg.org/nyxkmanpz/kop5_zpsb1297fe0.jpg)
(https://s23.postimg.org/q5akr7paz/kop6m_zps33e67d95.jpg)
(https://s3.postimg.org/is1ar48bn/kop7_zpsfd6ad0ff.jpg)
(https://s2.postimg.org/sfojze555/kop8_zps032a1b76.jpg)
(https://s14.postimg.org/c5tpdvklt/kop9_zps44e6c0ec.jpg)
(https://s11.postimg.org/46pfzq3wj/kop10_zps569a4694.jpg)
(https://s23.postimg.org/p5h1x97wb/kop11_zpsbcc76ffd.jpg)
(https://s16.postimg.org/ta6age7ud/kop12_zps4eaacdd0.jpg)
(https://s16.postimg.org/f9p9742qd/kop13_zps3544f1ce.jpg)


Thus we can understand that the following quotes come from the same mind:

In the middle of all sits Sun enthroned. In this most beautiful temple could we place this luminary in any better position from which he can illuminate the whole at once? He is rightly called the Lamp, the Mind, the Ruler of the Universe: Hermes Trismegistus names him the Visible God, Sophocles’ Electra calls him the All-seeing. So the Sun sits as upon a royal throne ruling his children the planets which circle round him. The Earth has the Moon at her service. As Aristotle says, in his On Animals, the Moon has the closest relationship with the Earth. Meanwhile the Earth conceives by the Sun, and becomes pregnant with an annual rebirth (De Revolutionibus, Of the Order of the Heavenly Bodies 10).

Who alone appears, by virtue of his dignity and power, suited…and worthy to become the home of God himself, not to say the first mover” (On the Motion of Mars, Prague, 1609, Chapter 4 - Kepler describing the Sun).


ANCIENT GREEK ASTRONOMERS: INVENTED DURING THE RENAISSANCE

(https://s16.postimg.org/m7uw3ro2d/odds1h_zps9fe75b9d.jpg)
(https://s10.postimg.org/c48df4iu1/odds2_zpsea36618e.jpg)
(https://s17.postimg.org/oy2j5i1lb/odds3_zpsa5e77aeb.jpg)
(https://s12.postimg.org/a9gz5wil9/odds4_zps9cc5dc01.jpg)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 05, 2014, 06:06:02 AM
LATE UPTHRUST OF THE HIMALAYAS RANGE IN THE AGE OF HISTORICAL MAN


https://web.archive.org/web/20160305043642/http://www.truthseekersministries.org/files/Velikovsky-Earth-in-Upheaval.pdf

I. Velikovsky's least known and, at the same time, best work is Earth in Upheaval.

Earth in Upheaval presents documentation of global catastrophes in prehistorical and historical times: the evidence of stone and bone. This evidence from the natural sciences indicates that these great disturbances which rocked our world were caused by forces outside the Earth itself.

In Earth in Upheaval, Velikovsky brings together a multitude of facts, such as palms found in northern Greenland, corals in Alaska, the unfossilized bones of hippopotamuses in England, and the remains of polar bears and arctic foxes crushed together in one mass with ostriches and crocodiles.


In this epochal book, Immanuel Velikovsky, one of the great scientists of modern times, puts the complete histories of our Earth and of humanity on a new basis. He presents the results of his 10-year-long interdisciplinary research in an easily understandable, even entertaining manner.

Earth in Upheaval - a very exactly investigated and easily understandable book - contains material that completely revolutionizes our view of the history of the earth.


http://s8int.com/boneyard5.html (http://s8int.com/boneyard5.html) (brief excerpts)

(https://s10.postimg.org/auh16y9ux/him1.jpg)
(https://s24.postimg.org/f2dlraarp/him2.jpg)
(https://s1.postimg.org/tpajduzhr/him3.jpg)
(https://s14.postimg.org/djrb948nl/him4.jpg)
(https://s22.postimg.org/o14wyaklt/him5.jpg)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 13, 2014, 02:03:04 AM
THE NELSON EFFECT


http://www.enterprisemission.com/hyper_confirm.htm (http://www.enterprisemission.com/hyper_confirm.htm)

"In the 1940s, the Radio Corporation of America (RCA) hired John Nelson, a young electrical engineer, in an effort to improve the reliability of short-wave radio communications around the Earth. Such radio transmissions had been observed to be more reliable in the "lulls" in between solar activity associated with "peak" sunspot years.

To his surprise, Nelson (via a solar observatory he built himself on the roof of a downtown New York skyscraper) soon specifically correlated this rising and falling radio interference with not only the sunspot cycle, but with the motions of the major planets of the solar system!; Nelson found, to his increasing astonishment, a very repeatable -- in essence, "astrological" -- correlation ... between the inexorable orbits of the major planets  and major radio-disturbing eruptions on the sun.


For over 30 years, based only on the heliocentric positions of the planets, John Nelson was able -- with over 90% accuracy -- to successfully predict sunspots, solar flares and geomagnetic storms -- something not possible by any other current scientific means!

On the latter point, Nelson also "rediscovered" something else:


"... it is worthy of note that in 1948, when Jupiter and Saturn were spaced by 120º, and solar activity was at a maximum, radio signals averaged of far higher quality for the year than in 1951 with Jupiter and Saturn at 180º and a considerable decline in solar activity. In other words, the average quality curve of radio signals [reflected by the Earth's ionosphere] followed the cycle curve between Jupiter and Saturn rather than the sunspot curve ....” "


A new paper, titled “Does a Spin Orbit Coupling Between the Sun and the Jovian Planets Govern the Solar Cycle?” points out a resonant, synchronized relationship between the Sun’s periodic peak sunspot cycles and the orbital positions of the Jovian planets -- Jupiter and Saturn:

http://www.publish.csiro.au/nid/138/paper/AS06018.htm (http://www.publish.csiro.au/nid/138/paper/AS06018.htm)

See also: http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2008/07/02/2292281.htm?site=science&topic=latest (http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2008/07/02/2292281.htm?site=science&topic=latest)


"There has historically been a recognized connection between the frequency of sunspot activity (the total number of spots) and the movement of the sun in relation to solar system's “barycentre” -- or, center of mass. This is driven primarily by the combined gravitational forces of Jupiter and Saturn, and to a far lesser extent, the other planets. But the big problem is that there is no conventional explanation for exactly how this influence occurs.


"There are really only two possible interactions, and neither of them is feasible," Dr. Wilson said in an interview. "Tidal forces are too tiny. They can only produce a movement of about a millimeter on the surface of the sun.

"The alternative, that the sun's motion about the centre of mass should be able to generate internal motions within the sun, violates Einstein's equivalence principle...." "


In 2004, Chris Duif pointed out that geomagnetic changes cannot be responsible for the
Allais effect:

http://arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/0408/0408023.pdf (http://arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/0408/0408023.pdf)

See also: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2001JA900006/abstract (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2001JA900006/abstract) (superb documentation, the PDF version of the article can be downloaded/seen there)

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.

In summary, we may state that it is dangerous to deduce eclipse-related effects from a single day's recording or a single
station. The chances are high of encountering a signature in the magnetic field trace that accidentally appears to be related to the eclipse.


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

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

http://www.acad.ro/sectii2002/proceedings/doc1-2003/n01_mihaila.pdf (http://www.acad.ro/sectii2002/proceedings/doc1-2003/n01_mihaila.pdf) (in French, it includes a brief summary in English, also)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 30, 2014, 06:12:31 AM
THE EXTENDED ARCTANGENT SERIES AND THE GIZEH PYRAMID


(https://s12.postimg.org/viaku97pp/pyr1.jpg)

The angle of slope of the Pyramid’s outer casing is 51.85 degrees (for example, see http://davidpratt.info/pyramid.htm (http://davidpratt.info/pyramid.htm) ).

However, in order to reach/know this value, the architects of the Gizeh Pyramid must have had at their disposal the extended arctangent series:


(http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/1/a/6/1a65c25333063610ba7ca6aecd562356.png)


(http://egyptologist.org/discus/messages/8/7355.jpg)

The sacred cubit is designated in the form of a horseshoe projection, known as the "Boss" on the face of the Granite Leaf in the Ante-Chamber of the Pyramid. By application of this unit of measurement it was discovered to be subdivided into 25 equal parts known now as: Pyramid inches.

ONE SACRED CUBIT = 0.6356621 meters


tan 51.8554 degrees = 2 sacred cubits

sin 72.7 degrees = 1.5 sacred cubits

sin 136.12 degrees = ln 2




72.7 / 2 = 36.35 = 100 - 100 sacred cubits

136.12 = actual height of the Gizeh Pyramid (141.347 - 5.23, 5.23 is the height of the masonry base)


The other angle of the triangle, 38.145 degrees, is also closely related to the sacred cubit, and the actual radius of the circle (38.13 meters) seen in the first image of this message.

38.13 = 60 sacred cubits

And 51.85/38.1 = 1.361 - therefore, all these measurements/dimensions must have been known well ahead of time to the arhitects of the Gizeh Pyramid; but in order to have the actual angle values, they needed to calculate the arctangent of two sacred cubits.


http://reocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/3324/nefersschooloflearning.htm (http://reocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/3324/nefersschooloflearning.htm)

http://reocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/3324/nefershouse.htm (http://reocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/3324/nefershouse.htm)

(http://reocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/3324/pan3.gif)

There are several values to be used for the sacred cubit depending on the color of the light spectrum: starting from 0.62832 all the way to 0.64 – the most important value is of course 0.63566, the sacred cubit, which corresponds to the green color.


I was able to actually sum the extended arctangent series:

ARCTAN v =  2n x ((2- {2+ [2+ (2+ 2{1/(1+ v2)}1/2)1/2]...1/2}))1/2 (n+1 parentheses to be evaluated)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 10, 2015, 02:04:37 AM
EOSPHORUS/HESPERUS - VENUS/AMON-NIBIRU - TLAHUIZCALPANTECUHTLI/XOLOTL

Both Greeks and Egyptians thought the morning star different from another star seen close to the Sun after sunset. The Greeks named the evening star that lingered in the sunset glow across the Ionian Sea Hermes, the winged messenger of the gods, while the Thebans recognized it as Horus, the vanquisher of Set and follower of Amun-Ra.

Similarly, ancient astronomers did not recognize Venus as one planet. When east of the Sun and seen in the western sky after sunset, the planet was called Hesperus. When west of the Sun and rising before it, the planet was called Phosphorous. About the 12th century B.C., Homer mentions Venus but considers it as two objects.


http://history.nasa.gov/SP-424/ch1.htm (http://history.nasa.gov/SP-424/ch1.htm)


One of the most informative works on the fact that the morning star and the evening star, in fact, ARE TWO DIFFERENT PLANETS:

http://www.mikamar.biz/symposium/cardona.txt (http://www.mikamar.biz/symposium/cardona.txt)

The author does mention:

Thus, for instance, being the closest planet to the Sun, Mercury not only revolves within the Earth's orbit but within that of the planet Venus itself. Mercury thus exhibits some of the aspects presented by Venus.  Although less bright than Venus, it, too, appears as an evening and morning star, a fact that was well known and recorded by the ancients, as, for instance, by Ptolemy,  but also by the Assyro-Babylonians who alluded to Nebo, their name for Mercury, as the morning star which announces the new age.



Mythology of Xolotl, Quetzalcoatl's twin brother:

http://www.history-aztec.com/pantheon.html (http://www.history-aztec.com/pantheon.html)

http://www.eastbayastro.org/2001/0201/r0201-2.htm (http://www.eastbayastro.org/2001/0201/r0201-2.htm)

(more information in S. Milbrath's works, Heaven and Earth in Ancient Mexico and Star Gods of the Maya)


Mercury and Hesperos:

http://www.varchive.org/itb/merkur.htm (http://www.varchive.org/itb/merkur.htm)

http://www.theoi.com/Titan/AsterEosphoros.html (http://www.theoi.com/Titan/AsterEosphoros.html)


The Enuma Elish does mention that two of Marduk's (Jupiter) satellites caused the first major planetary cataclysm.

The sun's chariots are in fact represented by the Morning Star and the Evening Star: Mercury and Venus (in the Mexican Codex Borgia, the Evening Star is represented with the solar disc on its back).


Official astronomical orbit of Venus:

The Synodical Year of Venus

THE PLANET Venus, at the present time, revolves around the sun in 288 days, which is the
siderial year of the planet. However, seen from the earth, which revolves around the sun on a
larger orbit and at a lower speed, Venus returns to the same position with respect to the earth
after 584 days, which is its synodical year. It rises before the sun, earlier every day for seventyone
days, until it reaches the western elongation or its westernmost point away from the rising
sun. Each morning thereafter the Morning Star rises lower and lower and for 221 days
robin-bobinapproaches the superior conjunction. About a month before the end of this period, it is eclipsed
by the rays of the sun, and for over sixty days it is not seen because of the sun's rays: it is behind
the sun or in superior conjunction. Then it appears for a moment after the setting sun, being now
the Evening Star and east of the western sun. For 221 nights it retreats from the middle point of
the superior conjunction, and beginning with the evening on which it first appears as an Evening
Star, each night it appears farther from the setting sun until it reaches the eastern elongation.
Then for seventy-one nights it approaches the sun. Finally it enters the inferior conjunction,
when it is between the earth and the sun. It is usually invisible for one or two days, and thereafter
appears west of the rising sun and is again the Morning Star. (from Worlds in Collision)


Thus, at least after the Deluge, Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli and Xolotl orbited the Sun in the shape of some sort of a cycloid curve: one took on the role of Mercury, while the other became the Evening Star; then, "Mercury" became the Morning Star, while the Evening Star modified its orbit and became Mercury; it is possible that these orbits were followed at least until the last planetary cataclysm occurred (some 250 years ago - see the new radical chronology proofs).


And Venus and Mercury have a diameter which is markedly different than what we have been led to believe in the official heliocentrical theory:


VENUS SOLAR TRANSIT

https://www.google.ro/search?biw=1280&bih=675&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=EuywVPSxNMHkUo_Vg_AP&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ&dpr=1&q=THE%20ORIGINAL%20STAR%20OF%20DAWN%20Dwardu%20Cardona#tbm=isch&q=venus+solar+transit (https://www.google.ro/search?biw=1280&bih=675&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=EuywVPSxNMHkUo_Vg_AP&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ&dpr=1&q=THE%20ORIGINAL%20STAR%20OF%20DAWN%20Dwardu%20Cardona#tbm=isch&q=venus+solar+transit)

(http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/654038main_Venustransit_2004_full.jpg)

(http://media.pennlive.com/midstate_impact/photo/11133180-large.jpg)


MERCURY SOLAR TRANSIT:

https://www.google.ro/search?hl=ro&authuser=0&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1280&bih=675&q=mercury+solar+transit&oq=mercury+solar+transit&gs_l=img.3...919.5042.0.5484.27.13.1.6.6.0.304.1617.0j2j4j1.7.0.msedr...0...1ac.1.60.img..19.8.1617.2Q4PEHVUeew (https://www.google.ro/search?hl=ro&authuser=0&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1280&bih=675&q=mercury+solar+transit&oq=mercury+solar+transit&gs_l=img.3...919.5042.0.5484.27.13.1.6.6.0.304.1617.0j2j4j1.7.0.msedr...0...1ac.1.60.img..19.8.1617.2Q4PEHVUeew)

(http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/162676main_mercury_transit_516.jpg)

(http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn10436/dn10436-1_370.jpg)


And the photographs/videos, no 148,000,000 km between the Sun and the ISS/Atlantis (no one is aboard of course, both the shuttle and the station are maneuvered by remote control):

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=58190.msg1490183#msg1490183 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=58190.msg1490183#msg1490183)

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/08/16/article-2026577-0CDF12F500000578-715_964x709.jpg (http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/08/16/article-2026577-0CDF12F500000578-715_964x709.jpg)

http://www.astrophoto.fr/iss_shuttle_crop.jpg (http://www.astrophoto.fr/iss_shuttle_crop.jpg)

http://www.astrophoto.fr/iss_shuttle.jpg (http://www.astrophoto.fr/iss_shuttle.jpg)


From the Bundahishn:

But in the end "the sun has attached Muspar to its own radiance by mutual agreement, so that he may be less able to do harm."


The significance of the foregoing information, relating to the flat earth planetary system is as follows:

Once the Sun will reach the end of the alloted precessional orbit, its "chariots", the planets Mercury and Venus will be set free; it is this phenomenon which does cause the end of a world age (as described earlier: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1635693#msg1635693 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1635693#msg1635693) ).
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 15, 2015, 06:31:25 AM
BOOK OF ENOCH CALENDAR - AXIAL PRECESSION FORMULA ERROR


Five synodical years of Venus equal 2919.6 days, whereas eight years of 365 days equal 2920 days, and eight Julian years of 365/4 days equal 2922 days. In other words, in four years there is a difference of approximately one day between the Venus and the Julian calendars.

Therefore, apparently in a strange way, we are following a Venusian calendar, unknowingly.

This is one of the main reasons for the entire Gregorian calendar reform hoax (the other being, of course, to falsify the chronology of history, as we have seen earlier).


Book of the Luminaries:

http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#Enoch_71 (http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#Enoch_71)

from Chapter 73:

 And these serve four days, which are not calculated in the calculation of the year.


The length of the year presented in the book of Enoch is actually 364 days, but the duration of such a day is very slightly longer than the 24-hour/day.

The four additional days take place at the first, third, fourth and sixth gate: they are included when we compute the number of days in a year, of course, but not when we calculate the actual precession.

The axial precession formula assumes a continuous Earth angular velocity (heliocentrical theory), whereas in the real flat earth theory, there are four discontinuities, which are not taken into consideration.


Orbital Variance Theory:

http://www.aloha.net/~johnboy/orbitalV.htg/variance.htm#arithmetic (http://www.aloha.net/~johnboy/orbitalV.htg/variance.htm#arithmetic)

http://www.aloha.net/~johnboy/Preces.htg/precession.htm (http://www.aloha.net/~johnboy/Preces.htg/precession.htm)

The 3 . 14 seconds is the mean deviation.  The actual deviation, over time, is from 3.11 seconds to 3.17 seconds daily. In other words, the TIME required for the Earth to complete one orbit around the Sun (a year) decreases daily by the rate of 3.14 seconds (of time) and accumulates, annually, to approximately 18 minutes (+-).

The 3.14 seconds (mean) of time (in a PREcessional or warming cycle) accumulates (actually causing 'apparent' precession), and over a period of 72 years it amounts to 'almost' one full 24 hour day [actual precessional rates vary, over time, from 19.19329333 minutes a year (when Earth is at Aphelion) to 18.99225167 minutes a year (when Earth is at Perihelion)].


But the axial precession formula (heliocentrical theory) uses the value of 3.35 seconds/day.

(http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/Graphics-Other/PSCI/pirireis2.gif)

Distance between Tropic of Cancer and Tropic of Capricorn: 3,234.64 miles (center of map)

Arclength: 6356.621 KM (side of figure/map) - this is the absolute uppermost bound/limit

Polar axis length (official numbers):  6356.7519 km = actual radius of the flat earth map


Six gates theory (see chapter 71 from the Book of Enoch)

One gate arclength, with 0.636 m as the value for the sacred cubit:

1060 km


Distance from one gate to the other, 11.444 km (where 11.444 = 4 x 2.861, 2.861 is the actual displacement factor of the Gizeh Pyramid).


Actual one gate arclength, then:

1048.56 km


Since the official figure of 50.24 arcseconds (annual heliocentrical rate) is wrong, in order to calculate the correct value we need to take into consideration the actual discontinuities in the solar precessional orbit:

The amount we get is 49.54 arcseconds/year.

And this makes all the difference when it comes to actually computing the distances involved.


For the 49.54 arcseconds/year, we will get a value of 1.5267 km/year of actual precessional distance being covered by the Sun.

1.5267 = (24sc)/10

If we divide 49.54 by 364 we will get 0.1361, the actual height of the Gizeh Pyramid (1000 x 0.1361).


Since the rate of the precession amounts to some 19 minutes per year, we can get a closer value by examining the following data.


3.1416 seconds per day of actual precessional time variance

The actual data calculated is 19.2 minutes, without taking into account the four day discontinuity, or some 1152 seconds/year (which corresponds to a value of 3.164 seconds per day).

That means that for a full year (book of Enoch calendar) the value will be close to the figure of 1144.44 seconds.

1144.44 seconds = 19.074 minutes

Then, 250 years x 1144.44 seconds = 286,110 seconds for a period of 250 years

For a 353 year old history, we obtain a value extremely close to 404778.5054 seconds

404778.5054 = (1000sc)2

That is, the total precessional time for a 353 year old history amounts to exactly 1,000,000sc2 seconds or 636,619.7723sc seconds.


250 years x 1.5267 km = a total of 381.675 km

Solar flat earth axial precession: for each gate, we have a mobile section which now moves westward until it reaches the 286.1 km limit (that is, it can only move/travel for 381.6 km).


2 x 381.5 = 763

1048.56 - 763 = 285.56

which is very close to the displacement factor value of 286.1



We could also use a period of 254.24 years (one sacred inch = 0.025424 m), starting with 1761: in line with the myths/legends of South/Central America concerning the 52 year Venus cycle.

1761 + 254.24 = 2015.24

1761 - 1708 = 53

1761 + 190.6 = 1951.6  (1.906 = 3sc)

This would correspond with a solar precessional rate of 1.5 km/year.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 16, 2015, 05:13:29 AM
ENGLISH CHANNEL REVISITED


The English Channel: 34 km distance from Cap Gris Nez to Dover, a curvature of some 22.4 meters on a round earth.

(https://image.ibb.co/hPHJxo/dover1.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/e1Daco/dover2.jpg)


The original webpages, as they were posted on flickr.com


The photographers located between Cap Blanc Nez and Cap Gris Nez: we will ascend to 30 meters.

(https://image.ibb.co/kf7qA8/doverbest2.jpg)

And now the photograph itself: no curvature whatsoever, all the way to the other shoreline, the Dover cliffs seen in their entirety (on a round earth, from 30 meters, we could not see anything under 16.5 meters from the other side), the ships are not part of an ascending/descending slope, no midpoint curvature of 22.4 meters:

(https://image.ibb.co/jBn7q8/doverbest.jpg)


Another photograph taken right on the beach of Cap Gris Nez: no curvature over a distance of 34 km:

(http://www.expedition360.com/journal/white_cliffs.jpg)



Dover cliffs:

(http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4070/4521816996_2971e62065.jpg)

(http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1051/4726849923_389dba2176.jpg)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 20, 2015, 05:20:08 AM
286.1 BLOOD MOON TETRAD


The first blood moon tetrad in history occurred in 1949-1950. It is assumed, in the official chronology of history, that the previous such astronomical phenomenon took place in 1493-1494 and that, in the future, the next blood moon tetrad will occur in 2032-2033; using the new radical chronology proofs we can clearly see that this is not the case at all.

Taking year 1 as 1662, we obtain the following interesting sacred cubit mathematical relationships:


1948 - 1662 = 286.1 = 450 sc

1967 - 1662 = 305 = 480 sc

2015 - 1662 = 353 = 555 sc (354 = 557 sc)


557 - 450 =~ 106.6

305/286.1 = 1.066

305 x 1144.44 seconds = 349054.2

1/2.861 = 0.349528


1708 + 286.1 = 1994    (1708, date of the Deluge, 1994 the first major planetary collision since 1765)

1765 + 183 = 1948 (183 =~ 13 x 14.134725)

286.1 sc = 181.8

1765 + 181.8 = 1947


XOLOTL = TYPHON = HESPEROS

http://www.gnostics.com/archives.pantheon.html (http://www.gnostics.com/archives.pantheon.html)

http://www.vopus.org/en/content/view/120/ (http://www.vopus.org/en/content/view/120/)


PALLAS = TYPHON

http://immanuelvelikovsky.com/Svbasic.htm#_Toc368234329 (http://immanuelvelikovsky.com/Svbasic.htm#_Toc368234329)


353.3 = 25 x 14.134725


2.8612 = 8.18532

8.18532 x 68.05 = 557

286.1 x 1144.44 seconds = 327424.28

1/0.03054 = 32.7439


Typhon did not aid his fellow Titans in battle on Mount Olympus. The Titan has presumably remained trapped in his cave, with no clear idea of what has happened outside.


Pallas-Typhon battling Zeus is the Black Sun.

Typhon battling Athene is the Evening Star (which is related to the Moon, since Aphrodite aided Gaea in the birth of Typhon).

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 20, 2015, 07:01:17 AM
NOT SO ANCIENT PARTHENON

The Parthenon is a former temple on the Athenian Acropolis, Greece, dedicated to the goddess Athena, whom the people of Athens considered their patron. Construction began in 447 BC when the Athenian Empire was at the height of its power. It was completed in 438 BC although decoration of the building continued until 432 BC. It is the most important surviving building of Classical Greece, generally considered the zenith of the Doric order.


History: Fiction or Science?, vol. I, pg. 416 - 427

https://books.google.ro/books?id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=history+fiction+science+fomenko&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=ihsMVea8H8HWaseUgsgE&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=history%20fiction%20science%20fomenko&f=false (https://books.google.ro/books?id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=history+fiction+science+fomenko&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=ihsMVea8H8HWaseUgsgE&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=history%20fiction%20science%20fomenko&f=false)


(https://s4.postimg.org/qvdbvmkct/pt1mh_zps0iigu8ct.jpg)

(https://s23.postimg.org/k13oyc3u3/pt2l_zpsawez8qhl.jpg)

(https://s16.postimg.org/bjeeuxphh/pt3g_zpsbf0gqlmm.jpg)

(https://s1.postimg.org/aasfq4mzz/pt4xt_zpsuaftbfj9.jpg)

(https://s21.postimg.org/59dg5ez7b/pt51_zpsskedj3ql.jpg)

(https://s3.postimg.org/oiqpodbib/pt6u_zpsu7yl0f1a.jpg)

(https://s24.postimg.org/9pika5c51/pt7q_zpscvlzizi3.jpg)

(https://s9.postimg.org/svzeo8whb/pt8q_zpsgsimplqn.jpg)

(https://s8.postimg.org/orunfgt2t/pt9i_zpsctzdhm0p.jpg)

(https://s7.postimg.org/4td9sfs3v/pt10_zpsd5gg9mke.jpg)

(https://s17.postimg.org/4jvclxiu7/pt11p_zpsopepzt6d.jpg)

(https://s10.postimg.org/vbor7ssvd/pt12z_zpsuqyowar7.jpg)

(https://s15.postimg.org/5g5cfb35n/pt13q_zpscamvixce.jpg)

(https://s18.postimg.org/yvnxe48fd/pt14_zpsafef4pbq.jpg)

(https://s21.postimg.org/sbrvzrrgn/pt15_zpsfuuk8qqb.jpg)



Cosmology of the Desana tribe:

(http://i113.photobucket.com/albums/n206/dharanis1/desanaworld_zps6l2jiopj.jpg)

(notice, at the bottom of the image, the two heavenly bodies which are responsible for causing the lunar and solar eclipses)


The time has come. After many months of discussion, we believe the negotiations between google.com and theflatearthsociety.org have reached a point of conclusion, and we would like now to present our reunification proposal.

The time has come to get rid of the faulty, flawed FAQ, and to replace it with the only theory that works perfectly...which has been used to defend FET in the Beam Neutrinos, Ring Laser Gyroscopes and the Axial Precession threads...to mention just a few.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 21, 2015, 03:48:53 AM
26.66 - 53.43 - 80 - 136.1 - 534  -  THE FIVE ELEMENTS AND THE ZEROS OF RIEMANN'S ZETA FUNCTION

The height of the pyramid of Gizeh is 141.347 (see http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1639106#msg1639106 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1639106#msg1639106) ), where 14.134725 is the value of the first zero of Riemann's Zeta function.

(http://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/zeros.jpg)

The first 100,000 zeros of the Riemann Zeta function:

http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/zeta_tables/zeros1 (http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/zeta_tables/zeros1)


An introduction to the mathematical relationships which exist between the values of pyramid of Gizeh and the consecutive zeros of the Riemann Zeta function:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1584725#msg1584725 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1584725#msg1584725)

The zeros of the Zeta function of Riemann are angles (expressed in radians); by finding the corresponding angles in the first four quadrants, and multiplying by 68.05 (radius of the circle), we obtain a certain arclength.


Firstly, let us try to determine approximate values (two decimal places accuracy) for the next four values of the zeros of the RZF, using ONLY the sacred cubit as a guide.


14.134725 - 4π = 1.568354 (exactly the value of the width of the first section from the queen chamber niche)

The most important figure/number of the Gizeh pyramid is, of course, 286.1 sacred inches (286.1 = 450 sacred cubits).

It represents the displacement factor, and the value of the height of the missing apex (286.1 si =  7.2738 meters).


The next most important sacred cubit figures are 534 and 636.66 (we also have 1060 or 1066.66, 1271.32 and so on).

Let us assume that the value of the missing apex of the pyramid whose height is actually the second zero of RZF (multiplied by ten) is 534 si.


We know that if we substract the length of the king's chamber from 141.34725, we get the true height of the Gizeh pyramid, that is, 136.1 meters (141.34725 - 5.23, where 5.23 represents the height of the masonry base).

And the ratio of 136.1/53.4 = 2.5424 (one hundred sacred inches).

1.361 x 5.34 = 7.2738 = 286.1 si


Then, let x = the true height of pyramid #2 (whose total height is represented by the second zero of RZF x 10), and y = the corresponding value of 53.4

x/y = 2.5424

xy/1000 = 534 si = 13.57

y = 73.5

x = 185.7

185.7/136.1 = 1.364

1.364 x 141.347 = 192.7


Therefore, we have an estimate of the value of the length of the king's chamber for the second pyramid: 192.7 - 185.7 = 7.097, and also FOR THE SECOND ZERO OF RZF: 19.27.

We already know that 1.5683 x 3.333 = 5.23

7.097/3.333 = 2.13 (the estimate for the width of the first section of the queen's chamber niche)


If we go through the same steps with 636 si, we will get:

- an estimate of approximately 21.0655 for the second zero, and 2.208 for the width of the first section of the niche


The true value of the second zero of RZF is actually 21.022


The true value of the THIRD pyramid's displacement factor is related directly to 890 si (89 x 6 = 534), but let us assume that we do not know this figure.

If we work with 1060 si, we will get:

- an estimate of 27.18 for the third zero (the true value is, of course, 25.0108)


The next important figure is 1271 si.

- an estimate of 29.794 for the fourth zero (the true value is 30.424)


Thus we can see how the values of the Gizeh pyramid are so important in order to discover the hidden pattern of the zeros of RZF.


Actually, we can get pretty good estimates of some of the zeros, by simply multplying 14.134725 by k (k = 1,2,3...)

56.53898  -   56.446

84.80835  -   84.74

98.94307  -   98.8312

141.34725   -   141.1237

169.6167  -  169.0945

197.886  -  198.01531

240.29  -  239.5554

6827.072  -  6827.21



Now, the hidden structure/pattern which relates the values of the five elements (26.6 - 53.43 - 80 - 136.1 - 534) of the pyramid of Gizeh to the values of the consecutive zeros of RZF.


RZF zero  -   reduction to angle value

14.134725  -  1.56835

21.02204  -  2.1724

25.0108  -  3.0196

30.424  -  5.2913

32.935  -  7.802

37.586  -  9.3116

40.9187  -  9.5027 and 12.64

43.327  -  11.91

48.005  -  13.447

49.7738  -  15.216

52.97  -  18.4128

56.446  -  18.747

59.347  -  21.647

60.83  -  23.1326

65.1125  -  24.2718



14.134725  -  1.56835  -  1.56835 x 2.66 = 4.1718 (a1)

21.02204  -  2.1724  -  2.1724 x 5.34 = 11.6 (a2)

25.0108  -  3.0196  -  3.0196 x 8 = 24.1568 (a3)

30.424  -  5.2913  -  5.2913 x 13.61 = 72.01 (a4)

32.935  -  7.802  -  7.802 x 53.4 = 416.6268 (a5)


Σ ak = 528.57


Let us go back to using the circle (r = 68.05, d = 136.1, see http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1573684#msg1573684 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1573684#msg1573684) ):

On such a circle, using s = r x @ (@ measured in radians), we will obtain some very special values:

Degrees   -   Arclength

22.5 – 26.66
45 – 53.4
90 – 106.68 (exactly the frequencies used by the Tibetan monks)
72.9 – 86.5 (=136.1 sc)
2.142 – 2.542 (1si x 100)
136.1 – 161.8


Dividing 528.57 by 68.05 we get 7.767 (a superb estimate for 7.802)


We will see that by adding/substracting values of π from these value we will obtain very special figures wholly related to the Gizeh pyramid numbers (26.66, 39.3, 33.96, 36.35, 53.4, 1.4305, 2.5424, -26.66, -33.96 and so on).

7.767 + 6π = 26.66

Therefore, to obtain the true value of the fifth zero (two decimal places accuracy), we would work backwards from 26.66 (or any of the other values listed above), obtain a figure CLOSE TO the expected value lying somewhere between 7.0 - 8.0, in this case 7.767.

Then, knowing this value, we easily get 528.57, and then 32.93 (the true value of the fifth zero of RZF).



Now, the NEXT FIVE CONSECUTIVE ZEROS.


21.02204  -  2.1724

25.0108  -  3.0196

30.424  -  5.2913

32.935  -  7.802

37.586  -  9.3116


Applying the scheme as before/above:

Σ ak = 667.67

667.67 / 68.05 = 9.811 (an excellent estimate of 9.3116)

adding succesive values of π to 9.811 we get: 38.16 (60 sacred cubits) and 34.95 (1/0.02861)



25.0108  -  3.0196

30.424  -  5.2913

32.935  -  7.802

37.586  -  9.3116

40.9187  -  9.5027 and 12.64


Σ ak = 732.878

732.878 / 68.05 = 10.7697 (using 9.5027)

adding succesive values of +- π to 10.7697 we get -36.354 (1 - 1 sacred cubit = 3.6354)


Σ ak = 900.41 (for the 12.64 value)

900.41 / 68.05 = 13.2316 - however, no special values of the Gizeh pyramid are to be found - this is how we can differentiate between the true and the wrong values of the succesive increments of π which are added to the zeros of the RZF, reduced to the angle value)


30.424  -  5.2913

32.935  -  7.802

37.586  -  9.3116

40.9187  -  9.5027

43.327  -  11.91

Σ ak = 895.56

895.56 / 68.05 = 13.16

adding succesive values of +- π to 13.16 we get: -2.5476, -33.96


(13.16 - 11.91)  +- π will also lead to special values of the Gizeh pyramid



32.935  -  7.802

37.586  -  9.3116

40.9187  -  9.5027

43.327  -  11.91

48.005  -  13.447

Σ ak = 1026.7

1026.7 / 68.05 = 15.0874

adding succesive values of +- π to 15.0874 we get 33.937



37.586  -  9.3116

40.9187  -  9.5027

43.327  -  11.91

48.005  -  13.447

49.7738  -  15.216

Σ ak = 1166.3278

1166.3278 / 68.05 = 17.139

adding succesive values of +- π we get 1.4313


40.9187  -  9.5027

43.327  -  11.91

48.005  -  13.447

49.7738  -  15.216

52.97  -  15.2712 and 18.4128

Σ ak = 1386.8

1386.8 / 68.05 = 20.38 (using the correct value of 18.4128)

adding succesive values of +- π we get 26.66, 39.22, -39.31


Σ ak = 1219.035 for the 15.2712 value

adding succesive values of +- π we can only get a figure of 5.347 (much less precise than the other figure obtained)



43.327  -  11.91

48.005  -  13.447

49.7738  -  15.216

52.97  -  18.4128

56.446  -  18.747

Σ ak = 1476.9

1476.9 / 68.05 = 21.703

adding succesive values of +- π to 21.703 we get -25.42


48.005  -  13.447

49.7738  -  15.216

52.97  -  18.4128

56.446  -  18.747

59.347  -  21.647

Σ ak = 1675.42

1675.42 / 68.05 = 24.62

adding succesive values of +- π to 24.62 we get 30.903185, 34 (where of course .309 x 2 = .618)



49.7738  -  15.216

52.97  -  18.4128

56.446  -  18.747

59.347  -  21.647

60.83  -  23.1326

Σ ak = 1818.661

1818.661 / 68.05 = 26.725

adding succesive values of +- π to 26.725 we get -26.7, 39.3


52.97  -  18.4128

56.446  -  18.747

59.347  -  21.647

60.83  -  23.1326

65.1125  -  24.2718

Σ ak = 1933.205

1933.205 / 68.05 = 28.4

adding succesive values of +- π to 28.4 we get 12.7
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 24, 2015, 06:40:13 AM
The surgical instruments discovered at Pompeii:

http://www.chronologia.org/kak_reconstruction/im/048.jpg (http://www.chronologia.org/kak_reconstruction/im/048.jpg)

http://www.chronologia.org/kak_reconstruction/im/049.jpg (http://www.chronologia.org/kak_reconstruction/im/049.jpg)

Dr. Anatoly Fomenko:

The figures above show the incredible 'ancient' surgical instruments of allegedly I century, discovered during the excavation in Pompeii. The quality and the high technological level are astounding. In the first figure, on the top – dental extracting forceps and foreign body probe. Below - speculum ani, speculum uteris used by the gynecologists. Take notice of the METALIC SHAFT WITH THE MOST PRECISE THREAD! See second figure. We can see screws inserted in the apertures, and rivets. But for that one needed to know how to drill metal. It means that the metal drills were already popular. So in front of us we see the manufactured articles of not earlier than the XVI century [NOR], ch.6.

The historians write, that when these most 'ancient' objects were found, 'it was the XVIII century, and this set of tools, VERY SIMILAR TO THOSE USED UNTIL NOW (FOR EXAMPLE, THE GYNICOLOGICAL SPECULUM) CREATED A GREAT IMPRESSION, it showed the high development level of the ancient surgery' [674:1], p.218. And further: 'This speculum uteris, used by the gynecologists, shows the highest level of the development of medicine already reached at that time' [674:1], p.149.


Schliemann's false Troy:

www.chronologia.org/en/how_it_was/03_4.html#sch5 (http://www.chronologia.org/en/how_it_was/03_4.html#sch5)


CHRIST, CRUCIFIED NEAR AN IMPORTANT SEA/STRAIT/RIVER:

(http://www.chronologia.org/kak_reconstruction/im/005.jpg)

Dr. Anatoly Fomenko:

Incidentally it is interesting to look carefully at the representation of the crucifixion. It appears that in many paintings, icons and frescoes Christ’s crucifixion is shown with a background of either a big sea strait or a wide river. Besides the artists were painting in particular either a strait or a river, but by no means a sea, fig.5. So, by depicting water, the opposite shore was always shown [5v1], ch.14. As we understand it now, it could not have been otherwise, as the Beykoz mountain is situated right on the shore of the wide Bosphorus. From there can be seen very clearly the European shore of the strait, where the centre of Constantinople is situated.

Any artist, had a more or less accurate recollection of the original story, would have depicted the Bosphorus strait as a significant part of the landscape, which served as a backdrop to the site of Christ’s crucifixion.


Mount Beykoz, the place outside the walls of Constantinople, where Christ was crucified:

(http://www.chronologia.org/kak_reconstruction/im/004.jpg)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1641885#msg1641885 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1641885#msg1641885)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 25, 2015, 06:47:22 AM
NEW RADICAL CHRONOLOGY: MORE PROOFS

We have seen already how the most direct proof that the chronology of the past was completely falsified can be used immediately to prove that prior to the XVIIth century there was no axial precession of the Earth: it is the precession of the Sun itself which leads to the 4.2 meters per day/3.17 seconds per day westward shift.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1638504#msg1638504 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1638504#msg1638504)


Exiguus assigns the date of March 24, year 563 AD, for the Passover.

However, in the year 563 AD, the Passover fell on March 25.



"It would be all right, but it presupposes that near Dionysius' date of 563 A.D. the 14th moon (Passover) really fell on March 24. It could be that Dionysius was not aware of the inaccuracy of the Metonian cycle and made the mistake shifting Passover from 563 to the same day of March in 31 A.D.

But he could not have been unaware of the date of Passover in the the almost contemporary year 563! To that end it was sufficient to apply the Metonian cycle to the coming 30-40 years; the inaccuracy of the Metonian cycle does not show up for such intervals.



But in 563 Passover (the 14th moon) fell not on March 24, but on Sunday, March 25, that is, it coincided with Easter as determined by the Easter Book.


As he specially worked with the calendar situation of almost contemporary year 563 and as he based his calculation of the era "since the birth of Christ" on this situation, Dionysius could not help seeing that, first, the calendar situation in the year 563 did not conform to the Gospels' description and, second, that the coincidence of Easter with Passover in 563 contradicts the essence of the determination of Easter the Easter Book is based on.


Therefore, it appears absolutely incredible that the calculations of the First Easter and of the Birth of Christ had been carried out in the 6th century on the basis of the calendar situation of the year 563. It was shown in Sec. 1 that the Easter Book, used by Dionysius, had not been compiled before the 8th century and had been canonized only at the end of the 9th century. Therefore, the calculations carried out by (or ascribed to) Dionysius the Little had not been carried out before the lOth century."


Moreover, Dr. G.V. Nosovksy verified the interval of 100 BC - 1700 AD, using the exact conditions stipulated by Exiguus as necessary to date exactly the crucifixion, and found that ONLY the date of 1095 AD corresponds exactly.

In the new radical chronology of history, the crucifixion occurred at the end of the Renaissance, in the interval 1770 - 1775 AD, as discussed here before.


Therefore, we have here the most direct and extraordinary proof that history was falsified to the fullest.


But Dr. G. Nosovky's research explored the subject even further , to discover when Dionysius Exiguus' works were actually falsified.


On dating the works of Exiguus and Vlastar:

www.chronologia.org/en/es_analysis2/img411.pdf (http://www.chronologia.org/en/es_analysis2/img411.pdf)

www.chronologia.org/en/es_analysis2/img412.pdf (http://www.chronologia.org/en/es_analysis2/img412.pdf)


The corresponding details of the biographies of Dionysius Exiguus (the Small) and Dionysius Petavius (the Little):

https://books.google.ro/books?id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&pg=PA360&lpg=PA360&dq=dionysius+petavius+little&source=bl&ots=OKuRIKcOYv&sig=6twCT7uTkvFuzCLxqqVFcWNj-Jc&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=rTsAVcWNB6GP7AbJ-IGYDA&ved=0CB8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=dionysius%20petavius%20little&f=false (https://books.google.ro/books?id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&pg=PA360&lpg=PA360&dq=dionysius+petavius+little&source=bl&ots=OKuRIKcOYv&sig=6twCT7uTkvFuzCLxqqVFcWNj-Jc&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=rTsAVcWNB6GP7AbJ-IGYDA&ved=0CB8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=dionysius%20petavius%20little&f=false)



Using the equinoctial dates provided by Vlastar himself (according to the official chronology), Dr. G. Nosovsky obtained the following results:

(https://s9.postimg.org/emwif3bxr/mat.jpg)


Matthew Vlastar's equinoxes and modern chronological tradition:

www.chronologia.org/en/es_analysis2/img415.pdf (http://www.chronologia.org/en/es_analysis2/img415.pdf)

www.chronologia.org/en/es_analysis2/img416.pdf (http://www.chronologia.org/en/es_analysis2/img416.pdf)

www.chronologia.org/en/es_analysis2/img418.pdf (http://www.chronologia.org/en/es_analysis2/img418.pdf)


(https://s8.postimg.org/v8fiu4j6t/mat1.jpg)



When was Ptolemy's Star Catalogue in 'Almagest' Compiled in Reality? Statistical Analysis:

https://web.archive.org/web/20131111204106/http://www.hbar.phys.msu.ru/gorm/fomenko/fomenko3.pdf

http://www.chronologia.org/en/es_analysis2/index.html (http://www.chronologia.org/en/es_analysis2/index.html)

Appendix 2. When Was Ptolemy's Star Catalogue Really Compiled? Variable Configurations of the Stars and the Astronomical Dating of the Almagest Star Catalogue:

pages 346 - 375



The Dating of Ptolemy's Almagest Based on the Coverings of the Stars and on Lunar Eclipses:

https://web.archive.org/web/20131111203642/http://www.hbar.phys.msu.ru/gorm/fomenko/fomenko4.pdf


http://www.chronologia.org/en/es_analysis2/index.html (http://www.chronologia.org/en/es_analysis2/index.html)

pages 376 - 381




https://web.archive.org/web/20131111203642/http://www.hbar.phys.msu.ru/gorm/fomenko/fomenko4.pdf (section 3: The Dating of the Lunar Eclipses and Appendix 2: The Table of the Almagest's Lunar Eclipses)


http://www.chronologia.org/en/es_analysis2/index.html (http://www.chronologia.org/en/es_analysis2/index.html) (pages 382 - 389)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 26, 2015, 05:54:12 AM
Who actually wrote the Beatles, Stones, Led Zeppelin, The Who, Moody Blues, Doors songs:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg770568#msg770568 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg770568#msg770568)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg805137#msg805137 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg805137#msg805137)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 27, 2015, 06:51:01 AM
The Easter Computus and the Origins of the Christian Era: the most comprehensive work on the official history/chronology of dating the Christian era, with special emphasis on Dionysius Exiguus

http://ixoyc.net/data/fathers/524.pdf (http://ixoyc.net/data/fathers/524.pdf)

Ptolemy (Almagest 3. 1) reports an observation of the equinox by Hipparchus on 27 Mechir of the 178th year from the death of Alexander (24 March 146 bc) and his own observation 285 years later on 7Pachon in the year 463 (22 March ad 140).


But we have already seen that the entire work attributed to Ptolemy, especially Almagest, was falsified at least after 1350 AD: thus the references to Hipparchus were also introduced in order to give the impression that the axial precession of the Earth was astronomically dated/recorded even in antiquity.


Julius Africanus is made to confirm Ptolemy:

https://books.google.ro/books?id=AvVPlyYjX7YC&pg=PA234&lpg=PA234&dq=julius+africanus+ptolemy+claudius&source=bl&ots=CZr56Yd7Tb&sig=9uZL0ZjEZERkoHr6m4PMM63R6Ho&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=CR4QVcK0E4GBU6aPgxA&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=julius%20africanus%20ptolemy%20claudius&f=false (https://books.google.ro/books?id=AvVPlyYjX7YC&pg=PA234&lpg=PA234&dq=julius+africanus+ptolemy+claudius&source=bl&ots=CZr56Yd7Tb&sig=9uZL0ZjEZERkoHr6m4PMM63R6Ho&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=CR4QVcK0E4GBU6aPgxA&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=julius%20africanus%20ptolemy%20claudius&f=false)


And Eusebius bases his work on chronology exactly on the publications of Julius Africanus:

Julius Africanus was a Christian writer (A.D. c.170-c.240) ... As a whole, [his Chronographies] has been lost, but there are quotations and extracts from it in Eusebius and other writers, while Eusebius himself probably based his own Chronicle upon it. (Finegan, page 140)

In the Church History Eusebius also refers in very complimentary terms ... to the Chronographies of Africanus, and his acquaintance with and high regard for that work make it probable that it provided much of the basis for his own Chronicle. (Finegan, page 148)


Each and every other detail attributed to Dionysius Exiguus' biography, the central pillar of chronology, had to be falsified/invented at the very same time Exiguus' false works were forged: Hippolytus, Irenaeus, Athanasius, Anatolius, Demetrius, Bede.


Here we have the most direct, comprehensive, and splendid proof (which no RE or UAFE can deny) that our official chronology of history was absolutely falsified during the Renaissance:

Dionysius Exiguus, On Easter (translation from Latin to English)

(https://s8.postimg.org/5p6td6wo5/dio1.jpg)


http://www.ccel.org/ccel/pearse/morefathers/files/dionysius_exiguus_easter_01.htm (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/pearse/morefathers/files/dionysius_exiguus_easter_01.htm)


Exiguus assigns the date of March 24, year 563 AD, for the Passover.


However, in the year 563 AD, the Passover fell on March 25.

(https://s15.postimg.org/q1wqtvofv/dio3.jpg)


http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~gent0113/easter/easter_text4a.htm (http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~gent0113/easter/easter_text4a.htm)


Dr. G. Nosovsky:

We don’t have to observe the sky or perform astronomical calculations every time; compiling a table of March and April full moons for any given period of 19 years should suffice for further reference. The reason is that the phases of the moon recur every 19 years in the Julian calendar, and the recurrence cycle remains unaltered for centuries on end – that is, if the full moon fell on the 25th March any given year, it shall occur on the 25th of March in 19 years, in 38 (19 x 2) years, etc.

The malfunctions in the cycle shall begin after 300 years, which is to say that if we cover 300 years in 19-year cycles, the full moon shall gradually begin to migrate to its neighbouring location in the calendar. The same applies to new moons and all the other phases of the moon.


http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=52083.0#.VRVdovysWCo (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=52083.0#.VRVdovysWCo)


But Exiguus could not have been unaware of the date of Passover in the the almost contemporary year 563! To that end it was sufficient to apply the Metonian cycle to the coming 30-40 years; the inaccuracy of the Metonian cycle does not show up for such intervals.

As he specially worked with the calendar situation of almost contemporary year 563 and as he based his calculation of the era "since the birth of Christ" on this situation, Dionysius could not help seeing that, first, the calendar situation in the year 563 did not conform to the Gospels' description and, second, that the coincidence of Easter with Passover in 563 contradicts the essence of the determination of Easter the Easter Book is based on.


Therefore, it appears absolutely incredible that the calculations of the First Easter and of the Birth of Christ had been carried out in the 6th century on the basis of the calendar situation of the year 563. It was shown in Sec. 1 that the Easter Book, used by Dionysius, had not been compiled before the 8th century and had been canonized only at the end of the 9th century. Therefore, the calculations carried out by (or ascribed to) Dionysius the Little had not been carried out before the lOth century.


(https://s1.postimg.org/4nhwrkzen/sky22.jpg)
(https://s3.postimg.org/dy3rh17oj/sky23.jpg)
(https://s1.postimg.org/z30wy31pr/sky24.jpg)
(https://s12.postimg.org/5qg47u5m5/sky25.jpg)


Dr. G.V. Nosovksy verified the interval of 100 BC - 1700 AD, using the exact conditions stipulated by Exiguus, and found that ONLY the date of 1095 AD corresponds exactly.



http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488947#msg1488947 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488947#msg1488947) (no axial precession for the Earth)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 30, 2015, 05:29:06 AM
Recently the sky rotation (southern hemisphere vs. northern hemisphere) question came up.

But it has been answered a long time ago: it can explained ONLY within the context of my FAQ.

Global Piri Reis FE map:

(http://web.archive.org/web/20061224004927/http://geocities.com/levelwater/africabrazil.gif)


There are three kinds of stellar orbits, here is the photograph to prove it:

(http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/0903/5hOHPsanterne900.jpg)


Let us remember that both the North Pole and the South Pole have NEVER been actually discovered:

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/tierra_hueca/tierrahueca/contents.htm (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/tierra_hueca/tierrahueca/contents.htm)

The region the HE take as the entrance to the inner earth, is actually the region on the Flat Earth which cannot be accessed by either land, sea or air, as the expeditions of both Peary and Cook proved clearly: neither could discover the North Pole at all (in Antarctica, we have already seen how R. Scott was assasinated in an earlier discussion). The curvature paradox also applied equally well to the HE hypothesis: since there is no curvature at the surface of the Earth, the Hollow Earth cannot be true.



(http://www.alliancesforhumanity.com/matter/matter_files/image007.jpg)

The two regions at the poles where stars rotate have a certain analogy to the subquark vortices exemplified above.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 30, 2015, 06:55:58 AM
The myth about Eratosthenes:

http://www.ilya.it/chrono/pages/erdmessungen.htm (http://www.ilya.it/chrono/pages/erdmessungen.htm)

The new chronologist Uwe Topper brought new light upon an "ancient" method used to calculate distances, so we will start with this.

In school we learned that Eratosthenes (276-194 B.C.), director of the great library at Alexandria, was the first to determine the size of the earth. Yet his alleged method does not convince me at all.

The following procedure is described: He assumed that Alexandria and Syene (now Assuan on the Nile before the first cataract) are situated on the same meridian and are exactly 5000 stades distant from each other. The latitudinal difference is given as 7°12' which is accurate. But these towns don't lie on the same meridian - Alexandria is 30° eastern longitude and Syene is 33°. The difference of 3° amounts to more than 300 km. We don't know how Eratosthenes determined these towns are 5000 stades distant (which is close enough). From these data Eratosthenes calculated the circumference of our planet to be 252,000 stades, which is astonishingly correct. The stade used in Egypt is 157,5 m, and thus the earth's circumference 39,690 km which is fairly correct (today a bit more than 40,000). It means roundabout 110 km distance between two parallels (today 111 km).

The latitudinal difference between Alexandria and Syene, 7°12', is exactly a 50th part of the whole circumference. If this had been applied correctly in the calculation, the circumference would have come to 250,000 stades, or 2000 stades short of what Eratosthenes assumed. This suggests he knew the outcome in advance and only looked for measures that let to the right result.


The Renaissance "ancient" astronomers:

(https://s9.postimg.org/69akm4psv/odds1h_zps9fe75b9d.jpg)

(https://s23.postimg.org/gtnd09e2j/odds2_zpsea36618e.jpg)

(https://s4.postimg.org/8roxp7x4t/odds3_zpsa5e77aeb.jpg)

(https://s16.postimg.org/eevespaqd/odds4_zps9cc5dc01.jpg)



It is usually assumed that π was a very important quantity to the "ancient" geometers/mathematicians: Archimedes, Ptolemy, Aryabatha, or that π was used to calculate the dimensions of the Gizeh pyramid.

The architects at Gizeh used ONLY the sacred cubit.

The sacred cubit is the RECIPROCAL value of π/2, the main quantity/factor which matters.


π = 2/sc = 2/0.6366197723675813...


Official course on trigonometry (http://www.mathsisfun.com/algebra/trigonometry.html (http://www.mathsisfun.com/algebra/trigonometry.html) and http://www.nabla.hr/TF-TrigFunctionsB1.htm (http://www.nabla.hr/TF-TrigFunctionsB1.htm)  ):

When we need to calculate the function for an angle larger than a full rotation of 2π (360°) we subtract as many full rotations as needed to bring it back below 2π (360°).

That is x/π = v

Then, the angle is reduced to the first two quadrants x - [v]π , where [] the integer part

Thus we have a long division by π, followed by a multiplication by π.


The sacred cubit approach is much easier by comparison.


y = a x sc (a, the angle, multiplied by one sacred cubit)

cos a = cos y/sc = cos (([y] + {y})/sc)  -  [y] the integer part of y  -  {y} the fractional part of y


A single multiplication by a sacred cubit does the job.


cos (([y] + {y})/sc) = cos([y]/sc)cos({y}/sc) - sin([y]/sc)sin({y}/sc)


Now, we switch back to the reciprocal value of the sacred cubit notation:

cos([y]/sc) = cos (π/2 x [y]) where [y] = 2k or 2k + 1 (and, of course, k is either even or odd)


Two examples.

cos 1054 = cos 1.56646 = 0.0043352

1054 x 1sc = 670.997 = 670 + 0.997

0.997/sc = π/2 x 0.997


Now, to calculate cos (π x 0.498582) I would use, of course, my global cosine formula, with n = 8

cos v = 1/2 x (   (     (  ( ( (2 - v2/2n)2 )2 )2  )2  ) -2 )


cos 1052 = cos 2.70806 = -0.90748

1052 x 1sc = 669.7 = 669 + 0.724

0.724/sc = π/2 x 0.362

To calculate sin({y}/sc), I would utilize the following formula:

sin π@ =  π@ x (1 - @2/12)(1 - @2/22)...


For an infinite trigonometric sum/series, the most difficult of all series, I would start with the [] and {} formulas:

{x} = x2 Σ(1/n2) - [ x ] + x2 + x - x2 Σ(1/n2)

(for the first sum the lower and upper limits are 1 and [ x ]; for the second, x)


[ x ] = xΣ(1/k) - INTEGRAL SIGN/FUNCTION

(for the first series k<=x; the lower and upper limits of the integral are 0 and x ; f(t) = Σ(1/k) where k<=t, and the integral is taken with respect to t)

Σ(1/k) = xΣ(1/(k(k+x)) (where k<=x for the first series, and for the second we have 1 and ∞)


For the sums which involve logarithms/exponents, I created a new summing method, which uses as the main term:

n = ln(51/2Fn)/ln(4sc2), where 4sc2 = phi

Fn = nth Fibonacci number

It can be used to calculate series which can be summed by the Euler-Maclaurin formula, and also series like this:

Σ(x3/2ln(xx + ex))
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 31, 2015, 06:11:51 AM
THE BLACK SUN AND THE LAEVOROTATORY SUBQUARKS


The detection of subquarks:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1278981#msg1278981 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1278981#msg1278981)

Chris Hill, theorist at Fermilab, indicated the view in “New Scientist” | 11 May 1996 | page 29 | “It would suggest that whatever lies inside the quarks is incredibly tightly bound, in a way that theory can’t yet accommodate.”


Absolute proof of the existence of subquarks:

https://web.archive.org/web/20120128042636/http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_09_4_phillips.pdf (https://web.archive.org/web/20120128042636/http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_09_4_phillips.pdf) (Dr. Stephen Phillips, UCLA, Cambridge)

See also: http://www.esotericscience.org/article5a.htm (http://www.esotericscience.org/article5a.htm)



http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1401101#msg1401101 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1401101#msg1401101) (subquarks, quarks, mesons, baryons)

This is true, remarkable, even for elements like francium and astatine, whose atomic weights must have been unknown to Besant and Leadbeater because science discovered them in, respectively,  1939  and  1940,  about seven years  after the deaths of  the two Theosophists.  How, if  MPAs  are not atoms, could they have anticipated  in 1908 - five years before scientists suspected the existence of isotopes - the fact that an element such as neon could have more than one type of  atom, an MPA, moreover, whose calculated number weight of 22.33 is consistent with their having detected with micro-psi the neon-22 nuclide before the physicist J. J. Thomson discovered it in  1913? One must turn to particle physics for answers.

This paper has presented evidence (summarized in Table 3) of how facts of nuclear and particle physics are consistent with purported psychic descriptions of subatomic particles.  It is because Besant and Leadbeater finished their ob-servations many years before pertinent scientific knowledge became available that their work cannot be rejected  as fraudulent once this consistency is accepted.  Nor can critics plausible interpret their observations as precognitive  visions of future ideas and discoveries of  physics.  If  this had been the case, Besant and Leadbeater might reasonably have been expected to describe atoms according to the Rutherford-Bohr model.


(https://s18.postimg.org/b8zld9eop/upa1.jpg)
(https://s15.postimg.org/5cxh5dskr/upa2.jpg)
(https://s18.postimg.org/s7itngxw9/upa3.jpg)

(https://s9.postimg.org/6giir17yn/image.jpg)
(https://s10.postimg.org/9bdf10r95/image.jpg)
(https://s22.postimg.org/5x975dmb5/image.jpg)
(https://s11.postimg.org/ipl1kvukj/image.jpg)
(https://s7.postimg.org/uedi4yhjv/image.jpg)
(https://s15.postimg.org/hnufrl5gb/image.jpg)
(https://s13.postimg.org/u1syknocn/image.jpg)
(https://s12.postimg.org/vaiee9qzx/image.jpg)
(https://s8.postimg.org/gy68lus5h/image.jpg)
(https://s11.postimg.org/bciph11tv/q10.jpg)



The catastrophic Rutherford-Bohr-Chadwick planetary atom model:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=61446.msg1604716#msg1604716 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=61446.msg1604716#msg1604716)



WHAT IS BIOHOMOCHIRALITY?

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488624#msg1488624 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488624#msg1488624)

Some molecules come in left– and right-handed forms that are mirror images of each other (i.e.: they are related like our left and right hands. Hence this property is called chirality, from the Greek word for hand. The two forms are called enantiomers (from the Greek word for opposite) or optical isomers, because they rotate plane-polarised light either to the right or to the left.).  All biological proteins are composed of only left-handed amino acids.  How this could have come about in a primordial soup has long been a puzzle to origin-of-life researchers, since both L (levo, left-handed) and D (dextro, right-handed) forms react indiscriminately.

Francis Crick, codiscoverer of the DNA structure, describes this strange characteristic of the molecules of living organisms:

    It has been well known for many years that for any particular molecule only one hand occurs in nature.  For example the amino acids one finds in proteins are always what are called the L or levo amino acids, and never the D or dextro amino acids.  Only one of the two mirror possibilities occurs in proteins.


Linus Pauling, Nobel laureate in chemistry:

        This is a very puzzling fact . . . . All the proteins that have been investigated, obtained from animals and from plants, from higher organisms and from very simple organisms bacteria, molds, even viruses are found to have been made of L-amino acids.



The origin of biohomochirality is to be found in the physics of the subquark:

(http://hpb.narod.ru/tph/OC003.JPG)

Dr.T. Henry Moray:

Further I realized that the energy was not coming out of the earth, but instead was coming to the earth from some outside source. These electrical oscillations in the form of waves were not simple oscillations, but were surgings --- like the waves of the sea --- coming to the earth continually, more in the daytime than at night, but always coming in vibrations from the reservoir of colossal energy out there in space.


Living tissue (with the exception of some bacteria) contains only L-amino acids (laevorotatory-left handed); dead tissue only D-amino acids (dextrorotatory-right handed).


Terrestrial gravity is represented by the dextrorotatory strings of receptive subquarks; antigravity comes into play once we can activate the laevorotatory strings of emissive subquarks (by torsion, sound, applying high electrical tension (see the Biefeld-Brown effect)).


The detection of the Higgs boson in the 1950s by G. Hodson:

http://www.smphillips.mysite.com/news.html


THE SOLAR ECLIPSE CANNOT BE CAUSED BY THE MOON: THE ALLAIS EFFECT


The Allais Effect I

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1623305#msg1623305 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1623305#msg1623305)


Dr. Maurice Allais:  Should the laws of gravitation be reconsidered?

http://allais.maurice.free.fr/English/media10-12.htm (http://allais.maurice.free.fr/English/media10-12.htm)

In the present status of the discussion, the abnormalities observed can be accounted for only by considering the existence of a new field. (page 12)


Dr. Maurice Allais report to Nasa:

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

Orders of magnitude incompatible with current theory

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.


The Allais Effect II (detection during the 1999, 2003, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 solar eclipses):

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1626747#msg1626747 (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 (http://stoner.phys.uaic.ro/jarp/index.php/jarp/article/viewFile/40/22)


Given the above, the authors consider that it is an inescapable conclusion from our experiments that after the end of the visible eclipse, as the Moon departed the angular vicinity of the Sun, 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.


We therefore are compelled to the opinion that some currently unknown physical influence was at work.



The Allais Effect III (the radiation of the Black Sun and commentaries of the 19th century's most accomplished astronomers: the existence of at least TWO dark bodies which also orbit the earth):

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1628430#msg1628430 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1628430#msg1628430)



The Allais Effect IV (the identity of the third heavenly body which takes part in a solar eclipse, other than the Sun and the Earth)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1629054#msg1629054 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1629054#msg1629054)


The three vertical panels to its right illustrate the pendulum’s “highly anomalous motions” -- recorded during two partial solar eclipses to cross Allais’ Paris laboratory in the 1950’s (the first in 1954, the second in 1959); the phase of each eclipse that corresponded with these “anomalous motions,” is depicted in the last three vertical strips (far right)."

(http://www.enterprisemission.com/Eclipse-Allais-Pendulum-motions.jpg)

"This normal, downward-sloping trend is abruptly REVERSED!

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) for even the 180-degree, "opposite" alignment of the sun and moon ... which, as previously noted, was also directly measured via the torsion pendulum two weeks after the March 7 eclipse!



The Allais Effect VI (axial precession is not related to Newtonian mechanics)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1642033#msg1642033 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1642033#msg1642033)



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

The detailed behavior of both pendulums over the eclipse period shown in Fig. 8 was remarkable. 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.



Analysis. This long Foucault-type pendulum behaved in a very stable manner. However well after the end of the locally visible eclipse, at around 11:33 (to the recording resolution, i.e. between the readings at 11:29 and 11:36), some influence clearly acted for a short period to increase the precession rate. This influence was no longer apparent during the next inter-reading interval (from 11:36 to 11:43), and then reversed itself to some extent during the next interval (from 11:43 to 11:50).


(http://science.nasa.gov/media/medialibrary/1999/10/08/ast12oct99_1_resources/allais.gif)

The eclipse and the pendulum - How the pendulum's swing angle changed during the 1954 eclipse
The plane of the oscillation of the pendulum shifted approximately 15 centesimal degrees during the eclipse (approximately 13.5 degrees)


The Allais Effect VII (stationary earth/Foucault's pendulum anomalies)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1642668#msg1642668 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1642668#msg1642668)

The physical reality is this. The Allais effect noticed can be due to either a momentary fluctuation in the earths rotation, or in the aethers rotation over that area of space where the alignment occurs.  The former for obvious reasons (the energy factor) is illogical.

"Nobel prize winner Maurice Allais had to go and throw another monkey wrench in the spokes of the heliocentric bicycle. Allais performed a marathon 30 day Foucault Pendulum experiment in 1954. During the experiment an eclipse occurred. Surprisingly, the pendulum changed angles by a significant 13.5 degrees! This suggests something in space was affecting the pendulum, not the motion of the earth."
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 01, 2015, 03:19:07 AM
JULY 1, 1908 LETTER SENT TO THE LONDON TIMES

http://www.nuforc.org/GNTungus.html (http://www.nuforc.org/GNTungus.html)

“TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES.”

“Sir,--I should be interested in hearing whether others of your readers observed the strange light in the sky which was seen here last night by my sister and myself. I do not know when it first appeared; we saw it between 12 o’clock (midnight) and 12:15 a.m.  It was in the northeast and of a bright flame-colour like the light of sunrise or sunset.  The sky, for some distance above the light, which appeared to be on the horizon, was blue as in the daytime, with bands of light cloud of a pinkish colour floating across it at intervals.  Only the brightest stars could be seen in any part of the sky, though it was an almost cloudless night.  It was possible to read large print indoors, and the hands of the clock in my room were quite distinct.  An hour later, at about 1:30 a.m., the room was quite light, as if it had been day; the light in the sky was then more dispersed and was a fainter yellow.  The whole effect was that of a night in Norway at about this time of year.  I am in the habit of watching the sky, and have noticed the amount of light indoors at different hours of the night several times in the last fortnight.  I have never at any time seen anything the least like this in England, and it would be interesting if any one would explain the cause of so unusual a sight.

Yours faithfully,
Katharine Stephen.
Godmanchester, Huntingdon, July 1.”


Let us remember that the first newspaper report about the explosion itself ONLY appeared on July 2, 1908 in the Sibir periodical.



A report from Berlin in the New York Times of July 3 stated: 'Remarkable lights were observed in the northern heavens on Tuesday and Wednesday nights, the bright diffused white and yellow illumination continuing through the night until it disappeared at dawn...'

On July 5, (1908) a New York Times story from Britain was entitled: 'Like Dawn at Midnight.' '...The northern sky at midnight became light blue, as if the dawn were breaking...people believed that a big fire was raging in the north of London...shortly after midnight, it was possible to read large print indoors...it would be interesting if anyone would explain the cause of so unusual a sight.'


The letter sent by Mrs. Katharine Stephen is absolutely genuine as it includes details NOBODY else knew at the time: not only the precise timing of the explosion itself (7:15 - 7:17 local time, 0:15 - 0:17 London time), BUT ALSO THE DURATION OF THE TRAJECTORY OF THE OBJECT, right before the explosion, a fact uncovered decades later only by the painstaking research of Dr. Felix Zigel, an aerodynamics professor at the Moscow Institute of Aviation:


The same opinion was reached by Felix Zigel, who as an aerodynamics professor at the Moscow Institute of Aviation has been involved in the training of many Soviet cosmonauts. His latest study of all the eyewitness and physical data convinced him that "before the blast the Tunguska body described in the atmosphere a tremendous arc of about 375 miles in extent (in azimuth)" - that is, it "carried out a maneuver." No natural object is capable of such a feat.



Manotskov decided that the 1908 object, on the other hand, had a far slower entry speed and that, nearing the earth, it reduced its speed to "0.7 kilometers per second, or 2,400 kilometers per hour" - less than half a mile per second.

375 miles = 600 km, or 15 minutes of flight time, given the speed exemplified above


I do not know when it first appeared; we saw it between 12 o’clock (midnight) and 12:15 a.m.


LeMaire maintains the "accident-explanation is untenable" because "the flaming object was being expertly navigated" using Lake Baikal as a reference point. Indeed, Lake Baikal is an ideal aerial navigation reference point being 400 miles long and about 35 miles wide. LeMaire's description of the course of the Tunguska object lends credence to the thought of expert navigation:

The body approached from the south, but when about 140 miles from the explosion point, while over Kezhma, it abruptly changed course to the east. Two hundred and fifty miles later, while above Preobrazhenka, it reversed its heading toward the west. It exploded above the taiga at 60º55' N, 101º57' E (LeMaire 1980).


Stations were anomalous bright nights were observed on June 30/July 1 1908:

http://imageshack.com/a/img23/1513/x7z5.jpg (http://imageshack.com/a/img23/1513/x7z5.jpg)


(http://www.phenomena.org.uk/features/page88/files/tunguska-3.jpg)

A photograph with an exposure time of 20 seconds taken at 10.5 p.m., July 1, 1908 by George Embrey of Gloucester.

http://www.phenomena.org.uk/features/page88/page88.html (http://www.phenomena.org.uk/features/page88/page88.html)


Sky-glow and shining clouds: drawing from a photograph taken in Russia on the night of 30 June - 1 July, 1908

(http://www.phenomena.org.uk/features/page88/files/dscf3603.jpg)



Tunguska file:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,59690.msg1537115.html#msg1537115 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,59690.msg1537115.html#msg1537115)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=59690.msg1535846#msg1535846 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=59690.msg1535846#msg1535846) (no comet, meteorite, or asteroid)


Tesla - Tunguska:

http://www.teslasociety.com/tunguska.htm (http://www.teslasociety.com/tunguska.htm)
http://www.tfcbooks.com/articles/tunguska.htm (http://www.tfcbooks.com/articles/tunguska.htm)

In London on the night of June 30th the air-glow illuminates the northern quadrant of the heavens so brightly that the Times can be read at midnight. In Antwerp the glare of what looks like a huge bonfire rises twenty degrees above the northern horizon, and the sweep second hands of stopwatches are clearly visible at one a.m. In Stockholm, photographers find they can take pictures out of doors without need of cumbersome flash apparatus at any time of night from June 30th to July 3rd.


If the light from the Sun could not reach London due to curvature and/or any light reflection phenomena, then certainly NO LIGHT from an explosion which occurred at some 7 km altitude in the atmosphere could have been seen at all, at the same time, on a spherical earth.


Eyewitness accounts from Lake Baikal and Nizshne-Karelinskoye: a clear proof that no curvature exists at the surface of the Earth.

Nizshne-Karelinskoye (465 km). Extremely bright (it was impossible to look at it) luminous body was seen rather high in the north-western sky soon after 8 a.m. It looked like a tube (cylinder) and for 10 minutes moved down to the ground. The sky was clear, but only in the side, where the body was seen, a small dark cloud was present low above the horizon. While coming to the ground, the body dispersed (flattened) and at this place a large puff of black smoke appeared. Then a flame emanated from this cloud.

500 meter altitude - 11.6 km visual obstacle
800 meter altitude - 10.4 km visual obstacle
1000 meters altitude - 9.7 km visual obstacle

At around 7:15 a.m., Tungus natives and Russian settlers in the hills northwest of Lake Baikal observed a column of bluish light, nearly as bright as the Sun, moving across the sky. About 10 minutes later, there was a flash and a loud "knocking" sound similar to artillery fire that went in short bursts spaced increasingly wider apart.

http://www.salem-news.com/articles/june302008/tunguska_day_6-30-08.php (http://www.salem-news.com/articles/june302008/tunguska_day_6-30-08.php)

That is when Tungus natives and others living in the hills northwest of Russia's Lake Baikal reported seeing a column of bluish light, that they described as being almost as bright as the Sun, moving across the sky.

A few minutes later they reported a flash and a sound that many said resembled artillery fire. The accompanying shock wave broke windows thousands of miles away from the impact zone, and knocked countless numbers of people to the ground.


Even if we take a 560 km distance to Tunguska, and a 1 km altitude (although Lake Baikal is located at some 435 meters in elevation), the visual obstacle will measure 15.5 km, no way for anybody located at Lake Baikal to have seen the explosion itself.

Let us ascend to 1,6 km in altitude at Lake Baikal; even then, the visual obstacle will measure 13.66 km.


NO ONE FROM LAKE BAIKAL OR NIZSHNE COULD HAVE SEEN THE EXPLOSION ON A ROUND EARTH.


The relationship between the glow seen for several nights all the way from Europe, telluric currents and aether:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=59690.msg1536443#msg1536443 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=59690.msg1536443#msg1536443)


Ballistic evidence:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=59690.msg1536460#msg1536460 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=59690.msg1536460#msg1536460)


Geo-magnetic disturbances were already observed even before the explosion!!

Many years later, researchers from Tomsk came across a forgotten publication by a Professor Weber about a powerful geo-magnetic disturbance observed in a laboratory at Kiel University in Germany for three days before the intrusion of the Tunguska object, and which ended at the very hour when the gigantic bolide exploded above the Central Siberian Plateau.


Tesla experimented with the ball lightning ether for YEARS before the Tunguska event; from the Wardenclyffe tower he sent longitudinal waves for days BEFORE the event itself in order to carefully set up the experiment.


Now, let me describe how the entire experiment was carried out.

http://www.cheniere.org/books/part1/teslaweapons.htm (http://www.cheniere.org/books/part1/teslaweapons.htm)

(http://www.cheniere.org/books/part1/fig10.jpg)

"In the continuous mode, two continuous scalar waves are emitted -- one faster than the other -- and they pair-couple into vector energy at the region where they approach an in-phase condition. In this mode, the energy in the distant "ball" or geometric region would appear continuously and be sustained -- and this is Tesla's secret of wireless transmission of energy at a distance without any losses.

Two scalar antennas were required: an explosion requires the presence of both scalar waves at the same point."

Tesla sent just one scalar wave for several days prior to the explosion to properly set up the aerial navigation.


A ray of light DOES NOT split into any component colours.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1394310#msg1394310 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1394310#msg1394310)


A few years ago, when the archive of the London Times could be accessed directly, I verified that indeed the three letters were published by the newspaper exactly as documented above: July 2, July 3 and July 4, 1908.

On a spherical earth, nothing could have been observed by Mrs. Katharine Stephen of
Godmanchester, Huntingdon: not the exact time of the explosion, not the exact timing of the trajectory itself before the explosion.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 02, 2015, 06:33:03 AM
JULY 1, 1908 LETTER SENT TO THE LONDON TIMES II

I edited the previous message to include many more details.


Now, the incredible fact that EVEN BEFORE THE DAY OF THE BLAST ITSELF (JUNE 30, 1908), a strange glow was observed over Siberia.

http://www.nkj.ru/archive/articles/14336 (http://www.nkj.ru/archive/articles/14336)

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nkj.ru%2Farchive%2Farticles%2F14336&edit-text= (https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nkj.ru%2Farchive%2Farticles%2F14336&edit-text=)

In brief: the witnesses stated that the anomalous skyglow commenced approximately 2 days before Tunguska!

“Scientists recorded the occurrence of some unusual phenomena starting on June 27th, 1908. Some specialists even suppose that these phenomena started as early as June 23 or June 21… Optical anomalies in the atmosphere (strange silvery clouds, brilliant twilights, and intense solar halos) were observed in western Europe, the European part of Russia, and western Siberia, beginning on June 23, 1908."

Exact reference: http://olkhov.narod.ru/tunguska.htm (http://olkhov.narod.ru/tunguska.htm)

THE TUNGUSKA EVENT: WHAT WE KNOW TODAY AND WHAT WE HOPE TO LEARN SOON

N. V. Vasilyev

(Kharkov Metchnikoff Institute and Commission on Meteorites of the Siberian Section of the Russian Academy of Sciences)



The only other similar emissions are those circa 1900 high-frequency, high-voltage scalar wave experiments by Tesla, where massive blue-white streams of arching electricity issued from the forest floor into the atmosphere, creating an intense, violent, blue-white glow, emitting an electrical noise, which was audible for miles and lasting several minutes.


http://altered-states.net/barry/tesla/ (http://altered-states.net/barry/tesla/) (the section Lighting up the sky)

Geo-magnetic disturbances were already observed even before the explosion!!

Many years later, researchers from Tomsk came across a forgotten publication by a Professor Weber about a powerful geo-magnetic disturbance observed in a laboratory at Kiel University in Germany for three days before the intrusion of the Tunguska object, and which ended at the very hour when the gigantic bolide exploded above the Central Siberian Plateau.


Tesla experimented with the ball lightning ether for YEARS before the Tunguska event; from the Wardenclyffe tower he sent longitudinal waves for days BEFORE the event itself in order to carefully set up the experiment.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 04, 2015, 01:27:35 AM
JULY 1, 1908 LETTER SENT TO THE LONDON TIMES III


(https://s17.postimg.org/3pp8wjacv/tunguska.jpg)

The fight path of the cosmic object, as reconstructed from eyewitness testimony and ballistic wave evidence. Felix Zigel and other space experts agree that, prior to exploding, the object changed from an eastward to a westward direction over the Stony Tunguska region. The arc at the bottom of the map indicates the scope of the area where witnesses either saw the fiery object or heard the blast.


The information acquired by the Florensky and Zolotov expeditions about the ballistic shock effect on the trees provides a strong basis, in some scientists' view, for a reconstruction of an alteration in the object's line of flight. In the terminal phase of its descent, according to the most recent speculations, the object appears to have approached on an eastward course, then changed course westward over the region before exploding. The ballistic wave evidence, in fact, indicates that some type of flight correction was performed in the atmosphere.


The same opinion was reached by Felix Zigel, who as an aerodynamics professor at the Moscow Institute of Aviation has been involved in the training of many Soviet cosmonauts. His latest study of all the eyewitness and physical data convinced him that "before the blast the Tunguska body described in the atmosphere a tremendous arc of about 375 miles in extent (in azimuth)" - that is, it "carried out a maneuver." No natural object is capable of such a feat.


UFOs/Jet aircrafts/V2 rockets were invented by the Vril society, only after 1936.



http://www.rense.com/UFO/london.htm (http://www.rense.com/UFO/london.htm) (The following letter [the Katharine Stephen letter dated July 1, 1908] was the first of several letters and articles to appear in "The Times" (London), which describe the highly unusual meteorological events, and magnetic anomaly, that were observed not only over England, but over all of Western Europe, as well.)

Curious Articles In The  Times Of London From July 1908
Curious Phenomenon Reported to the Times of London July 1908



In the archives of the former Irkutsk Magnetic and Meteorological Observatory, investigators managed to find notes written by A. K. Kokorin, who was an observer at a weather station on the River Kezhma, about 600 km from the Tunguska explosion site. In his observation journal for June 1908, the section headed "Notes" contains an exceptionally important entry.
 
It shows that there was certainly more than one body in the air at that time.

At 7 am, two fiery circles [spheres] of gigantic size appeared to the north; 4 minutes after appearing, the circles disappeared; soon after the disappearance of the fiery circles a loud noise was heard, similar to the sound of the wind, that went from north to south; the noise lasted about 5 minutes; then followed sounds and thundering, like shots from enormous guns, that made the windows rattle. Those shots continued for 2 minutes, and after them came a crack like a rifle-shot. These last sounds lasted 2 minutes. Everything took place in broad daylight.
At that time, T. Naumenko was observing the flight of a sphere from the village of Kezhma which stands on the River Angara.


"In the continuous mode, two continuous scalar waves are emitted -- one faster than the other -- and they pair-couple into vector energy at the region where they approach an in-phase condition. In this mode, the energy in the distant "ball" or geometric region would appear continuously and be sustained -- and this is Tesla's secret of wireless transmission of energy at a distance without any losses.

Two scalar antennas were required: an explosion requires the presence of both scalar waves at the same point."

SEE ALSO:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1995026#msg1995026


BALL LIGHTNING: the demonstration that the Tunguska explosion was caused by a ball lightning phenomenon:

http://www.worldsci.org/pdf/ebooks/Chukanov-BallLightning.pdf (http://www.worldsci.org/pdf/ebooks/Chukanov-BallLightning.pdf) (section II, the Tunguska "meteorite")

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 06, 2015, 05:43:43 AM
JULY 1, 1908 LETTER SENT TO THE LONDON TIMES IV

"The most impressive observation of ball lightning made in contemporary times is
the so-called ”Tunguska meteorite” For this reason I devote to this unusual natural
phenomenon special chapter. The “Tunguska meteorite” occurred in the basin of the
Podkamenna River in Tunguska region (Russia) in 1908. According to witnesses, an
enormous bright ball, 400 meters in diameter, appeared in the air. The devastation was so
intense that scientists have also hypothesized that it was an anti-matter body which had
penetrated the earth’s atmosphere, a nuclear explosion, or an enormous comet. I believe
rather that it was an extremely large ball lightning sphere for the following reasons:

- First, a nuclear explosion, even assuming that such a device could have been
created on earth in 1908 or sent to earth from an extraterrestrial source, can be
ruled out. Isotope studies of the soil composition, inert gases, and minerals in the
Tunguska region and fireball site show no elevation in the number of neutrons
which would normally accompany a nuclear explosion.

- Second, no metallic traces or typical debris from meteorite were found.

- Third, a comet can also be ruled out. The heat generated when a comet entered the
atmosphere should have disintegrated most of it; the melting and vaporization of
the ice in the comet’s head would have produced an enormous cloud of gases and
vapor. Although there were significant atmospheric anomalies between 30 June
and 2 July 1908, no such cloud was observed.

- Fourth, the usual reason for rejecting ball lightning as the cause of devastation is
that the weather was sunny. There were no rainstorms. Although it is true that
rainstorms favor the occurrence of ball lightning, it can materialize at any time
given conditions necessary for complete ionization of gases in certain volume.
And in fact, such conditions were present at Tunguska region. In 1908 the elevenyear
cycle of sunspot activity coincided with the century cycle; oscillations in
sunspot activity increased rapidly, reaching critical values toward the end of June
1908. This activity was accompanied by fluctuations in sunspot activity, increased
brightness in the sun’s corona, radio emissions in the visible band (a factor which
increases the probability of air ionization), an increased number of solar flares,
and the appearance of great sun spots. In general such increased sun activity
manifests itself in the earth’s atmosphere by intensified geomagnetic activity, the
presence of abnormal optic events such as an unusual distribution of silvery
clouds, bright dawns, disturbance in the atmospheric polarization, and brightly lit
night skies, which started about 25 June, reached climaxes on the date of the
catastrophe, and slowly passed away over next few days. These phenomena
indicate that there were very favorable conditions facilitating the ionization of a
large volume of gas.

- Fifth, there are many uncertainties about the trajectory of the Tunguska
phenomenon. It seems that the fireball’s motion included some deviations from a
straight-line “fall” (or ballistic line) that would have been impossible for
meteorites, comets, and other natural bodies. Ball lightning, however, can
maneuver in both horizontal and vertical plans; its motion is governed by earth’s
gravitational field and by the electromagnetic fields in the atmosphere. Certain
disturbances in the magnetic fields on earth were registered in Irkutsk (city in
Siberia) following the explosion, thus supporting my hypothesis.

- Sixth, ball lightning is a spherical capacitor, carrying heavy electromagnetic loads
which affect the neighboring magnetic fields. Studies of soils in the surrounding
area have determined their remagnetizations. Such a phenomenon is certainly
possible, given the powerful electromagnetic impulse which usually accompanies
an explosion of the ball lightning sphere. Ball lightning can explode because of
the leakage of electrical charges from the sphere and the resulting disintegration
of its structureless nuclear component. On another hand, ball lightning could be
excited by some electrical current which occurred at the moment just before
explosion. We, human beings on planet earth, had incredible chance that
“Tunguska meteorite” was excited not much. The explosion of the Tunguska ball
lightning yielded powerful currents of charged particles moving irregularly. These
charged particles created strong electromagnetic fields, which demagnetized soils
in the region.

- Seventh, large ball lightning typically disintegrates into smaller spheres, which
further disintegrate into still smaller spheres, until finally they explode. Fires
broke out simultaneously at widely scattered areas of the forest and witnesses
reported hearing many explosions. Both facts suggest that the ball lightning
sphere followed the typical pattern of disintegration into smaller spheres before
exploding.

- Eight, the presence of mutated trees and ants along the fireball trajectory is also
consistent with the hypothesis of ball lightning. Proponents of the comet theory
point out that ultraviolet radiation would penetrate the atmosphere because of a
rupture through the ozone layer caused by the comet and its movement through
the atmosphere or, secondarily, because of the explosion wave created by the
comet’s impact. Obviously, if the rupture in the ozone layer was caused by the
explosion, then it could as easily have been caused by the explosion of the ball
lightning as by the explosion of the comet. My research shows that ball lightning
radiates all the time ultraviolet radiation. It is significant to note in this case that
the pattern of mutated trees and ants covered the whole of the fireball trajectory
which support my hypothesis and contradicts with the hypothesis of comet.
Furthermore, dendrologists claim that the new forest (with high percentage of
mutated trees) at the explosion’s epicenter sprang from seeds that had been
preserved deep in the soil. Yet ultraviolet radiation has low penetration capacity.
How could deep-buried seeds mutate at such a depth? More convincingly, the ball
lightning was excited by some electrical current and produced a lot of X-rays (or
even gama-radiation) which have much higher penetration capacity than
ultraviolet rays.

- Ninth, various hypothesis have suggested different types of explosions (thermal,
apple-like, rheological); but none of these hypothesis are sufficient to explain the
enormous energy generated during the Tunguska explosion. The accounts suggest
an accumulation of enormous energy for very short period of time on the surface
of the Tunguska phenomenon. As a result of this accumulation of energy, a
monstrous explosion occurred. Indeed, this explosion closely resembles the
profile of slightly excited large ball lightning."



MAGNETIC MONOPOLES = SUBQUARKS

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1615813#msg1615813 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1615813#msg1615813)


A graviton is NOT electrically neutral.

The recent discovery of magnet monopoles and relationship with subquarks means the following:

The dextrorotatory magnet monopole/subquark is the actual graviton.

The laevorotatory magnet monopole/subquark is the antigraviton.


THE LAMOREAUX EFFECT/THE NIPHER EXPERIMENTS:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1616174#msg1616174 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1616174#msg1616174)

The relationship between gravitation and the electric field was first observed experimentally by Dr. Francis Nipher. Nipher's conclusion was that sheilded electrostatic fields directly influence the action of gravitation. He further concluded that gravitation and electrical fields are absolutely linked.


SPINTRONICS, secret world of magnets, the most thorough work on the double helix theory of the magnetic field (double helix of the telluric currents):

http://freeenergycommunity.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/the-secret-world-of-magnets-spintronics-2006-howard-johnson.pdf (http://freeenergycommunity.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/the-secret-world-of-magnets-spintronics-2006-howard-johnson.pdf)



An electromagnetic wave is simply a ripple in the sea of ether waves: it consists of two scalar waves, which propagate in a double torsion motion.

Tesla kept the ripples in the ether sea (electromagnetic waves) to a minimum, while sending the entire signal/impulse ONLY through the laevorotatory ether scalar wave (sometimes going beyond the speed of light): it is exactly how he achieved his legendary and fantastic results, by NOT using the hertzian ripples in the ether waves.

A normal electromagnetic wave will produce a temporary ripple in the ether sea, the signal transmitted will travel at the speed of light, in the absence of a higher density of aether (medium) and ether waves.


SCALAR WAVE = A SINGLE SUBQUARK (MAGNETIC MONOPOLE) STRING

TERRESTRIAL GRAVITY = DEXTROROTATORY SCALAR WAVE

ANTIGRAVITATIONAL WAVE (EMPLOYED BY TESLA, BROWN, LEEDSKALNIN, KEELY) = LAEVOROTATORY SCALAR WAVE



BALL LIGHTNING = SCALAR WAVES/TELLURIC CURRENTS/SUBQUARS STRINGS WHICH FORM A DOUBLE TORSION TORNADO (normally, the subquark strings/ether travel linearly in double torsion motion; through special methods [employed by Kozyrev, DePalma, Tesla, Brown] the scalar waves are directed into a double torsion tornado object, that is,  ball lightning)


Ball Lightning, Paradox of Physics: https://books.google.ro/books?id=OLbvX5UnxXoC&printsec=frontcover&dq=ball+lightning&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=VH0iVfL_KJeLaOCjgqAD&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=ball%20lightning&f=false (https://books.google.ro/books?id=OLbvX5UnxXoC&printsec=frontcover&dq=ball+lightning&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=VH0iVfL_KJeLaOCjgqAD&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=ball%20lightning&f=false) (includes extensive evidence, pages 7 - 102)


Tesla, ball lightning objects kept in wooden boxes:

https://books.google.ro/books?id=HIuK7iLO9zgC&pg=PA22&lpg=PA22&dq=tesla+fireballs+wooden+boxes+lightning&source=bl&ots=Xa3Gs3ZYSU&sig=g4tZ2Wq5xgePKhMRY3ZWBSfAgTg&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=Jn4iVdXABJTdauv2gcAB&ved=0CDsQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=tesla%20fireballs%20wooden%20boxes%20lightning&f=false (https://books.google.ro/books?id=HIuK7iLO9zgC&pg=PA22&lpg=PA22&dq=tesla+fireballs+wooden+boxes+lightning&source=bl&ots=Xa3Gs3ZYSU&sig=g4tZ2Wq5xgePKhMRY3ZWBSfAgTg&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=Jn4iVdXABJTdauv2gcAB&ved=0CDsQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=tesla%20fireballs%20wooden%20boxes%20lightning&f=false)



The ball lightning spheres seen at Tunguska defied not only terrestrial gravitation, but also showed that the Earth does not orbit the Sun, or rotates around its own axis: since ball lightning is a form of double torsion strings of subquarks, it does not obey in any form the accepted law of attractive gravity, given the 29km/s accepted orbital speed of the Earth around the Sun, the ball lightning objects would have disappeared instantly from sight - the fact that they did not means that the Earth is absolutely stationary.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 08, 2015, 06:06:01 AM
JULY 1, 1908 LETTER SENT TO THE LONDON TIMES V


(https://image.ibb.co/j5jUoy/ts1.jpg)


In 1891, Nikola Tesla gave a lecture for the members of the American Institute of Electrical Engineers in New York City, where he made a striking demonstration. In each hand he held a gas discharge tube, an early version of the modern fluorescent bulb. The tubes were not connected to any wires, but nonetheless they glowed brightly during his demonstration. Tesla explained to the awestruck attendees that the electricity was being transmitted through the air by the pair of metal sheets which sandwiched the stage. He went on to speculate how one might increase the scale of this effect to transmit wireless power and information over a broad area, perhaps even the entire Earth. As was often the case, Tesla's audience was engrossed but bewildered.



Tesla had a bold fantasy whereby he would use the principle of rarefied gas luminescence to light up the sky at night. High frequency electric energy would be transmitted, perhaps by an ionizing beam of ultraviolet radiation, into the upper atmosphere, where gases are at relatively low pressure, so that this layer would behave like a luminous tube. Sky lighting, he said, would reduce the need for street lighting, and facilitate the movement of ocean going vessels.



(http://www.phenomena.org.uk/features/page88/files/tunguska-3.jpg)
A photograph with an exposure time of 20 seconds taken at 10.5 p.m., July 1, 1908 by George Embrey of Gloucester.



The telluric currents/ether/subquark-magnetic monopoles strings transmitted the energy input from the Tesla ball lightning spheres which exploded over Siberia (Tunguska):  this is how the bright luminescence in the night skies of Europe and Central Asia was created.


If the light from the Sun could not reach London due to curvature and/or any light reflection phenomena, then certainly NO LIGHT from an explosion which occurred at some 7 km altitude in the atmosphere could have been seen at all, at the same time, on a spherical earth.


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 17, 2015, 06:05:49 AM
JULY 1, 1908 LETTER SENT TO THE LONDON TIMES VI


(https://image.ibb.co/i4nX8y/tgr1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/h8hFTy/tgr2.jpg)

The Tunguska Mystery, V. Rubtsov, pg. 176-177


(https://image.ibb.co/cjwLvd/tgr3.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/kAeOFd/tgr4.jpg)


The Tunguska Mystery, V. Rubtsov, pg. 15-16




In 2004, Chris Duif pointed out that geomagnetic changes cannot be responsible for the Allais effect:

http://arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/0408/0408023.pdf (http://arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/0408/0408023.pdf)

See also: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2001JA900006/abstract (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2001JA900006/abstract) (superb documentation, the PDF version of the article can be downloaded/seen there)

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.

In summary, we may state that it is dangerous to deduce eclipse-related effects from a single day's recording or a single
station. The chances are high of encountering a signature in the magnetic field trace that accidentally appears to be related to the eclipse.


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

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

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



http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1619746#msg1619746 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1619746#msg1619746) (EDIT: the original quote from John 13:1)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 29, 2015, 05:34:42 AM
POMPEII - HERCULANEUM: 1725 - 1778 I


The water conduit built by the architect/engineer Domenico Fontana starting with 1592 A.D. (official chronology), which runs EXACTLY through Pompeii:

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-QuuzyDV-N3M/UyLcBoBI4yI/AAAAAAAAB7A/8GnA9OPEMSw/s1600/pompei-canale-del-sarno.png)

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-AaDZJNIpWUo/UyLdQaz6BPI/AAAAAAAAB7M/_mw1ttDNTVA/s1600/pompei-e-canale-artificale.png)

http://www.anticorpi.info/2014/03/la-pompei-sepolta-nel-1631-svela-i.html (http://www.anticorpi.info/2014/03/la-pompei-sepolta-nel-1631-svela-i.html)

English translation:

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=it&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.anticorpi.info%2F2014%2F03%2Fla-pompei-sepolta-nel-1631-svela-i.html&edit-text= (https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=it&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.anticorpi.info%2F2014%2F03%2Fla-pompei-sepolta-nel-1631-svela-i.html&edit-text=)


The water conduit passes through Via de Nocere, Pompeii:

(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/pom-canal1.jpg)


Many more photographs with the water conduit integrated perfectly with the arhitecture/urban landscape of Pompeii:

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ilya.it%2Fchrono%2Fpages%2Fpompejidt.htm&edit-text= (https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ilya.it%2Fchrono%2Fpages%2Fpompejidt.htm&edit-text=)



The Fontana water conduit built while POMPEII WAS A CITY IN FULL ACTIVITY:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=_sc5PfjuCqQ#t=0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=_sc5PfjuCqQ#t=0)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=koKNBC-t51c#t=0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=koKNBC-t51c#t=0)

Two remarcable documentaries, signed A. Tschurilow, which take the viewer on a journey through Pompeii, street by street, and demonstrates that the water conduit built by D. Fontana was constructed while Pompeii was a city in full activity.


Another article on the subject, signed Lorenzo Acerra:

http://scienzamarcia.blogspot.ro/2014/03/pompei-sotto-la-lava-ombelico-della.html (http://scienzamarcia.blogspot.ro/2014/03/pompei-sotto-la-lava-ombelico-della.html)


English translation:

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=it&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fscienzamarcia.blogspot.ro%2F2014%2F03%2Fpompei-sotto-la-lava-ombelico-della.html&edit-text= (https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=it&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fscienzamarcia.blogspot.ro%2F2014%2F03%2Fpompei-sotto-la-lava-ombelico-della.html&edit-text=)



PINEAPPLES AND MANGOES OF POMPEII

(http://img.theepochtimes.com/n3/eet-content/uploads/2013/09/Pineapple-with-background-676x450.png)

(https://image.ibb.co/iSu7ad/image133c.jpg)

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/293933-reconsidering-history-the-discovery-of-america-thousands-of-years-ago/ (http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/293933-reconsidering-history-the-discovery-of-america-thousands-of-years-ago/)


The pineapple fruit, brought to Europe for the first time by Columbus (official chronology):

https://books.google.ro/books?id=nyWY_YkV7qAC&pg=PA407&lpg=PA407&dq=pineapple+transported+by+spanish+ships&source=bl&ots=r3X8MD6IuN&sig=PrgyjaXO79Qo5n_gNMiSKieTbZE&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=n1s2Vfr5JMKVsgGpoYDwAg&ved=0CFsQ6AEwCg#v=onepage&q=pineapple%20transported%20by%20spanish%20ships&f=false (https://books.google.ro/books?id=nyWY_YkV7qAC&pg=PA407&lpg=PA407&dq=pineapple+transported+by+spanish+ships&source=bl&ots=r3X8MD6IuN&sig=PrgyjaXO79Qo5n_gNMiSKieTbZE&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=n1s2Vfr5JMKVsgGpoYDwAg&ved=0CFsQ6AEwCg#v=onepage&q=pineapple%20transported%20by%20spanish%20ships&f=false)


Generally, the presence of pineapples in Roman and Greek art are ignored. But a pineapple is one of the most durable fruits that can be shipped across the Atlantic profitably. Pineapples would be shipped alive while most other fruit and vegetables would rot in the dank sea air.

I have been to Pompeii and seen the House of Ephebus pineapple mosaic. I have alse seen a couple of other examples in the museo at Naples. I have also seen (and been hit by cones falling from the pin es of Rome.) There is NO resemblence of the pineapples in the mosaics to pine cones, which lack the spiky foliage at the top. Also, the pine cones are brown instead of a golden color.


No pine cone at all...

There is NO resemblence of the pineapples in the mosaics to pine cones, which lack the spiky foliage at the top. Also, the pine cones are brown instead of a golden color.


You have to admit though, from those pictures and in context, it does look very much like the fruit. After all, why would I put a pine cone on a platter with figs, grapes and pomegranates?



http://pomonacampana.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/103.pdf (http://pomonacampana.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/103.pdf)


(https://image.ibb.co/guHDgJ/mango1.jpg)


http://www.ilya.it/chrono/pages/pompejigallerydt.htm (http://www.ilya.it/chrono/pages/pompejigallerydt.htm)

(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/gallery/pom13.jpg)

(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/gallery/pom14.jpg)

In the window of the museum can be seen a lot of glass products, including bottles, flasks for perfumes, multicolored glass of different shades. Particularly noteworthy are absolutely transparent thin glass vases. The same glass vases are shown on Pompeian frescoes.

Then, at the mid point of the 15th century, Angelo Barovier produced what was to become known as vetro cristallo or cristallo veneziano. This was a pure, bright, completely transparent crystal glass.

(http://www.bigbeadlittlebead.com/guides_and_information/Venetian_Glass/04_BBLB_Cristallo_Glass_1580.jpg)

An early example of Venetian cristallo glass dating from 1580


Perfectly flat window glasses at Herculaneum:

(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/gallery/pom16.jpg)

(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/gallery/pom15.jpg)

It was in 1688, in France Experts developed new process of making Flat glass, mainly used in Mirrors. The process was pouring molten glass onto a special table and roll it flat, later when cooled it was polished using felt disks, then it is coated with reflective material to produce the Mirrors.

https://books.google.ro/books?id=jXgnnCpz22QC&pg=PA3&lpg=PA3&dq=flat+window+glass+first+obtained+at+st.+gobain+1688&source=bl&ots=kADb-hHyu9&sig=CZw5-KyF8ZGQDxyrtHnG2SA7b90&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=Spw3VbvTNcWmsgHgsIDgCg&ved=0CEsQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=flat%20window%20glass%20first%20obtained%20at%20st.%20gobain%201688&f=false (https://books.google.ro/books?id=jXgnnCpz22QC&pg=PA3&lpg=PA3&dq=flat+window+glass+first+obtained+at+st.+gobain+1688&source=bl&ots=kADb-hHyu9&sig=CZw5-KyF8ZGQDxyrtHnG2SA7b90&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=Spw3VbvTNcWmsgHgsIDgCg&ved=0CEsQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=flat%20window%20glass%20first%20obtained%20at%20st.%20gobain%201688&f=false)


"The use of Renaissance artists of identical details, same colors decisions, motives, general composition plans, the presence in the Pompeian frescoes of the things that emerged in the 15 to 17 century, the presence in Pompeian paintings of genre painting, which is found only in the epoch of the Renaissance, and the presence of some Christian motifs on some frescoes and mosaics suggest that Pompeian frescoes and the works of artists of the Renaissance come from the same people who have lived in the epoch. "Vitas Narvidas," Pompeian Frescoes and the Renaissance: a comparison, "Electronic Almanac" Art & Fact 1 (5), 2007.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 29, 2015, 06:00:22 AM
POMPEII - HERCULANEUM: 1725 - 1778 II

The most important work on the extraordinary similarities between the frescoes discovered at Pompeii and the Renaissance paintings/sculptures (Raphael, Tintoretto, Da Vinci, Botticelli, Goltzius):

http://web.archive.org/web/20120202135352/http://artifact.org.ru/kalibrovka-teorii/vidas-narvidas-pompeyskie-freski-i-renessans-ochnaya-stavka.html (http://web.archive.org/web/20120202135352/http://artifact.org.ru/kalibrovka-teorii/vidas-narvidas-pompeyskie-freski-i-renessans-ochnaya-stavka.html)

English translation:

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fweb.archive.org%2Fweb%2F20120202135352%2Fhttp%3A%2F%2Fartifact.org.ru%2Fkalibrovka-teorii%2Fvidas-narvidas-pompeyskie-freski-i-renessans-ochnaya-stavka.html&edit-text= (https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fweb.archive.org%2Fweb%2F20120202135352%2Fhttp%3A%2F%2Fartifact.org.ru%2Fkalibrovka-teorii%2Fvidas-narvidas-pompeyskie-freski-i-renessans-ochnaya-stavka.html&edit-text=)


Giovanni Mascolo, 1633:

(https://image.ibb.co/n5GTFd/1631a.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/hrPb1J/1631b.jpg)

Pompeii and Herculaneum, cities in full activity, in 1631 A.D.


http://www.lib.luc.edu/specialcollections/items/show/52 (http://www.lib.luc.edu/specialcollections/items/show/52)

Biography of G. Mascolo: http://www.scribd.com/doc/150505992/Vesuvius-A-historical-approach-to-the-1631-eruption-cold-data-from-the-analysis-ofthree-contemporary-treatises#scribd (http://www.scribd.com/doc/150505992/Vesuvius-A-historical-approach-to-the-1631-eruption-cold-data-from-the-analysis-ofthree-contemporary-treatises#scribd)

(https://image.ibb.co/mn778y/1631c.jpg)

E. Shurshikov on the names Torre del Greco and Torre Anunziata:

http://artifact.org.ru/personalnie-dela-/e-n-shurshikov-pompei-1631-god.html (http://artifact.org.ru/personalnie-dela-/e-n-shurshikov-pompei-1631-god.html)

English translation:

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fartifact.org.ru%2Fpersonalnie-dela-%2Fe-n-shurshikov-pompei-1631-god.html&edit-text= (https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fartifact.org.ru%2Fpersonalnie-dela-%2Fe-n-shurshikov-pompei-1631-god.html&edit-text=)


Ortelius, 1570 map:

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_mVSVlQXoXaQ/S3vPojv0RaI/AAAAAAAAAmg/kuovyl4UdLA/s320/Immagine3.jpg)

Chemical composion of the frescoes at Pompeii and paintings created during the Renaissance is the same (Sir Humphrey Davy analysis):

(https://image.ibb.co/cdy3gJ/davy1.jpg)


The hypothesis according to which there may have been FOUR CITIES (Pompeii + Herculaneum, destroyed in 79 B.C., and Pompeii + Herculaneum, destroyed in 1631 A.D.), put forward by some historians, is false.


The dinosaurs at Pompeii:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1413765#msg1413765 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1413765#msg1413765)


Still Life style of painting, in the official chronology of history, required many decades of logical development of the various techniques of painting, from Giotto to Caravaggio; yet, the SAME style of painting is to be found exactly at Pompeii...

http://www.dillum.ch/html/neue_matrix_vorschau.htm (http://www.dillum.ch/html/neue_matrix_vorschau.htm)

(http://www.dillum.ch/html/caravaggio_natura_morta.gif)

(http://www.dillum.ch/html/oplontis_natura_morta.gif)


POMPEII AHD HERCULANEUM DEPICTED ON MAPS DATED 1725 AND 1778 (attributed ten years after 1769 AD, the real date of the destruction of Pompeii and Herculaneum):

https://web.archive.org/web/20131020083546/http://halsema.org/people/theleonardifamily/history/mapsof15-18thcentitaly/images/fullsize/3.jpg

(https://preview.ibb.co/dP4Fvd/1631f.jpg)


(http://www.newparadigma.ru/engines/NPforum/files/21/POMPEAkarta.jpg)


Pliny the Elder could not possibly have been present in the year 79 AD, August 24, at or near Pompeii (or near the volcano Vesuvius)...

"Usus ille sole, mox frigida, gustaverat iacens studebatque; poscit soleas, ascendit locum ex quo maxime miraculum illud conspici poterat. Nubes – incertum procul intuentibus ex quo monte; Vesuvium fuisse postea cognitum est – oriebatur, cuius similitudinem et formam non alia magis arbor quam pinus expresserit."


"My uncle was stationed at Misenum, in active command of the fleet. On 24 August, in the early afternoon, my mother drew his attention to a cloud of unusual size and appearance. He had been out in the sun, had taken a cold bath, and lunched while lying down, and was then working at his books. He called for his shoes and climbed up to a place which would give him the best view of the phenomenon. It was not clear at that distance from which mountain the cloud was rising (it was afterwards known to be Vesuvius); its general appearance can be best expressed as being like an umbrella pine."

http://bloggingpompeii.blogspot.ro/2013/01/plinys-letters-about-vesuvius.html (http://bloggingpompeii.blogspot.ro/2013/01/plinys-letters-about-vesuvius.html)


If you are in Miseno you can not be confusing Vesuvius with any other mountain. Vesuvius from there is in full view and Pliny`s uncle did not have to climb to a higher place to see it.

(http://www.mmdtkw.org/ALRIVes0810Miseno.jpg)

http://www.tschurilow.de/index.php/de/beitraege/13-raetsel/37-pliny-s-letters-about-vesuvius (http://www.tschurilow.de/index.php/de/beitraege/13-raetsel/37-pliny-s-letters-about-vesuvius)

(http://www.geology.sdsu.edu/how_volcanoes_work/Images/Diagrams/model.jpg)

Plinian eruption model from San Diego State University

Bibliographical references with show that Pliny the Elder was located actually near Etna, Sicily:

http://bloggingpompeii.blogspot.ro/2013/01/plinys-letters-about-vesuvius.html (http://bloggingpompeii.blogspot.ro/2013/01/plinys-letters-about-vesuvius.html)

https://books.google.ro/books?id=PW-vAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA12&lpg=PA12&dq=suetonius+pliny+the+elder+etna+sicily&source=bl&ots=2GS_ETS-8U&sig=DnWkBub2Rr872v6ghyHaryBuyko&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=pfM4VZT9FMKZsgH-s4DIDw&ved=0CC4Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=suetonius%20pliny%20the%20elder%20etna%20sicily&f=false (https://books.google.ro/books?id=PW-vAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA12&lpg=PA12&dq=suetonius+pliny+the+elder+etna+sicily&source=bl&ots=2GS_ETS-8U&sig=DnWkBub2Rr872v6ghyHaryBuyko&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=pfM4VZT9FMKZsgH-s4DIDw&ved=0CC4Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=suetonius%20pliny%20the%20elder%20etna%20sicily&f=false)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 01, 2015, 05:16:12 AM
POMPEII - HERCULANEUM: 1725 - 1778 III


Archaeomagnetic dating of the artifacts at Pompeii:

https://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=ro&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://new.chronologia.org/volume6/tur_vez79.html (https://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=ro&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://new.chronologia.org/volume6/tur_vez79.html)

Dating events "Vesuvius Eruption '79" paleomagnetic characteristics of artifacts

All the artifacts tested belong to the 17TH century (including a fresco attributed to "antiquity").


Limits of the archaeomagnetic dating:

1. Official chronology of history context

http://archserve.id.ucsb.edu/courses/anth/fagan/anth3/Courseware/Chronology/11_Paleomag_Archaeomag.html (http://archserve.id.ucsb.edu/courses/anth/fagan/anth3/Courseware/Chronology/11_Paleomag_Archaeomag.html)

2. New chronology of history context

http://evolutionfacts.com/Ev-V3/3evlch26.htm (http://evolutionfacts.com/Ev-V3/3evlch26.htm)


The results of the dating:

The whole cluster of "Artifacts" was within the cluster "The first half of the 17th century."

(http://new.chronologia.org/volume6_im/tur/vez_4.gif)

Figure 4. Dating event "The eruption of Vesuvius in '79" by analogy, having a reliable chronological anchor. Red ellipse is outlined in a cluster corresponding to the direction of the vector of the geomagnetic field in the first half of the 17th century. The red dotted line inside the ellipse corresponds approximately to 1631.


(http://new.chronologia.org/volume6_im/tur/vez_5.gif)

Figure 5. Dating event "The eruption of Vesuvius in '79" calibration curve SIVC (AnTyur). Detail of the calibration curve SIVC (AnTyur) shown in magenta. Red circle shows the average value of the paleomagnetic parameters artifacts. The numbers near the points characterizing paleomagnetic parameters artifacts of Pompeii and Herculaneum, the samples correspond to the numbers in Table 1.


Dating the "antiquity" of Southern Italy paleomagnetic characteristics of artifacts

https://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=ro&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://new.chronologia.org/volume6/tur_it.html (https://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=ro&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://new.chronologia.org/volume6/tur_it.html)


Conclusion: the whole "antiquity" Southern Italy is mainly formed by artifacts of the first half of the 17th century.


Other works signed A.M. Tyurin:

Radiocarbon dates that characterize the area of ​​Mount Vesuvius

https://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=ro&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://new.chronologia.org/volume7/turin_data_vezuv.php (https://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=ro&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://new.chronologia.org/volume7/turin_data_vezuv.php)


On the issue of dating errors event "The eruption of Vesuvius in '79"

https://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=ro&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://new.chronologia.org/volume7/turin_pogr_vez.php (https://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=ro&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://new.chronologia.org/volume7/turin_pogr_vez.php)


Status of dating events "Eruption of Vesuvius in '79"

https://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=ro&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://new.chronologia.org/volume7/turin_sost_vez.php (https://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=ro&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://new.chronologia.org/volume7/turin_sost_vez.php)



The structure of the calibration curves in archaeomagnetic dating

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fnew.chronologia.org%2Fvolume4%2Fturin_str.html&edit-text= (https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fnew.chronologia.org%2Fvolume4%2Fturin_str.html&edit-text=)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 06, 2015, 06:34:04 AM
POMPEII - HERCULANEUM: 1725 - 1778 IV

Paleomagnetic parameters of the artifacts found at Pompeii and Herculaneum:

(https://image.ibb.co/nGxkvd/datavesu79.jpg)

Table 1: Paleomagnetic samples parameters characterizing the event "The eruption of Vesuvius in '79"


https://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=ro&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://new.chronologia.org/volume6/tur_vez79.html (https://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=ro&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://new.chronologia.org/volume6/tur_vez79.html)


Paleomagnetic parameters, Southern Italy, 1600 - 2000 AD:

(http://new.chronologia.org/volume6_im/tur/vez_1.gif)

Figure 1. The actual data describing the evolution of the parameters of the geomagnetic field of Southern Italy in the last 400 years [Tanguy, 2005]. The results of instrumental measurements of vector direction of the geomagnetic field, represented in the form of the path of movement of the North Magnetic Pole, shows dark yellow line. Black circles show the direction of the residual magnetization vectors of samples of lava eruptions of Etna (E) and Vesuvius (V). The size of the circle corresponds to the measurement error. Digit near the circle - the year of the eruption. Blue line shows the path of movement of the North Magnetic Pole, estimated by paleomagnetic product parameters volcanoes Etna and Vesuvius.


The data coincide perfectly: the artifacts found at Pompeii and Herculaneum belong to the 17th century

(http://new.chronologia.org/volume6_im/tur/vez_4.gif)

Figure 4. Dating event "The eruption of Vesuvius in '79" by analogy, having a reliable chronological anchor. Red ellipse is outlined in a cluster corresponding to the direction of the vector of the geomagnetic field in the first half of the 17th century. The red dotted line inside the ellipse corresponds approximately to 1631.


The reason why archaeologists and physicists have not yet realized these facts, lies with the calibration curves accepted in the conventional chronology: FAMC - The France Archaeological Magnetic Curve si SIVC - The South Italian Volcanic Curve.

(http://new.chronologia.org/volume4_im/turin/str1.jpg)


A.M. Tyurin examines the errors inherent in the calibration curves:

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fnew.chronologia.org%2Fvolume4%2Fturin_str.html&edit-text= (https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fnew.chronologia.org%2Fvolume4%2Fturin_str.html&edit-text=)


The situation is similar to that which describes the second derivative of the moon's elongation:

http://hbar.phys.msu.ru/gorm/atext/newton2.htm (http://hbar.phys.msu.ru/gorm/atext/newton2.htm)

https://web.archive.org/web/20130511130053/http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/atext/newton1.htm (https://web.archive.org/web/20130511130053/http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/atext/newton1.htm)


(http://hbar.phys.msu.ru/gorm/atext/nnt2p1.gif)

https://web.archive.org/web/20130511090410/http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/fomenko/dsec.htm (https://web.archive.org/web/20130511090410/http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/fomenko/dsec.htm)

Newton: "The most striking feature of Figure 1 is the rapid decline in D'' from about 700 to about 1300 ... . This decline means (Newton, 1972b) that there was a 'square wave' in the osculating value of D''... . Such changes in D'', and such values, unexplainable by present geophysical theories ... , show that D'' has had surprisingly large values and that it has undergone large and sudden changes within the past 2000 yrs"


The FAMC and SIVC calibration curves cannot be true for the historical period prior to 1600 AD, since the speed ​​variations in the direction of the vector of the geomagnetic field cannot be explained by current geophysical theories:

(http://new.chronologia.org/volume4_im/turin/str15.gif)

The calibration curve arheomagnetic FAMC (The France Archaeological Magnetic Curve).


(http://new.chronologia.org/volume4_im/turin/str16.gif)

The calibration curve archaeomagnetic dating FAMC. Speed ​​variations in the direction of the vector of the geomagnetic field. Squares of red - the results of instrumental observations of geomagnetic field variations.

A.M. Tyurin:

Such variations in the velocity spread of the vector direction of the geomagnetic field are unlikely to be due to the inertia of the planetary process.



https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fnew.chronologia.org%2Fvolume4%2Fturin_str.html&edit-text= (https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fnew.chronologia.org%2Fvolume4%2Fturin_str.html&edit-text=)

(The Calibration Curve FAMC section)


In the same section from the The Structure of the Calibration Curves in Archaeomagnetic Dating, A.M. Tyurin explains the discrepancies and errors which lead to the incorrect official dating of the artifacts.


The new, correct calibration curve (FAMC [AmTyur]):

(http://new.chronologia.org/volume4_im/turin/pic17.gif)


The calibration curve archaeomagnetic dating FAMC (AnTyur). Black color is shown a calibration curve archaeomagnetic dating FAMC [11, Fig 1]. Curve (band) FAMC (AnTyur) is shown the red lines. The solid line corresponds to the central axis of the calibration curve, dotted lines - its borders. The blue dotted lines indicate the boundaries of the segments of the curve FAMC (AnTyur).


Two other works by A.M. Tyurin examine the errors in dating the geological and geophysical data at Vesuvius:

https://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=ro&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://new.chronologia.org/volume6/tur_dat.html (https://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=ro&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://new.chronologia.org/volume6/tur_dat.html)

https://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=ro&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://new.chronologia.org/volume6/tur_geol.html (https://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=ro&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://new.chronologia.org/volume6/tur_geol.html)


Moreover, a careful reexamination of the hypotheses on which conventional (but incorrect) paleomagnetic dating is based (antiquity to the 17TH century),  should also include the geological/astronomical cataclysms which occurred during the 18th century (new radical chronology of history): thus the correct date of approximately 1770 - 1775 AD for the destruction of Pompeii and Herculaneum should be reached (see also the perfectly flat window glass at Herculaneum, a technology which was developed only after 1688 AD, at St. Gobain, and the maps dated 1725 and 1778 which feature Pompeii and Herculaneum).

We can also infer that in 1775 we are just at the beginning of the falsification of history, since no churches can be found at Pompeii (there is the temple of Isis, http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/pom-isis2.jpg (http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/pom-isis2.jpg) ).
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 20, 2015, 05:20:49 AM
SOUTHERN ITALY ARTIFACTS CONVENTIONALLY DATED 800 BC - 500 AD ACTUALLY BELONG TO THE 17TH CENTURY


List of 31 artifacts, paleomagnetic parameters:

(http://new.chronologia.org/volume6_im/tur/it_tab_1.gif)

Dating the "antiquity" of Southern Italy
paleomagnetic characteristics of artifacts


https://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=ro&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://new.chronologia.org/volume6/tur_it.html (https://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=ro&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://new.chronologia.org/volume6/tur_it.html) (all the details on the paleomagnetic dating of the artifacts in Southern Italy)


Paleomagnetic parameters, Southern Italy, 1600 - 2000 AD:

(http://new.chronologia.org/volume6_im/tur/vez_1.gif)

Figure 1. The actual data describing the evolution of the parameters of the geomagnetic field of Southern Italy in the last 400 years [Tanguy, 2005]. The results of instrumental measurements of vector direction of the geomagnetic field, represented in the form of the path of movement of the North Magnetic Pole, shows dark yellow line. Black circles show the direction of the residual magnetization vectors of samples of lava eruptions of Etna (E) and Vesuvius (V). The size of the circle corresponds to the measurement error. Digit near the circle - the year of the eruption. Blue line shows the path of movement of the North Magnetic Pole, estimated by paleomagnetic product parameters volcanoes Etna and Vesuvius.



(http://new.chronologia.org/volume6_im/tur/it_2.gif)

Figure 2. The parameters of the samples (archaeological date, declination and inclination vector residual magnetization) characterizing artifacts Southern Italy a period of 800 BC - 500 AD [Evans, 2005]. The numbers near the points - the date archaeological samples: (+) corresponds to the years AD, (-) - BC



The data coincide perfectly: the artifacts found in Southern Italy ("800 BC - 500 AD") belong to the 17th century:

(http://new.chronologia.org/volume6_im/tur/it_4.gif)

Figure 4. The paleomagnetic data on Southern Italy, describing the evolution of the vector direction of the geomagnetic field in the period 1600-2000 years BC and 800 BC - 500 years BC .. Red crosses correspond to the declination and inclination vector residual magnetization patterns characterizing artifacts period 800 BC - 500 AD [Evans, 2005]. The points correspond to samples that characterize the event "The eruption of Vesuvius in '79": pyroclastic rocks (volcanic tuff deposits) - the point of the blue, the artifacts - the point is red. Green diamond corresponds to the archaeological site Carthage. The diameter of a circle of red color corresponds approximately to the "linear" speed variations in the direction of the vector of the geomagnetic field (over 100 years in the scale plate). The rest of the symbols are shown in Figure 1.


A.M. Tyurin:

Comparison of the parameters of the samples with the actual data that characterize the evolution of the parameters of the geomagnetic field of Southern Italy in the last 400 years [Tanguy, 2005], gave surprising results (Figure 4). Paleomagnetic parameters for the Archaeological Site Carthage, samples of artifacts that characterize the event "The eruption of Vesuvius in '79" and most of the specimens, artifacts characterizing the period 800 BC - 500 AD, roughly correspond to the parameters of the geomagnetic field of the first half of the 17th century.


Even more striking results were obtained when comparing between them averaged parameters of the samples (Figure 5). It was found that the parameters of the Archaeological Site Carthage, averaged parameters of the samples of artifacts that characterize the event "The eruption of Vesuvius in '79" and averaged parameters of the samples, characterizing artifacts period 800 BC - 500 AD practically coincide (Figure 5, they circled in red ellipse).

(http://new.chronologia.org/volume6_im/tur/it_5.gif)

Figure 5. The paleomagnetic data on Southern Italy, describing the evolution of the vector direction of the geomagnetic field in the period 1600-2000 years BC and 800 BC - 500 years BC .. red four-pointed star averaged values ​​correspond to the declination and inclination vector residual magnetization patterns characterizing artifacts period 800 BC - 500 AD Green filled circle - the averaged value of the parameter sample artifacts that characterize the event "The eruption of Vesuvius in '79." The numbers about stars, diamonds and circles denote their corresponding year. The remaining symbols are shown in figure 1 and 4 and in the text.


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 01, 2015, 05:21:57 AM
Outside this forum I have seen a couple of prominent flat earthers deny any climate change or global warming based on man made causes. I would like to know the view of flat earthers in this forum.

To qualify as a "prominent" flat earther, one must understand the aether/ether physics/subject very well in order to be able to answer any and all questions posed by the RE (such as, for example, the beam neutrinos thread http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=27426.0#.VZUl-Bvtmko (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=27426.0#.VZUl-Bvtmko) )


The climate changes are simply a manifestation of a very important fact: we are nearing the end of a world age, as I have documented here for the past several years.

This means that the vibration of the dextrorotatory subquarks (terrestrial gravity) has increased to some degree with the following effects: the "melting" of the Greenland/Antarctica ice sheets (due to the surge of the immediate effects of terrestrial gravity, decomposition/disintegration, AND NOT due to an increase in global temperature/emission of gases; that is, the ice sheets are disintegrating faster and not melting more speedily), the exacerbation of the desertification process (W. Reich was the first to understand that this is due to the increase effects of terrestrial gravity [what he called DOR], and was able to nullify these same effects by raising the level of the vibration of the laevorotatory subquarks strings [ORGONE], using the Cloudbuster), the changing rates of radioactive decay.


EDIT

I have updated the links in the R. Hess/Projekt Kronos section:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg976837#msg976837 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg976837#msg976837)







Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 09, 2015, 08:40:35 AM
Foucault Pendulum is evidence the earth is rotating. They are latitude dependent, which is only possible on a round earth.

The Allais effect demolishes the notion that Foucault's pendulum is evidence the earth is rotating.

Trying to use Foucault's pendulum as proof for heliocentricity really backfired when Maurice Allais repeatedly observed pendulums slowing their motion during eclipses! This implies that either the "rotating Earth" decelerates during eclipses or the firmament does.


http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1642668#msg1642668 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1642668#msg1642668) ( FOUCAULT'S PENDULUM ANOMALIES - STATIONARY EARTH: THE ALLAIS EFFECT VII ) :

The Allais effect proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the anomalies registered during the solar eclipses discussed above show that Foucault's pendulum is actually the very best proof that the Earth is stationary: it is the effect of the telluric currents/subquark strings/ether upon the pendulum which is responsible for the movement of the Foucault's pendulum, this effect was carefully documented also by Dr. Dayton Miller, as discussed earlier.


"Nobel prize winner Maurice Allais had to go and throw another monkey wrench in the spokes of the heliocentric bicycle. Allais performed a marathon 30 day Foucault Pendulum experiment in 1954. During the experiment an eclipse occurred. Surprisingly, the pendulum changed angles by a significant 13.5 degrees! This suggests something in space was affecting the pendulum, not the motion of the earth."


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 16, 2015, 06:08:14 AM
FAINT YOUNG SUN PARADOX UPDATED

The complete demonstration that the age of the Sun cannot exceed some ten million years (that is, we find ourselves right at the beginning of the main-sequence lifetime of the Sun, when no fluctuations in luminosity could have taken place); over the past 25 years there have been several attempts made to try to explain the paradox, all such efforts have failed, see the six links below.


http://www.clim-past.net/7/203/2011/cp-7-203-2011.pdf (http://www.clim-past.net/7/203/2011/cp-7-203-2011.pdf) (a classic work)

http://creation.com/young-sun-paradox#txtRef15 (http://creation.com/young-sun-paradox#txtRef15) (takes a look at Toon and Wolf's work, it debunks their earlier work in 2010: http://www.colorado.edu/news/releases/2010/06/03/early-earth-haze-likely-provided-ultraviolet-shield-planet-says-new-cu (http://www.colorado.edu/news/releases/2010/06/03/early-earth-haze-likely-provided-ultraviolet-shield-planet-says-new-cu) )


“Paradox Solved” – no, hardly, as the estimates for the young Earth CO2 levels were considerably less as pointed out by a recent paper in GRL, and this paper is based upon climate models which are unable to replicate even the Holocene, RWP, MWP, LIA, 20th and 21st centuries.

A recent paper published in Geophysical Research Letters finds that the ‘Faint young Sun problem’ has become “more severe” because to solve the problem using conventional greenhouse theory would require CO2 to comprise 0.4 bar or about 40% of the young Earth atmosphere, far greater than CO2 partial pressures today [0.014 bar or 28 times less] or those estimated for the young Earth [0.06 bar]. According to the authors, “Our results suggest that currently favored greenhouse [gas] solutions could be in conflict with constraints emerging for the middle and late Archean [young Earth].”

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2012GL054381/abstract (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2012GL054381/abstract)



http://www.clim-past.net/7/203/2011/cp-7-203-2011.html (http://www.clim-past.net/7/203/2011/cp-7-203-2011.html)

http://asterisk.apod.com/viewtopic.php?t=19684&p=149581 (http://asterisk.apod.com/viewtopic.php?t=19684&p=149581)

http://asterisk.apod.com/viewtopic.php?t=19684&p=149581#p149562 (http://asterisk.apod.com/viewtopic.php?t=19684&p=149581#p149562)

http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/06dat4.htm (http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/06dat4.htm)

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v474/n7349/full/nature09961.html (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v474/n7349/full/nature09961.html)



(excerpts from two works signed Dr. Danny Faulkner and Dr. Jonathan Sarfati)

Supposedly the Sun has been a main-sequence star since its formation about 4.6 billion years ago. This time represents about half the assumed ten-billion-year main-sequence lifetime of the Sun, so the Sun should have used about half its energy store. This means that about half the hydrogen in the core of the Sun has been used up and replaced by helium. This change in chemical composition changes the structure of the core. The overall structure of the Sun would have to change as well, so that today, the Sun should be nearly 40% brighter than it was 4.6 billion years ago.

This obviously has consequences for the temperatures of the planets. It is generally believed that even small fluctuations in the Sun's luminosity would have devastating consequences on Earth's climate. A 40% change in solar luminosity should have produced dramatic climatic changes.

According to evolution, about four billion years ago when life supposedly first arose on Earth, the temperature had to have been close to what the temperature is today. But if that were the case, the subsequent increase in the Sun's luminosity would have made Earth far too hot for life today. One could naively suggest that Earth began cooler than it is today and has been slowly warming with time. But this is not an option because geologists note that Earth's rock record insists that Earth's average temperature has not varied much over the past four billion years, and biologists require a nearly constant average temperature for the development and evolution of life. This problem is called the early faint Sun paradox.

Evolution proposes that the early atmosphere contained a greater amount of greenhouse gases (such as methane) than today. This would have produced average temperatures close to those today, even with a much fainter Sun. As the Sun gradually increased in luminosity, Earth's atmosphere is supposed to have evolved along with it, so that the amount of greenhouse gases have slowly decreased to compensate for the increasing solar luminosity.

The precise tuning of this alleged co-evolution is nothing short of miraculous. The mechanism driving this would have to be a complex system of negative feedbacks working very gradually, though it is not at all clear how such feedbacks could occur. At any point, a slight positive feedback would have completely disrupted the system, with catastrophic consequences similar to those of Venus or Mars. For instance, the current makeup of Earth's atmosphere is in a non-equilibrium state that is maintained by the widespread diversity of life. There is no evolutionary imperative that this be the case: it is just the way it is. Thus the incredibly unlikely origin and evolution of life had to be accompanied by the evolution of Earth's atmosphere in concert with the Sun.

The implausibility of such a process has caused Lovelock to propose his Gaia hypothesis. According to this, the biosphere (consisting of Earth's oceans, atmosphere, crust, and all living things) constitutes a sort of super organism that has evolved. Life has developed in such a way that the atmosphere has been altered to protect it in the face of increasing solar luminosity. Lovelock's hypothesis has not been generally accepted, largely because of the spiritual implications. Indeed, it does seem to lead to a mystical sort of view.


If billions of years were true, the sun would have been much fainter in the past. However, there is no evidence that the sun was fainter at any time in the earth's history. Astronomers call this the faint young sun paradox.

Evolutionists and long-agers believe that life appeared on the earth about 3.8 billion years ago. But if that timescale were true, the sun would be 25% brighter today than it was back then. This implies that the earth would have been frozen at an average temperature of -3 C. However, most paleontologists believe that, if anything, the earth was warmer in the past. The only way around this is to make arbitrary and unrealistic assumptions of a far greater greenhouse effect at that time than exists today, with about 1,000 times more CO2 in the atmosphere than there is today.

The physical principles that cause the early faint Sun paradox are well established, so astrophysicists are confident that the effect is real. Consequently, evolutionists have a choice of two explanations as to how Earth has maintained nearly constant temperature in spite of a steadily increasing influx of energy. In the first alternative, one can believe that through undirected change, the atmosphere has evolved to counteract heating. At best this means that the atmosphere has evolved through a series of states of unstable equilibrium or even non-equilibrium. Individual living organisms do something akin to this, driven by complex instructions encoded into DNA. Death is a process in which the complex chemical reactions of life ceases and cells rapidly approach chemical equilibrium. Short of some guiding intelligence or design, a similar process for the atmosphere seems incredibly improbable. Any sort of symbioses or true feedback with the Sun is entirely out of the question. On the other hand, one can believe that some sort of life force has directed the atmosphere's evolution through this ordeal. Most find the teleological or spiritual implications of this unpalatable, though there is a trend in this direction in physics.

A much higher concentration of carbon dioxide in Earth's atmosphere has been suggested to maintain a proper temperature. This is an inferrence supported by no geological evidence whatsoever. Studies of iron carbonates by Rye et al. conclusively show that Earth had at most 20 percent the required amount of CO2. We have evidence that Mars also had temperatures suitable for liquid in its distant past. It is unlikely that CO2 would custom-heat both planets.


Conditions on the very early earth that permit the appearance and early evolution of life seem to be achievable without invoking too many improbabilities. As the sun then became hotter, however, we have a problem; if the greenhouse atmosphere is maintained for too long, as the sun brightens, a runaway greenhouse effect may result from positive feedback, creating a Venus-like situation and rendering the earth uninhabitable. A compensating negative feedback is required.

Some geochemical feedback may be possible, but it appears unlikely to be sufficient. Living organisms, too, started converting carbon dioxide into oxygen and organic matter, substantially decreasing the greenhouse effect as soon as photosynthesis got going. There is, however, no obvious reason for this process to keep exactly in step with the sun's increasing luminosity. It may be that we have simply been lucky, but as an explanation that is not entirely satisfactory. If the tuning did need to be very precise, Faulkner would have a point in calling it 'miraculous'.


As a result of a fainter Sun, the temperature on ancient Earth should have been some 25 C lower than today. Such a low temperature should have kept large parts of Earth frozen until about one to two billion years ago. The case for Mars is even more extreme due to its greater distance from the Sun. Yet there is compelling geologic evidence suggesting that liquid water was abundant on both planets three to four billion years ago.

Earth's oldest rocks, which are found in northern Canada and in the southwestern part of Greenland, date back nearly four billion years to the early Archean eon. Within these ancient rock samples are rounded 'pebbles' that appear to be sedimentary, laid down in a liquid-water environment. Rocks as old as 3.2 billion years exhibit mud cracks, ripple marks, and microfossil algae. All of these pieces of evidence indicate that early Earth must have had an abundant supply of liquid water in the form of lakes or oceans.

This apparent contradiction, between the icehouse that one would expect based upon stellar evolution models and the geologic evidence for copious amounts of liquid water, has become known as the 'faint young sun paradox.'


See also: http://grazian-archive.com/quantavolution/vol_03/chaos_creation_03.htm (http://grazian-archive.com/quantavolution/vol_03/chaos_creation_03.htm) (collapsing tests of time)

Electrical Sun: http://www.electric-cosmos.org/sun.htm (http://www.electric-cosmos.org/sun.htm)


DATING METHODS OF THE PAST:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1640735#msg1640735 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1640735#msg1640735)


The Faint Young Sun Paradox remains to this day one of the most devastating proofs against the spherical earth hypothesis (not nearly enough time for the earth's formation/evolution).



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 16, 2015, 06:20:23 AM
BAROMETER PRESSURE PARADOX UPDATED


"It has been known now for two and a half centuries, that there are more or less daily variations in the height of the barometer, culminating in two maxima and two minima during the course of 24 hours. The same observation has been made and puzzled over at every station at which pressure records were kept and studied, but without success in finding for it the complete physical explanation."


First, the correct station pressure data as it is measured all around the world.

First reference.

NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE DATA:


The most basic change in pressure is the twice daily rise and fall in due to the heating from the sun. Each day, around 4 a.m./p.m. the pressure is at its lowest and near its peak around 10 a.m./p.m. The magnitude of the daily cycle is greatest near the equator decreasing toward the poles.

http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/education/yos/resource/JetStream/atmos/pressure.htm (http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/education/yos/resource/JetStream/atmos/pressure.htm)

Each day, around 4 a.m./p.m. the pressure is at its lowest and near its peak around 10 a.m./p.m.


Second reference.

GRAPHS SHOWING THE DAILY SEMIDIURNAL BAROMETRIC PRESSURE CHANGES AT 10:00 AM/10:00 PM (MAXIMUMS) AND 4:00 PM/4:00 AM (MINIMUMS):

http://www.geografia.fflch.usp.br/graduacao/apoio/Apoio/Apoio_Elisa/flg0355/textos/Ahrens_cap9.pdf (http://www.geografia.fflch.usp.br/graduacao/apoio/Apoio/Apoio_Elisa/flg0355/textos/Ahrens_cap9.pdf) (PG. 211)


Third reference.

A remarkable characteristic of the semi-diurnal barometric variation is the regularity of the occurrence of the maxima and minima and their uniformity in time of day in all latitudes. While the amplitude of these waves may vary greatly with latitude, with elevation, and with location, whether over the sea or over the land, the local times of maxima and minima are very constant.

http://www.archive.org/stream/bulletinobserv06terruoft/bulletinobserv06terruoft_djvu.txt (http://www.archive.org/stream/bulletinobserv06terruoft/bulletinobserv06terruoft_djvu.txt)
(Bulletin of Applied Physical Science)


A remarkable characteristic of the semi-diurnal barometric variation is the regularity of the occurrence of the maxima and minima and their uniformity in time of day in all latitudes.

ALL LATITUDES, no exception recorded.

EVER.


Fourth reference.

It has been known now for two and a half centuries, that there are more or less daily variations in the height of the barometer, culminating in two maxima and two minima during the course of 24 hours. The same observation has been made and puzzled over at every station at which pressure records were kept and studied, but without success in finding for it the complete physical explanation. In speaking of the diurnal and semidiurnal variations of the barometer, Lord Rayleigh says: ‘The relative magnitude of the latter [semidiurnal variations], as observed at most parts of the earth’s surface, is still a mystery, all the attempted explanations being illusory.



Fifth reference.

The atmospheric pressure is greatest at about 10:00 a.m. and 10:00 pm. and least at about 4:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. The variations are primarily the result of the combined effects of the sun's gravitational attraction and solar heating, with solar heating being the major component.

http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00001262/00001 (http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00001262/00001)


THIS REFERENCE EVEN HAS A GRAPH ATTACHED WHICH DOES SHOW THE 10:00 AM AND 10:00 PM MAXIMUMS (PAGE 569).


The best reference from Soil Engineering.

The atmospheric pressure is greatest at about 10:00 a.m. and 10:00 pm. and least at about 4:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.


Sixth reference.

The barometric pressure curve shows a portion of the normal twice-daily oscillation that occurs due to solar and lunar gravitational forces (atmospheric tides), with high pressures at approximately 10:00 AM and PM, and low pressures at 4:00 AM and PM.

http://info.ngwa.org/gwol/pdf/930158405.PDF (http://info.ngwa.org/gwol/pdf/930158405.PDF)


Seventh reference.


http://www-das.uwyo.edu/~geerts/cwx/notes/chap01/diurnal.html (http://www-das.uwyo.edu/~geerts/cwx/notes/chap01/diurnal.html)

Surface pressure measurements in Taiwan (at 25 deg. N) are least around 4am and (especially) 4 pm Local Standard Time, and most around (especially) 10am, and 10pm LST; the amplitude of the semidiurnal cycle is about 1.4 hPa.


Eighth reference.


http://books.google.ro/books?id=vNkZAQAAIAAJ&pg=RA1-PA217&lpg=RA1-PA217&dq=barometer+pressure+semidiurnal+change+10+am+4+pm&source=bl&ots=zgQHfJMC_w&sig=NMbmgLuqwPVwEfGVp3WuSu8Mdgg&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=-As4UqWRL4qp4ATI2ICIBA&ved=0CEAQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=barometer%20pressure%20semidiurnal%20change%2010%20am%204%20pm&f=false (http://books.google.ro/books?id=vNkZAQAAIAAJ&pg=RA1-PA217&lpg=RA1-PA217&dq=barometer+pressure+semidiurnal+change+10+am+4+pm&source=bl&ots=zgQHfJMC_w&sig=NMbmgLuqwPVwEfGVp3WuSu8Mdgg&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=-As4UqWRL4qp4ATI2ICIBA&ved=0CEAQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=barometer%20pressure%20semidiurnal%20change%2010%20am%204%20pm&f=false)

THIS IS REAL SCIENCE: DAILY SEMIDIURNAL CHANGES IN THE BAROMETER PRESSURE READING.

Maximums at 10:00 am and 10:00 pm, and minimums at 4:00 am and 4:00 pm.



Ninth reference.

Humboldt carried a barometer with him on his famous South American journeys of 1799-1804. In his book Cosmos he remarked that the two daily maxima at about 10 a.m. and 10 p.m. were so regular that his barometer could serve somewhat as a clock.

http://www-eaps.mit.edu/faculty/lindzen/29_Atmos_Tides.pdf (http://www-eaps.mit.edu/faculty/lindzen/29_Atmos_Tides.pdf)

(http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/7028/5ou6.jpg)

U.S. Weather Bureau, “Ten-Year Normals of Pressure Tendencies and Hourly Station Pressures for the United States,”
Technical Paper No. 1, Washington, D.C. 1943.

Semidiurnal variations: maximums at 10:00 am/10:00 pm and minimums at 4:00 pm/4:00 am

(http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/9360/gr7f.jpg)

Surface pressure exhibits a remarkably stable semidiurnal oscillation with maxima at 10 a.m. and 10 p.m. and minima at 4 a.m. and 4 p.m. local time. This semidiurnal oscillation in surface pressure is a universal phenomenon observed worldwide and can be identified even in disturbed weather conditions.

http://amselvam.webs.com/SEN1/bio2met.htm (http://amselvam.webs.com/SEN1/bio2met.htm)



NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE DATA:


The most basic change in pressure is the twice daily rise and fall in due to the heating from the sun. Each day, around 4 a.m./p.m. the pressure is at its lowest and near its peak around 10 a.m./p.m.


A remarkable characteristic of the semi-diurnal barometric variation is the regularity of the occurrence of the maxima and minima and their uniformity in time of day in all latitudes. (Bulletin of Applied Physical Science)


ALL LATITUDES, no exception recorded.

Surface pressure exhibits a remarkably stable semidiurnal oscillation with maxima at 10 a.m. and 10 p.m. and minima at 4 a.m. and 4 p.m. local time. This semidiurnal oscillation in surface pressure is a universal phenomenon observed worldwide and can be identified even in disturbed weather conditions.


BAROMETER PRESSURE PARADOX

One maximum is at 10 a.m., the other at 10 p.m.; the two minima are at 4 a.m. and 4 p.m.

The heating effect of the sun can explain neither the time when the maxima appear nor the time of the minima of these semidiurnal variations.

If the pressure becomes lower without the air becoming lighter through a lateral expansion due to heat, this must mean that the same mass of air gravitates with changing force at different hours.


Lord Rayleigh: ‘The relative magnitude of the latter [semidiurnal variations], as observed at most parts of the earth’s surface, is still a mystery, all the attempted explanations being illusory.’



Currently, the barometer pressure paradox CANNOT BE EXPLAINED AT ALL.

Richard Lindzen tried, some 40 years ago, to include the effects of ozone and water absorption in the atmospheric tide equations; notwithstanding that in his original paper he did express some doubts, the scientific community happily concluded that the barometer pressure paradox has been solved.


Not by a long shot.

Here is S.J. Woolnough's paper detailing the gross error/omission made by Lindzen.

https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/full/10.1175/JAS3290.1

While the surface pressure signal of the simulated atmospheric tides in the model agree well with both theory and observations in their magnitude and phase, sensitivity experiments suggest that the role of the stratospheric ozone in forcing the semidiurnal tide is much reduced compared to theoretical predictions. Furthermore, the influence of the cloud radiative effects seems small. It is suggested that the radiative heating profile in the troposphere, associated primarily with the water vapor distribution, is more important than previously thought for driving the semidiurnal tide.






Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 17, 2015, 08:42:27 AM
DR. T. HENRY MORAY: DISCOVERY OF ETHER WAVES


Dr. Thomas Henry Moray, an electrical engineer, began research on aerial static generators in 1910. He succeeded in deriving usable electrical energy from the earth's electrostatic field. Many others had achieved similar results in the century preceding Dr. Moray. Patents of "aerial batteries" fill the archives (Vion, Ward, Dewey, Palenscar, Pennock, Plausen). Their remarkable efficiency required only the establishment of elevated stations in appropriate places, each differing in the actual mode of extracting the atmospheric energies.


During the Christmas Holidays of 1911, I began to fully realize that the energy I was working with was not of a static nature, but of an oscillating nature. Further I realized that the energy was not coming out of the earth, but instead was coming to the earth from some outside source. These electrical oscillations in the form of waves were not simple oscillations, but were surgings --- like the waves of the sea --- coming to the earth continually, more in the daytime than at night, but always coming in vibrations from the reservoir of colossal energy out there in space.


While investigating the output of his device, he discovered a feature of the natural static energy, which had somehow been overlooked by other aerial battery designers. The electrostatic power had a flimmering, pulsating quality to it. He learned of this "static pulsation" while listening through headphones, which were connected to telephone wires. The static came in a single, potent surge. This first "wave" subsided, with numerous "back surges" following. Soon thereafter, the process repeated itself. The static surges came "like ocean waves". Indeed, with the volume of "white noise" which they produced, they sounded like ocean waves!

These peculiar waves did not arrive with "clock precision". Just like ocean waves, they arrived in schedules of their own. Dr. Moray was convinced that these were world-permeating waves. He came to believe that they represented the natural "cadence of the universe". This intriguing characteristic suggested that small amounts of pulsating electrostatic charge might be used to induce large oscillations in a large "tank" of charge.


http://johnbedini.net/john34/eternal%20lanterns.htm (http://johnbedini.net/john34/eternal%20lanterns.htm)

(Superb biography of Dr. T. Henry Moray, extraordinary details...sections Electric Rock, Ground Energy, The Swedish Stone, Crucible of the Stars, Space Rays, Sea of Energy, Radioactive Impulses...)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 18, 2015, 01:05:48 AM
Recently, there have been questions re: the "atmospheric momentum", even a whole thread dedicated to the subject...


http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1618928#msg1618928 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1618928#msg1618928) (geocentric Coriolis force, angular momentum, boundary layer, stationary earth, restoring forces paradox)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 21, 2015, 08:45:01 AM
WHAT IS LIGHT?

MAGNETIC MONOPOLES = SUBQUARKS

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1615813#msg1615813 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1615813#msg1615813)


A graviton is NOT electrically neutral.

The recent discovery of magnet monopoles and relationship with subquarks means the following:

The dextrorotatory magnet monopole/subquark is the actual graviton.

The laevorotatory magnet monopole/subquark is the antigraviton.


THE LAMOREAUX EFFECT/THE NIPHER EXPERIMENTS:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1616174#msg1616174 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1616174#msg1616174)

The relationship between gravitation and the electric field was first observed experimentally by Dr. Francis Nipher. Nipher's conclusion was that sheilded electrostatic fields directly influence the action of gravitation. He further concluded that gravitation and electrical fields are absolutely linked.


SPINTRONICS, secret world of magnets, the most thorough work on the double helix theory of the magnetic field (double helix of the telluric currents):

http://freeenergycommunity.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/the-secret-world-of-magnets-spintronics-2006-howard-johnson.pdf (http://freeenergycommunity.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/the-secret-world-of-magnets-spintronics-2006-howard-johnson.pdf)



An electromagnetic wave is simply a ripple in the sea of ether waves: it consists of two scalar waves, which propagate in a double torsion motion.

Tesla kept the ripples in the ether sea (electromagnetic waves) to a minimum, while sending the entire signal/impulse ONLY through the laevorotatory ether scalar wave (sometimes going beyond the speed of light): it is exactly how he achieved his legendary and fantastic results, by NOT using the hertzian ripples in the ether waves.

A normal electromagnetic wave will produce a temporary ripple in the ether sea, the signal transmitted will travel at the speed of light, in the absence of a higher density of aether (medium) and ether waves.


SCALAR WAVE = A SINGLE SUBQUARK (MAGNETIC MONOPOLE) STRING

TERRESTRIAL GRAVITY = DEXTROROTATORY SCALAR WAVE

ANTIGRAVITATIONAL WAVE (EMPLOYED BY TESLA, BROWN, LEEDSKALNIN, KEELY) = LAEVOROTATORY SCALAR WAVE



BOSONS = PHOTONS = NEUTRINOS

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1615813#msg1615813 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1615813#msg1615813)


BIOHOMOCHIRALITY AND TERRESTRIAL GRAVITY

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488624#msg1488624 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488624#msg1488624)


A ray of light DOES NOT split into any component colours

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1394310#msg1394310 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1394310#msg1394310)


Ether waves are transversal waves which flow in a double torsion motion (that is, there are two scalar waves: dextrorotatory and laevorotatory, right-handed spin and left-handed spin).

It is through these waves that longitudinal waves travel (what we call light, ultraviolet, x-rays, gamma, and waves of even higher frequencies): these waves consist of bosons (photons, neutrinos).
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 25, 2015, 11:19:29 PM
I like to tell this story. Once, in the twilight hour, a visitor came to my study, a distinguished-looking gentleman.

He brought me a manuscript dealing with celestial mechanics. After a glance at some of the pages, I had the feeling that this was the work of a mathematical genius.

I entered into conversation with my visitor and mentioned the name of James Clerk Maxwell. My guest asked: "Who is he?" Embarrassed, I answered: "You know, the scientist who gave a theoretical explanation of the experiments of Faraday."

"And who is Faraday?" inquired the stranger. In growing embarrassment 1 said: "Of course, the man who did the pioneer work in electromagnetism." "And what is electromagnetism?" asked the gentleman.

"What is your name?" I inquired. He answered: "Isaac Newton."

I awoke. On my knees was an open volume: Newton's Principia.

This story is told to illustrate what I have said before. Would you listen to anybody discuss the mechanics of the spheres who does not know the elementary physical forces existing in nature? But this is the position adopted by astronomers who acclaim as infallible a celestial mechanics conceived in the 1660s in which electricity and magnetism play not the slightest role.

(from Earth in Upheaval)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 18, 2015, 12:25:08 AM
THE SIRIUS MERIDIAN TRANSIT PERIODS DATA: INEXISTENCE OF EARTH’S AXIAL PRECESSION


https://web.archive.org/web/20100305042618/http://www.siriusresearchgroup.com/diagrams/SiriusTransitObservations.shtml (https://web.archive.org/web/20100305042618/http://www.siriusresearchgroup.com/diagrams/SiriusTransitObservations.shtml)

http://www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/srg/SiriusResearch.shtml (http://www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/srg/SiriusResearch.shtml)

Extended sidereal time-measurements from 6 April 1994 to 6 April 1996 revealed a total negative time deviation of 1.6 seconds from tropical-sidereal time. According to 'precession' this difference should be about 3.34 seconds per year. Hence a total negative deviation of about 6.68 seconds was to be expected, but did not occur in reality.

The continuous measurement of 6 April 1994 to 5 April 2000 confirmed this fact conclusively. In that period the total negative deviation of 'Sirius time' from the total mean sidereal time accumulated to 4.1 seconds. This means about negative 0.68 s per year (!). Again, according to 'precession' a negative time difference of 6 × 3.34 s or about 20 seconds should have occurred, but did NOT occur with respect to Sirius!

As a matter of fact, the mean rotation period of the earth relative to Sirius is nearly identical to the time interval of the mean sidereal day of 86164.09054 seconds.

Even more surprising is the observation that the mean time interval of the sidereal year, as measured with respect to Sirius is nearly identical (by less than one second) to the time interval of the tropical year. According to the theory of 'precession', a yearly time difference of about 1223 s is supposed to occur between a sidereal year and the tropical year.

The meridian transit measurements of Sirius have shown that neither a time difference of 6 × 1223 s, nor a difference of 6 × 3.34 s has occurred over the 6-year observation period from April 1994 to April 2000.

These observations clearly indicate that the so-called 'precession of the earth' is NOT a scientific fact.

 Note: The actual time difference between the mean solar day of 86400 seconds and the mean sidereal day of 86164.0905382 seconds is exactly 235.9094618 seconds per complete rotation. Due to earth's orbital motion this difference accumulates in a complete revolution of the earth to the time period of one complete solar day. Hence, the total number of earth's rotations in one complete 360° period of revolution around the sun is expressed by the following two equations:

86400 s ÷ 235.9094618 s = 366.24219878
365.24219878 × 86400 s = 366.24219878 × 86164.0905382 s


Practical Observation and Measurement of Sidereal Time with respect to Sirius:

My meridian transition time measurement with respect to Sirius (using the UTC atomic-time radio signal from WWV Fort Collins/Colorado), which I conducted over a period of 5 consecutive years, resulted in the following mean sidereal rotation time for the Earth.

Obviously, as indicated by the adjective mean all variations in time caused by periodic or any other fluctuations of the Earth's axis, as well as the assumed precession of the axis, must be included in the 5-year observation period. Technically speaking this is still the easiest and best available method to measure and determine a mean sidereal day.

First meridian transition time of Sirius on 20.04.1994 at 20:16:48.5 hours
Last meridian transition time of Sirius on 19.04.1999 at 20:21:34.5 hours

The total time span between those two measurements is exactly 157 680 286 seconds.
(5 calendar years including one leap day is 5 x 365 days of 86400 s each, plus the time difference of 286 s on the last day)

In this same time interval exactly 5 x 366 sidereal days (meridian transitions) were completed. As a result, the mean sidereal day with respect to Sirius is:

157 680 286 s ÷ 1830 = 86164.09071 seconds.

Note: The mean sidereal day is officially published with 86164.091 s mean solar time, while the mathematically calculated mean sidereal day is exactly 86164.0905382 seconds. Therefore, my precise measurement of 86164.09071 s with respect to Sirius is within the acceptable range of accuracy.

A maximum error in observation of ± 0.5 seconds between the two (first and last) meridian transition of Sirius during the period of 5 years would have the following results:

minimum: 157 680 285.5 s ÷ 1830 meridian transitions = 86164.09044 s
maximum: 157 680 286.5 s ÷ 1830 meridian transitions = 86164.09098 s

Due to the apparent precession, the measurable mean sidereal day should be about 86164.09966 seconds, since logically the actual mean rotation time of the Earth by 86164.0905382 seconds can only be measured with a delay in time relative to the inertial position of the fixed stars. In other words, if precession were indeed to occur, absolutely no fixed star can ever have a mean meridian transition time of 86164.0905382 seconds.

This physical fact would imply that my measurement with respect to Sirius contains an error of observation by about 16.7 seconds (5 x 3.34 s per year), not to mention the +1223 s with each sidereal year!


https://web.archive.org/web/20040214111127/http://www.siriusresearchgroup.com/article3.htm (https://web.archive.org/web/20040214111127/http://www.siriusresearchgroup.com/article3.htm)


Much more information, including additional arguments, here:

http://www.poleshift.org/PrecessParadox.html (http://www.poleshift.org/PrecessParadox.html)

http://www.poleshift.org/from%20Hom-Precession.html (http://www.poleshift.org/from%20Hom-Precession.html)

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:-Pg_fpjxNA4J:www.journaloftheoretics.com/articles/3-3/Uwe-pub.htm+&cd=2&hl=ro&ct=clnk&gl=ro (http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:-Pg_fpjxNA4J:www.journaloftheoretics.com/articles/3-3/Uwe-pub.htm+&cd=2&hl=ro&ct=clnk&gl=ro)

http://www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/srg/Sirius%20Transit%20Data/PDFs/Homann's%20Explanation%20of%20the%20Transit%20Periods%20of%20Sirius%20-%20Results.pdf (http://www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/srg/Sirius%20Transit%20Data/PDFs/Homann's%20Explanation%20of%20the%20Transit%20Periods%20of%20Sirius%20-%20Results.pdf)



A video explaining all of the necessary data required to understand the astronomical situation/setting:

(http://)


A response from one of the authors of the articles mentioned above:

It was argued that the observations of Sirius are ambiguous. Two transit times were chosen in an attempt to calculate the length of time it takes the Earth to move 360 degrees around the sun (sidereal year). The calculation, however, is based on the false premise that the complete orbit period is being affected by accumulating and variable rotation time differences, as measured on the last transit for instance.

It is an erroneous belief that time variations relative to the absolute rotation period of the Earth on its axis (mean sidereal day) must translate into a roughly 366-fold time difference for the Earth to move 360 degrees around the sun.

The rotation of the Earth is not completely predictable. The observations of Sirius have shown that throughout Earth's orbital period the rotation period can be subject to significant daily variations, presumably due to oscillations of the axis of rotation. There is nothing ambiguous about such observations.

The mean transit time of Sirius, as determined by method of direct transit measurement, does not conform to the model of lunisolar precession:

1994 06.04. 21h11'50"
2000 05.04. 21h13'41"
(2191 solar days × 86400 s + 111 s) ÷ 2197 transits of Sirius = 86164.0924 seconds

In practice, the results of long-term transit measurements get applied in order to determine the mean sidereal day of 86164.0905382 seconds. The adjective mean denotes here that periodic and non-periodic variations have been averaged out, the mean rotation being affected only by the apparent daily regression of the stars. Based on the adopted value of 50.26" per tropical year, the extra rotation time relative to the stars is about 9.12 millisecond per day and not 3.34 seconds per day, as one is misled to believe.

The absolute rotation period plus 9.12 ms represents a rotation of 360° 0.1368". The difference of 9.12 ms must be removed to calculate the 360-degree orbit period during which the Earth makes exactly one absolute rotation more relative to inertial space than relative to the sun.

The mathematical facts are conclusive. Irrelevant of the rate of the apparent annual regression of the stars, it takes the absolute center of the Earth 31,556,925.97474 seconds to move 360 degrees around the sun relative to the inertial point of reference that remains fixed with respect to the orientation of the Earth's axis in space.


The Allais Effect VI (axial precession is not related to Newtonian mechanics)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1642033#msg1642033 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1642033#msg1642033)

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

The detailed behavior of both pendulums over the eclipse period shown in Fig. 8 was remarkable. 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.


Analysis. This long Foucault-type pendulum behaved in a very stable manner. However well after the end of the locally visible eclipse, at around 11:33 (to the recording resolution, i.e. between the readings at 11:29 and 11:36), some influence clearly acted for a short period to increase the precession rate. This influence was no longer apparent during the next inter-reading interval (from 11:36 to 11:43), and then reversed itself to some extent during the next interval (from 11:43 to 11:50).


The Allais Effect VII (stationary earth/Foucault's pendulum anomalies)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1642668#msg1642668 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1642668#msg1642668)

The physical reality is this. The Allais effect noticed can be due to either a momentary fluctuation in the earths rotation, or in the aethers rotation over that area of space where the alignment occurs.  The former for obvious reasons (the energy factor) is illogical.

"Nobel prize winner Maurice Allais had to go and throw another monkey wrench in the spokes of the heliocentric bicycle. Allais performed a marathon 30 day Foucault Pendulum experiment in 1954. During the experiment an eclipse occurred. Surprisingly, the pendulum changed angles by a significant 13.5 degrees! This suggests something in space was affecting the pendulum, not the motion of the earth."


The entire historical/astronomical data has been faked/forged, from Hipparchus and Ptolemy to Galilei and Kepler:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1638504#msg1638504 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1638504#msg1638504)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1638725#msg1638725 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1638725#msg1638725)


How to calculate the sun’s precession on a flat earth surface: the history of the world cannot be more than 500 years old

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1651574#msg1651574 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1651574#msg1651574)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1635693#msg1635693 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1635693#msg1635693)





Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 07, 2015, 08:54:29 AM
THE EXTENDED SCHROETER EFFECT: THE EVENING STAR AND THE MORNING STAR ARE TWO DIFFERENT PLANETS


Official astronomy science:

In 1793, J. H. Schroeter reported, for the first time, observing the southern limb of the planet Venus remaining concave up to about eight days before or after its conjunction with the Sun, according to his best estimate.

In general, the time difference between the time of theoretical dichotomy and the time of observed dichotomy is about four to six days.

The various theoretical interpretations of this long-standing anomaly, whether they be atmospheric, kinematic or optical, have not been able to explain the basic Schroeter effect: they cannot explain in any way the extended Schroeter effect.


Nonetheless, the phase anomaly of Venus is much wider than the Schroeter's effect, and can produce differences of ± 0.10 for all phases from near 0.1 Phase to 0.9 Phase; and not just at 0.5 Phase alone.


Eastern elongation Venus Schroeter effect data:

http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/2005JBAA..115...79H/0000080.000.html (http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/2005JBAA..115...79H/0000080.000.html)

Western elongation Venus Schroeter effect data:

http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/2005JBAA..115...79H/0000081.000.html (http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/2005JBAA..115...79H/0000081.000.html)


Notable differences observed:

http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/2005JBAA..115...79H/0000082.000.html (http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/2005JBAA..115...79H/0000082.000.html)



The superb analysis of the Schroeter effect in the context of geocentrism:

http://web.archive.org/web/20120726101423/http://www.realityreviewed.com/Schroter.htm (http://web.archive.org/web/20120726101423/http://www.realityreviewed.com/Schroter.htm) (it includes a different proof of the fact that the Schroeter effect can only take place within the geocentric context, many other quotes concerning the Schroeter effect)


http://www.issibern.ch/teams/venusso2/multimedia/pdf/Krasnopolsky_06.pdf (http://www.issibern.ch/teams/venusso2/multimedia/pdf/Krasnopolsky_06.pdf) (unsolved problems for the atmosphere of Venus)

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1969JBAA...79..286J (http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1969JBAA...79..286J) (the phase anomalies of Mercury)


The original discussion on the hypothesis that the Evening Star and Morning Star are two different planets:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1650377#msg1650377 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1650377#msg1650377)


The Morning Star and the Evening Star in the mythology of the American Indian tribes, are two different planets:

https://web.archive.org/web/20120421071508/http://www.mythopedia.info/Sosondowah.pdf (superb analysis)

(Note: the Evening Star is not Mars, see: http://www.masseiana.org/smithe.htm (http://www.masseiana.org/smithe.htm) )


Xolotl and Mercury:

https://books.google.ro/books?id=MofGZF5Nt-QC&pg=PA73&lpg=PA73&dq=xolotl+mercury+evening+star&source=bl&ots=gVq9QAhxkf&sig=OC-K66Cs5-zBxaajgRQIB_PQO3o&hl=ro&sa=X&ved=0CCYQ6AEwAGoVChMI3-_rr5PyyAIVyW0UCh1o9wPO#v=onepage&q=xolotl%20mercury%20evening%20star&f=false (https://books.google.ro/books?id=MofGZF5Nt-QC&pg=PA73&lpg=PA73&dq=xolotl+mercury+evening+star&source=bl&ots=gVq9QAhxkf&sig=OC-K66Cs5-zBxaajgRQIB_PQO3o&hl=ro&sa=X&ved=0CCYQ6AEwAGoVChMI3-_rr5PyyAIVyW0UCh1o9wPO#v=onepage&q=xolotl%20mercury%20evening%20star&f=false)

(Heaven and Earth in Ancient Mexico, S. Milbrath, pg. 73, 83-87, plates 8-10)


XOLOTL = TYPHON = HESPEROS

http://www.gnostics.com/archives.pantheon.html (http://www.gnostics.com/archives.pantheon.html)

http://www.vopus.org/en/content/view/120/ (http://www.vopus.org/en/content/view/120/)


XOLOTL = EVENING STAR

http://www.azteccalendar.com/god/xolotl.html (http://www.azteccalendar.com/god/xolotl.html)

http://www.mythologydictionary.com/xolotl-mythology.html (http://www.mythologydictionary.com/xolotl-mythology.html)


PHAETHON = EVENING STAR = ADYMNUS

https://books.google.ro/books?id=qXMvBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA182&lpg=PA182&dq=phaethon+evening+star&source=bl&ots=jirRAD0yWq&sig=XQTWE5L5faBwb7zS6B7f3_I9lRY&hl=ro&sa=X&ved=0CEoQ6AEwB2oVChMIseCFm8ayyAIVJABzCh34FgEe#v=onepage&q=phaethon%20evening%20star&f=false (https://books.google.ro/books?id=qXMvBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA182&lpg=PA182&dq=phaethon+evening+star&source=bl&ots=jirRAD0yWq&sig=XQTWE5L5faBwb7zS6B7f3_I9lRY&hl=ro&sa=X&ved=0CEoQ6AEwB2oVChMIseCFm8ayyAIVJABzCh34FgEe#v=onepage&q=phaethon%20evening%20star&f=false)

http://www.24grammata.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Robert-Graves-The-Greek-Myths-24grammata.com_.pdf (http://www.24grammata.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Robert-Graves-The-Greek-Myths-24grammata.com_.pdf)

PHAETHON = TYPHON

http://www.blavatsky.net/index.php/37-topics/atlantis/54-phaeton-and-atlantis (http://www.blavatsky.net/index.php/37-topics/atlantis/54-phaeton-and-atlantis)

PALLAS = TYPHON

http://immanuelvelikovsky.com/Svbasic.htm#_Toc368234329 (http://immanuelvelikovsky.com/Svbasic.htm#_Toc368234329)


The only author who thinks that Aten is Mercury (that is, Typhon, the Evening Star):

http://www.gks.uk.com/akhenaten-amarna-mercury/ (http://www.gks.uk.com/akhenaten-amarna-mercury/)



On the angular size of Mars:

http://www.freelists.org/post/geocentrism/The-resolution-of-Mars,4 (http://www.freelists.org/post/geocentrism/The-resolution-of-Mars,4)


In fact, the only thing that Galileo's findings showed was that the epicycles in the Ptolemaic system were much larger than had previously been suspected.

As for the Tychonic model of Geocentrism, if one uses the same elliptical orbits of Kepler, the result is that two epicycles in the Ptolemaic system will translate into one ellipse, per planet, in the Tychonic system. Thus, around the sun, Mercury and Venus would each have a perigee and an apogee, and each locus of points along that polarity would show the respective phases of Mercury and Venus, as viewed from earth. (R. Sungenis) - (this is how, on a flat earth, we correctly explain the phases of Venus photograph: http://s23.postimg.org/sfm8mp8p7/venus_phase1.jpg (http://s23.postimg.org/sfm8mp8p7/venus_phase1.jpg) )
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 09, 2015, 12:36:46 PM
BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT APPLIED TO WATER MOLECULES: THE ICOSAHEDRON AND ETHER WAVES


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

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg759935#msg759935 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg759935#msg759935) (BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg759968#msg759968 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg759968#msg759968) (CLOUDS)


"A recent theory by Martin Chaplin Professor of Applied Science Water and Aqueous Systems Research of the London South Bank University demonstrates that water molecules can arrange themselves in various structures and configurations based on the icosahedron. The most amazing structure is a super icosahedral structure that exists of 13 smaller icosahedral structures with a total of 1820 water molecules."

(http://www.soulsofdistortion.nl/images/Joe_Cell_2.gif)

Icosahedral super water cluster of 1820 H2O molecules

"Chaplin’s model of the molecular structuring of water is able to explain many of the anomalous properties of water, such as its expansion between 0 en 4 degrees, its high boiling point and many other strange properties that makes water such a rare fluid. So what this theory shows is that water dynamically creates these super icosahedral clusters to give water its exclusive properties."


ICOSAHEDRAL WATER CLUSTERS:

http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/clusters_overview.html (http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/clusters_overview.html)

http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/cluster_evidence.html (http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/cluster_evidence.html)


Let us remember that the water molecule itself, H2O, is actually in the shape of an icosahedron:

(http://hpb.narod.ru/tph/OC157.JPG)

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr13.pdf (http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr13.pdf)


Baryons, mesons, quarks, subquarks:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1401101#msg1401101 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1401101#msg1401101)


"Water can perhaps best be understood -from pure symmetry terms - as a device to permit the successful compression of electrical charge. To complete compression successfully - nature uses what every mathematician knows is the ONLY geometry for infinite or perfected - compression: FRACTALITY (self similarity)."


"Now here’s the secret of water in relation with ether energy, these icosahedral structures resonate with the telluric currents through form! They are the waveguides that allow the subquark strings to implode [that is, to form a double torsion tornado around the water molecule itself]. The icosahedral water clusters simply, nest or fit recursively into the fractal matrix of imploding waves that sustains matter, i.e. the atoms of the water molecules."

 http://www.soulsofdistortion.nl/water4.html (http://www.soulsofdistortion.nl/water4.html)

"Water through this internal self-similarity with the internal structure of the atom in fractal form, will start to act like a super conductor to this imploding ether energy."


The very shape of a water droplet is actually an ideal capacitor:

https://web.archive.org/web/20091106165712/http://www.goldenmean.info/biophoton/ (https://web.archive.org/web/20091106165712/http://www.goldenmean.info/biophoton/)


The relationship between a water molecule and the local capacitive charge field:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080624000331/http://www.goldenmean.info/rain/ (https://web.archive.org/web/20080624000331/http://www.goldenmean.info/rain/)



http://www.ias.ac.in/jess/june2004/Esb1571.pdf (http://www.ias.ac.in/jess/june2004/Esb1571.pdf)

The relaxation time required for a ventilated drop to reach its equilibrium temperature increases with the drop size and is higher for the charged than for the uncharged drops. It is concluded that in a given distance, charged drops will evaporate less than that of uncharged drops.

THE CHARGED DROPS WILL EVAPORATE LESS THAN THE UNCHARGED DROPS. WHY? BECAUSE OF THE BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT, WHICH DOES PROVIDE THE ADDITIONAL ENERGY (ANTIGRAVITATIONAL) IN THE FORM OF LAEVOROTATORY SUBQUARKS.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 10, 2015, 12:05:02 AM
ETHER DRIFT RESULTS: CONFIRMATION OF DAYTON MILLER'S RESULTS/EXISTENCE OF DYNAMIC ETHER

Yuri Galaev, Ph.D.; Senior research officer of the Institute for Radiophysics & Electronics National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, and corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences (RANS)

The most significant development since Miller has been the
experiments of Yuri Galaev of the Institute of Radiophysics and
Electronics in the Ukraine. Galaev made independent measure-
ments of ether-drift using radiofrequency and optical wave
bands. His research not only "confirmed Miller's results down
to the details"but also allowed computation of the increase of
ether-drift with altitude above the Earth's surface (calculated to
be 8.6 m/sec per meter of altitude).

http://www.orgonelab.org/DynamicEther.pdf (http://www.orgonelab.org/DynamicEther.pdf) (Dr. James DeMeo's superb presentation of ether drift results)


Now, the English translations of Dr. Yuri Galaev's groundbreaking work and most precise confirmation of the existence of dynamic ether (experiments carried out over the course of several years). Let us remember that, in what follows, it is the ether itself which flows above the flat surface of the earth and not the other way around... that is, both Miller and Galaev measured precisely the velocity and physical qualities of ether as it travels/propagates above the flat earth.


http://www.orgonelab.org/EtherDrift/Galaev2.pdf

journal pgs 207-224

pg 210 interferometer description
pg 220 ether drift velocity measurements/data


THE MEASURING OF ETHER-DRIFT VELOCITY AND KINEMATIC ETHER VISCOSITY WITHIN OPTICAL WAVES BAND Yu.M. Galaev The Institute of Radiophysics and Electronics of NSA in Ukraine


The positive results of three experiments [1-3], [7- 9], [10] give the basis to consider the effects detected in these experiments, as medium movement developments, responsible for electromagnetic waves propagation.

Such medium was called as the ether [11] at the times of Maxwell, Michelson and earlier. The conclusion was made in the works [1-3], that the measurement results within millimeter radio waves band can be considered as the experimental hypothesis confirmation of the material medium existence in nature such as the ether. Further discussions of the experiment results [1-3] have shown the expediency of additional experimental analysis of the ether drift problem in an optical wave band.


Thus, in the work, the hypothesis experimental verification about the ether existence in nature, i.e. material medium, responsible for electromagnetic waves propagation, in the optical wave band has been performed. The estimation of the ether kinematic viscosity value has been performed. The first order optical method for the ether drift velocity and the ether kinematic viscosity measuring has been proposed and realized.

The method action is based on the development regularities of viscous liquid or gas streams in the directing systems. The significant measurement results have been obtained statistically. The development of the ether drift required effects has been shown. The measured value of the ether kinematic viscosity on the value order has coincided with its calculated value.

The velocity of optical wave propagation depends on the radiation direction and increases with height growth above the Earth's surface. The velocity of optical wave propagation changes its value with a period per one stellar day. The detected effects can be explained by the following:
 
optical wave propagation medium available regarding to the Earth's movement;
 
optical wave propagation medium has the viscosity, i.e. the feature proper to material mediums composed of separate particles;

the medium stream of optical wave propagation has got a space (galactic) origin.

The work results comparison to the experiment results, executed earlier in order of the hypothesis verification about the existence of such material medium as the ether in nature, has been performed. The comparison results have shown the reproduced nature of the ether drift effect measurements in various experiments performed in different geographic requirements with different measurement methods application. The work results can be considered as experimental hypothesis confirmation about the ether existence in nature, i.e. material medium, responsible for electromagnetic waves propagation.

The following model statements are used at measuring method development [4-6]: the ether is a material medium, responsible for electromagnetic waves propagation; the ether has properties of viscous gas; the metals have major etherdynamic resistance. The imagination of the hydroaerodynamic (etherdynamic) effect existence is accepted as the initial position. The method of the first order based on known regularities of viscous gas movement in tubes [27-28] has been proposed and realized within the optical electromagnetic waves band in the work for measuring of the ether drift velocity and ether kinematic viscosity.


http://www.orgonelab.org/EtherDrift/Galaev.pdf

journal pgs 211-225

ETHERAL WIND IN EXPERIENCE OF MILLIMETRIC RADIOWAVES PROPAGATION Yu.M. Galaev The Institute of Radiophysics and Electronics of NSA in Ukraine


The ethereal wind speed value, measured in a radio frequency band at the work, is close to the ethereal wind speeds values, measured in electromagnetic waves optical range in the experiments of Miller [5, 6], Michelson, Peas, Pearson [11]. Such comparison results can be considered as mutual confirmation of the research results veracity, the experiment [5, 6] and the experiment [11].

The executed analysis has shown, that this work results can be explained by radiowaves propagation phenomenon in a space parentage driving medium with a gradiant layer speed in this medium ow near the Earth's surface. The gradiant layer available testifies that this medium has the viscosity -- the property intrinsic material media, i.e. media consisting of separate particles. Thus, the executed experiment results agree with the initial hypothesis positions about the Aether material medium existence in the nature.


Dr. Maurice Allais' analysis of the Dayton Miller ether-drift experiments:

http://allais.maurice.free.fr/English/media12-1.htm (http://allais.maurice.free.fr/English/media12-1.htm)


The most striking effect upon living matter of such ether waves (both laevorotatory and dextrorotatory) is the biohomochirality phenomenon, completely unexplained by modern science (RE/UA), as documented here:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488624#msg1488624 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488624#msg1488624)



AWT (aetheric wind theory) misconceptions:

Dark matter which fills 'empty' space is otherwise known as the aether. Aether has mass, physically occupies three dimensional space and is physically displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it. Including 'particles' as large as galaxies and galaxy clusters.


Let me explain:

Aether = medium through which ETHER flows

Ether = scalar waves consisting of subquarks strings

The density of aether can vary.


RE theory requires a full void, otherwise the equations which "describe" the orbits of the planets will have to include friction terms.


KEPLER MOTION

In an appropriate coordinate system, the motion of a planet around the sun (considered as fixed) with the attractive force being proportional to the inverse square of the distance /z/ of the planet from the sun is given by the solution of the second order conservative system with the potential function -/z/^-1 for z =/0.

A mechanical system without friction can be described in the Hamiltonian formulation.

References for Celestial Mechanics and Hamiltonian mechanics:

V.I. Arnold, Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics, Springer-Verlag, 1978

C.L. Siegel and J. Moser, Lectures on Celestial Mechanics, Springer-Verlag, 1971

J. Moser, Stable and Random Motions in Dynamical Systems, Princeton Univ. Press, 1973

Area Preserving Maps, Nonintegrable/Nearly Integrable Hamiltonians, KAM Theory:

http://www.math.rug.nl/~broer/pdf/kolmo100.pdf (http://www.math.rug.nl/~broer/pdf/kolmo100.pdf)


Stability of the heliocentric planetary system:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg987360.html#msg987360 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg987360.html#msg987360) (chaos/horseshoe theory, original quotes from Henri Poincare and much more)


ONCE ONE MENTIONS AETHER, THE DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS WHICH DESCRIBE THE MOTION OF THE CELESTIAL SPHERES, IN THE HELIOCENTRICAL THEORY, WILL NO LONGER BE A HAMILTONIAN, THAT IS, FRICTIONAL TERMS WILL HAVE TO BE INSERTED.

Aether/Ether = Physics of a cavity resonator

On July 3, 1899, Tesla discovered terrestrial stationary waves within the earth. He demonstrated that the Earth behaves as a smooth polished conductor and possesses electrical vibrations. He experimented with waves characterized by a lack of vibration at points, between which areas of maximum vibration occur periodically. These standing waves were produced by confining waves within constructed conductive boundaries. Tesla demonstrated that the Earth could respond at predescribed frequencies of electrical vibrations.

Between the nearly perfectly conducting terrestrial surface and ionosphere, a resonating cavity is formed. Broadband electromagnetic impulses, like those from lightning flashes, fill this cavity, and create globally the so-called Schumann resonances at frequencies 5 - 50 Hz (Schumann, 1952; Bliokh et al., 1980; Sentman, 1987).


Here is another misconception:

With regard to the ether, Einstein states:

Light propagates through the sea of ether, in which the Earth is moving. In other words, the ether is moving with respect to the Earth...


http://www.ekkehard-friebe.de/dishones.htm (http://www.ekkehard-friebe.de/dishones.htm)

He did not realize that ether = friction, so therefore, the very equations of motion, thought to be Hamiltonian, must be modified to include the frictional effect of ether/aether upon the celestial bodies...
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 14, 2015, 11:25:51 PM
DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX

Stanley Byers presented his findings to the National Science Foundation, the US Air Force Office of Scientific Research and to Dr. Harold Puthoff, with very interesting feedback.

(https://image.ibb.co/d9E4oy/double1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/djAxad/double2.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/i0uOFd/double3.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/cHYB1J/double4.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/msfPMJ/double5.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/dqy5Ty/double6.jpg)


As if this wasn't enough, here is the flux of gravitons paradox, (how a three body system cannot function given the attractive gravity scenario) - for a better visualization, use Sun - Jupiter - Io

"OBJECTIVE: Demonstrate that this interchange of gravitational particles again will seem to result in violations of conservation of energy. We will do this by demonstrating that, if matter is indeed influenced by gravitational particles, then, even under normal orbital conditions, gravity should decrease, due to a gravitational shadowing effect. This shadowing effect would violate conservation of energy.

Thought Experiment: IMAGINE THAT GRAVITONS BEHAVE LIKE PHOTONS

(for descriptive purposes only)

To better visualize how this partial gravitational influence might be encountered, let us describe gravity and gravitational interaction in terms of light, so that:

If gravitons exist, violations of the Law of Conservation of Energy will almost certainly occur.

Brilliance of light = gravitational attraction = (emission of gravitons)

Decreasing Transparency = Increasing Density and Mass

In this thought experiment, we will specify one sun, one earth and one moon. Each will be partially luminous, to simulate their 'output' of gravitons, and each will also be partially opaque, to indicate their 'capturing-of' or their 'reception-of' gravitons. We would then have the following description of the system.

In this imaginary system, the moon orbits the earth, and the earth-moon pair orbits the sun. Since glow will simulate gravity emitted, we could describe this sun as glowing brighter that this earth, and this earth as glowing brighter than the moon.

In addition, the moon would be more transparent than the earth, and the earth would be less transparent than the sun. This would simulate the increasing 'interception' of gravity, with an increase of both the density and mass from the moon, to the earth then to the sun in our imaginary example.

In this example, the light from the sun would 'attract' the earth and the moon (simulating the pull of gravity). The earth would glow less brilliantly than the sun, but still brighter than the moon. The moon would be attracted to both the earth and the sun, but would orbit the earth. The earth moon pair would then orbit the sun together.

In this example, the moon would spend more time in the earth's shadow, and the earth's shadow would be comparatively darker than the moon's shadow. Since the moon would be attracted to the sun only by the light from the sun, and the light emitted by the earth with the sun shining through the less transparent earth would be less than the light emitted by the sun directly, the moon would gain some amount of orbital distance from the sun every time the moon 'hid' in the earth's shadow.

This gain of gravitational energy, simulated in this example with light and transparency, {for visual purposes only}, would violate conservation of energy. If gravitons exist, they must self-condradictingly pass through nearer masses unaffected, so as not to decrease gravity for masses at a further distance, while still interacting with those closer masses at the same time.

Otherwise, we are left with the choice that masses at a distance will randomly gain some gravitational potential energy depending on whether randomly distributed nearer masses create a gravitational 'shadow' effect. We are once again led to the conclusion that gravitons, if they exist, must create violations of conservation of energy. This is hardly a reliable theoretical endorsement of gravitons, when conservation of energy must fall by the wayside in order to allow gravitons to exist. A much more logical conclusion is again, gravitons do not exist, and cannot exist. Some other method of explaining gravitational interactions must be needed."
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 21, 2015, 12:57:49 AM
DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II

From a classic text on mechanics:

(https://image.ibb.co/mv4ZMJ/double7.jpg)


When science teachers are asked how does gravity work, they answer in this manner:

Gravity is a force.

Gravity is directed towards the center of the orbit i.e. the sun.

That makes gravity the centripetal force.

Imagine a ball attached to a string and you are holding the other end of the string and moving your hand in such a way that the ball is in circular motion. Then tension in the string is centripetal force.

Now, ball = earth

you = sun

tension in the string = gravity



Gravity is the reason one object orbits another. An analogy is swinging a ball on a string over your head. The string is like gravity, and it keeps the ball in orbit. If you let go of the string, the ball flies away from you. (Dr. Eric Christian, April 2011)


http://scienceline.ucsb.edu/getkey.php?key=4569 (http://scienceline.ucsb.edu/getkey.php?key=4569) (UCSB Science Line)

Centrifugal force acts on a rotating object in a direction opposite the axis of rotation. Imagine that you have a tennis ball tied to a string. If you swing the tennis ball on the string around in a circle, you would feel the ball tugging on the string. That is the centrifugal force on the ball. It is counteracted by tension in the string that you are holding. In this example, the tension force in the string is like the gravitational force between the earth and the sun. The ball doesn't get closer or farther from your hand. If you suddenly cut the string, the ball would go flying away, but that wont happen to the earth because of the sun's gravity.

http://scienceline.ucsb.edu/getkey.php?key=4583 (http://scienceline.ucsb.edu/getkey.php?key=4583)

Forces can make something move or stop something from moving. For a planet in orbit around the sun, the string is invisible. That invisible string is the gravitational force between the Earth and the sun.


Then, the Mass Attraction and General Relativity Attraction concepts are not viable models for the cause of gravity and inertia.

Applying any "attractive" force model to the Earth Moon dynamic forces, we obtain this system:

The Earth’s attractive gravitation balances the orbital centrifugal force of the Moon.
The Moon’s attractive gravitation balances the orbital centrifugal force of the Earth.

At first this may seem like an orderly and balanced attractive force system; however,... the following paradox exists. If the seat, source and cause of the "apparent" attraction forces are "internal" to each of the bodies...the attraction concept produces twice the force that is necessary to balance the centrifugal orbital forces of a planet moon system. The concept of "attraction" between bodies requires that the force “from” each separate body acts on the remote body,-- and equally on the originating body. Another example of a balanced system is a rope under tension; each end has an equal amount of opposing force. As noted by Newton's third law of motion, " To every action there is always an opposed  equal reaction".

This double force paradox is directly applicable to the "mass attraction",... the General Relativity “attraction” and all other attraction type concepts of gravity.

This example may help visualize the double force issue.

Let there be two rafts ( x and y )  freely floating on a clear calm lake with a rope between them.
Both rafts are still and are a rope length apart. 
The man on (raft x) pulls on the rope which is attached to raft y.
Raft x will move toward raft y,… and raft y will move toward raft x.
Both rafts will receive equal and opposite force and motion. 
It is not possible for (raft x) to remain still and be the source of the force.   

The Mass Attraction Models of Gravitation

The attraction concepts accept Newton's inverse square equation of gravity's force between two bodies as:
             F = G x (M1 x M2) / r squared .
The surface gravity (g) for each of the bodies can be derived from the gravitational constant (G) and the mass and radius of the bodies. Using Newton's equation the g forces, allegedly "seated" in each of the "two" bodies acting on the other at a distance, can be calculated.

Within the "attraction" concepts:

From Earth, the concept requires that Earth's gravity is attracting the Moon; and an equal Earth anchored “attraction” force is pulling the Earth toward the Moon.

From the Moon, the Moon's gravity is attracting the Earth; and this Moon seated force is equally pulling the Moon toward the Earth.
 

Using: 1 ) Newton’s equation as given above, 2 ) basic arithmetic, 3 ) common logic and 4 ) the mechanics of force, it is shown that the assumed Earth and Moon seated forces are equal; and as a result;…"all attraction models" produce twice the force that is required to balance the centrifugal forces of orbit!

The General Relativity Model of Gravitation

The exact same paradox arises with the General Relativity (GR) concept of gravity. It postulates that Mass warps a hypothetical "fabric of spacetime" and the warped fabric of spacetime causes “attraction” of other masses. Since in the GR theory the seat of the attractive force is anchored within the center of the planet’s and moon’s positions, we would again have twice the force required to balance the orbital forces of the Earth Moon system.

Stanley V. Byers
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 31, 2015, 03:53:21 AM
F. HOPKINSON'S MAYAN PYRAMID


Francis Hopkinson's 1778 Mayan Step Pyramid:

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0e/Continental_%2450_note_1778_pyramid.jpg)

Why would a MAYAN PYRAMID appear on a seal for the United States? No Mayan Pyramids were known to exist in the 1776 United States!
Why include such an image after so many years of painstaking review by committees and congress?


The pyramid depicted in the image attributed to F. Hopkinson resembles exactly the well-known shape of the Mayan pyramids:

http://www.english.illinois.edu/maps/poets/a_f/bronk/tikal.htm (http://www.english.illinois.edu/maps/poets/a_f/bronk/tikal.htm)
http://www.ancient.eu/Palenque/ (http://www.ancient.eu/Palenque/)

But these images became known to the Western world, according to the official chronology, only after Alexander Humboldt's and John Lloyd Stephens' works were published (1810 and 1837-1841).

This is how we can infer that the biography of F. Hopkinson was forged/falsified at least 50 years later, by the same group of people who actually built not only the Mayan pyramids but also the monuments of South America and the temple at Angkor Wat in Asia.

Luther's Bill of Rights

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1641253#msg1641253 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1641253#msg1641253)

There were no Mayans, they could not possibly have had knowledge of precessional cycles:

http://mathisencorollary.blogspot.ro/2012/12/the-staggering-implications-of-maya.html (http://mathisencorollary.blogspot.ro/2012/12/the-staggering-implications-of-maya.html)


Few people understand that the image depicted on the Great Seal of the United States is actually a very sophisticated calendar.

The thirteen step Mayan pyramid is an obvious reference to the calendar attributed to the Mayans.

In the Mayan Great Cycle, there are 13 baktuns of 20 katuns each. Each katun consists of 20 tuns or 19.7 Years of our modern western calendar years.

http://strangeye.blogspot.ro/2012/11/the-mayan-end-game-calendar-and-seal.html (http://strangeye.blogspot.ro/2012/11/the-mayan-end-game-calendar-and-seal.html) (explains how the bottom step starts at 1756 AD, and the top of the pyramid symbolizes the year 2012 AD).

However, there is more to this.

Phoenix = Venus = Bennu

http://www.egyptianmyths.net/phoenix.htm (http://www.egyptianmyths.net/phoenix.htm)

The Phoenix bird is a symbol of the solar transit of Venus.

The return of Venus as Morning Star after her solar transit signals the flight of the Phoenix.

1761
1765 = midpoint (11 years to 1776)
1769


2004
2008 = midpoint (11 years to 2019)
2012

Therefore the image points to the year 2019.


How to calculate the sun’s precession on a flat earth surface: the history of the world cannot be more than 500 years old

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1651574#msg1651574 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1651574#msg1651574)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1635693#msg1635693 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1635693#msg1635693)

The arclength for each gate (space alloted for the each of the six periods running from the winter solstice to the summer solstice, and from the summer solstice to the winter solstice) is 1048 km.

There are several possibilities relating to describing the solar precession within the context of the 1048 km alloted for the each gate.

Obviously, the upper bound must be 524 km (1048/2): solar precession = 1.5 km - 1.52 km per year, otherwise at the end of the precessional cycle the solar orbit would intersect the space alloted for the next gate (or the space beyond the tropic of Cancer/Capricorn latitudes).

That is, we would have a mobile section (which would be used by the Sun for 30 days, the interval alloted for each gate of 381.6 km) which now moves westward until it reaches the 286.1 km limit (that is, it can only move/travel for 381.6 km; its starting point will travel 381.6 km, across a time period of some 254.24 years, and its endpoint, already on the 381.6 km mark, will travel another 381.6 km to reach the 763.2 km limit, after 254.24 years, at some 1.5 km per year).

The lower bound has to be 262 km (1048/4): we cannot imagine a precessional cycle which would occupy less than 262 km (of the total 1048 km).

Therefore, the correct number is to be found between 524 km and 262 km.

Each and every FE believer must understand these facts very precisely: the history of the world cannot be more than a few hundreds of years old, as these numbers prove exactly this fact.

In the new radical chronology of history, the last major cosmic catastrophe occurred in the period 1760-1767, which coincides with the Venus solar transit data offered by modern astronomy, and with the exodus of Akhenaton from Egypt.

That is, the full precessional cycle of the sun cannot be more than some 260 years old.

That is why I chose 381.6 (600 sacred cubits) km as the figure which best encompasses all the available data.

Of course, the other FE/UAFE/RE should investigate this matter, and come up with their own numbers, if they choose a different way of analyzing the data. However, their calculations are bounded by the 524 km and the 262 km figures.

Solar precession 49 arcseconds per year

0.01361 degrees (136.1 height of the Giza pyramid)

(other figures are as follows: for 50.23 arcseconds per year, we will have an angle of 0.013971 degrees; for 49.54 arcseconds, an angle of 0.0137611 degrees; let us remember that 3.14 seconds is the mean deviation, while the actual deviation, over time, is from 3.11 seconds to 3.17 seconds daily, this would accumulate to some 19 minutes per year)

381.6/254.24 = 1.5 km per year of solar precession

That is, it will take 254.24 years for the Sun to complete its precessional cycle within the space alloted for the each gate (1048 km =~ 2 x 381.6 + 286.1; each gate will have a displacement factor of 286.1 km)

254.24 = 10000 sacred inches

254.24 years means a total precesional angle of 3.49528 degrees, where 1/0.00349258 = 286.1, the displacement factor the Giza pyramid

1761 + 254.24 = 2015.24

1765 + 254.24 = 2019.24 (thus we arrive at the same figure offered by the calendar depicted on the Great Seal)

However, we do not know precisely the very year in which the end of the Fourth World age occurred (it has to be somewhere between 1761 and 1767, according to my analysis of the new radical chronology of history).


Here is a work published by a Hungarian architect which takes a closer look at the precessional clock of the Giza pyramid:

http://blog.world-mysteries.com/mystic-places/giza-the-time-machine/ (http://blog.world-mysteries.com/mystic-places/giza-the-time-machine/)

(http://blog.world-mysteries.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/AG_Khufu_calendar1.jpg)

(http://blog.world-mysteries.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Khufu_and_3_sml_pyramids.jpg)

The time of the summer and winter solstice is marked by straight lines of 28 degrees each drawn from the apex of Khefren.
The summer solstice is marked by a straight line starting at the pyramid’s apex and going 28 degrees North (from West to East direction) placed on the drawing by J.A.R. Legon in 2000 (27.95 degrees). The line  of the winter solstice can be determined by mirroring that line in Southern direction. The north-eastern foot-point of the limestone Khentkawes will be the location of the winter solstice. As the years can be divided into two equal parts this way, the division of the year into two parts was created. The summer solstice is connected to the 21st of June, while the winter solstice to the 21st of December. Today, there are 6 months between the two dates.


(http://blog.world-mysteries.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/AG_Giza3B.jpg)

(http://blog.world-mysteries.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/AG_Giza3.jpg)

However, the author of the article did not notice the most obvious fact:

858.5 = 286.1666 x 3

455.5 x 3.1416 = 1430.9954

2 x 1430.9954 = 2861.991


Let us now substract 3.49528 degrees (total solar precession on a flat earth) from 28 degrees (actually 27.95 degrees) and see what figures will be obtained.

With an angle of 24.4547 degrees, amazingly, the new side of the triangle will measure 391.94 meters, that is, 391.94 + 63.56 = 455.5 meters.

one sacred cubit = 0.6356 meters

391.94/143.05 =~ 1/0.3649 (1 - 0.3649 = 0.635)

The other side will measure 763.8 meters

763.8 x 5 = 6000 sacred cubits

763.2 = 2 x 381.6


This means, of course, that we have another proof relating to the fact that the builders of the Giza pyramids had at their disposal the knowledge about the radian measure, and also how to easily calculate various measures (angles, sides) in a right triangle.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1573684#msg1573684 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1573684#msg1573684) (Gizeh pyramid advanced calculus)


The Sun will rise from the West at the time of Imam Mahdi's appearance.

This well-known prophecy is, of course, not taken seriously my most scholars within the context of heliocentricity; however, its astronomical meaning can be discerned immediately given the facts listed above: as the Sun reaches its orbital limit (the very endpoint of its alloted space within a gate), it will have to rise from the west to reach/achieve an orbit over the flat surface of the Earth (this is how we explain the various legends around the world concerning the reversal of the path of the Sun; this only can happen at the end of a world age).



For the 1048 km total measurement allowed for a single gate, we will have an equivalent angle of 9.611 degrees.

6 x 9.611 = 57.666 degrees

So there will be a discrepancy of 1.6666 degrees between this computation and the 56 degrees angle shown in the last figure above.

1.666 degrees corresponds to an arclength of 185.526 km.


Let us now modify the total arclength of the six gates to accomodate the 56 degree angle.

Then, the total arclength for a single gate will measure: 1017.5 km (space between gates 117.78587 km/5 = 23.557 km).

1017.5 = 4 x 254.75 km

Then something very interesting will occur: 286.1 + 365.5 + 365.5 = 1017.1

365.5/1.5 = 243.666

455.5 - 60 = 395.4  (395.4 x 0.3642 = 144; 1 - 0.3642 = 0.6358)

The total precessional angle would measure: 3.26985 degrees (for an arclength of 364 km)

But 243 years measures the very timing of the Venus solar transits (1761 + 243 = 2004; 1769 + 243 = 2012).

Since the time of rotation of Venus around its own axis is 243 days, the Sun will then have orbited 243 times above the flat surface of the Earth, as Venus has rotated 365 times around its own axis. What this means is that in the time between two Venus passages, Venus will rotate 365 times, the number of days in an earth year, around its own axis.


This would mean that the exodus of Akhenaton took place in the period 1773 - 1780; again, we have a reference to the mysterious number 1776 (the year of the solar transit of Mercury).


If we modify the displacement factor, from 286.1 to 254.24, then we will have:

254.24 + 381.6 + 381.6 = 1017.5 (so that we will keep the 3.49528 degree angle, and the date of the end of the fourth age, the Typhon/Venus cosmic cataclysm, in the period 1761-1767)



Therefore, the most likely setting for the solar precession calculations would be this:

total angle 3.49528 degrees (1/286.1 = 0.00349528)

total gate arclength = 1017.5 km

total precessional cycle arclength = 381.6 km

displacement factor for each gate = 254.24 km

381.6/1.5 = 254.24 years alloted for the total precessional period of time of the Sun

most likely date for the end of the fourth age: 1761-1767


Let us notice that the Great Seal can also be a reference to the 1776 solar transit of Mercury (bottom step being the 1769 solar transit). The thirteen step pyramid points to the year 2012 (1756-2012, Mayan calendar, explained earlier). Then 2012 + 7 = 2019, again (2019 is another year for the Mercury transit, as are 2006 and 2016).

In the previous message dedicated to Mercury/Xolotl/Venus/Hesperos, I added more references on the relationship between Xolotl and Mercury; also the link to the work relating to the fact that Aten actually represents Mercury:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1722427#msg1722427 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1722427#msg1722427)


As was noted before, the height of the Gizeh Pyramid is 141.34725 meters (where 14.134725 is the first zero of the Riemann's Zeta function).

27.95 degrees x 2 = 55.9 degrees (total angle)

To this value, we will have a corresponding arclength of 6222.78587 km

Substracting the 6 x 1017.5 km value, we obtain 117.78587 km

25/3 x 14.134725 = 117.78587

27 x 14.134725 = 381.6

18 x 14.134727 = 254.24

72 x 14.134725 = 1017.5

If we divide 27.95 by 3, we obtain 9.31666 degrees.

Then tan 9.31666 x 858.5 =~ 141.325

tan (2 x 9.31666) x 858.5 =~ 286.1

Then 455.5 - 286.1 =~ 168 (168 = 84 x 2; 840sc = 534, and 1680sc = 1066.6)

Keeping the same proportions related to 1017.5 and 14.134725 (27, 27 and 18; that is, 27 x 14.134725 and 18 x 14.134725), and applying them to 141.4725 we obtain, 53, 53 and 35.34.

53.3 is one of the universal constants of the Gizeh Pyramid (the others being, 136.1, 286.1, 26.666, 7.2738)

For the total figure of 141.4725, we have to include the distance between the gates (23.557 km; 11.7785 to the left, 11.7785 to the right, since we divide the 27.95 degree angle exactly by 3)

23.557 km (arclength) corresponds to an angle of 0.2116 degrees

tan 0.2116 x 858.5 = 3.172 (where 3.178 = 5sc)

Substracting 3.178 from 35.34, and also 0.6 (in order to add 0.3 to 53 twice, to get 53.3), we finally obtain the values: 3.178, 31.78, 53.3 and 53.3

These clues were left by the architects of the Gizeh Pyramid in order to correctly calculate the actual values (to the very meter) of the external gates (alloted spaces for the Sun/Moon).

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 09, 2015, 06:58:06 AM
FENRIR AND TYR: THE RACE TO THE CELESTIAL POLE

(http://orig05.deviantart.net/4562/f/2009/193/3/d/3d276fd9e046327894210ec7d14c53cd.jpg)

(http://www.northernpaganism.org/assets/images/Fenrir/HatiSkoll3-s.jpg)

Fenrir = Black Sun = South Star

Tyr = Polaris Star


Tirawa Atius is the lord of all things and it is he alone who determines fate. At the beginning of the world, he set a large bull buffalo in the sky to the far northwest. With the passage of each year, the bull loses one hair; when all these hairs are gone, the world will end. As that hair falls, there will be widespread meteor showers, and the sun and moon will become dim.

In the beginning, Tirawa Atius appointed the North Star and the South Star to control fate. The North Star once spoke directly to the Pawnee and told them that the South Star moved just a little bit to the north with each passing year. When the South Star catches up with the North Star, then the world will end.


(see also Brady's Book of Fixed Stars, Bernadette Brady, pg. 66-67 on the capture of the North Star legend)


The declination of Polaris:

http://www.glyphweb.com/esky/concepts/northerncelestialpole.html (http://www.glyphweb.com/esky/concepts/northerncelestialpole.html)

Polaris approaches the Celestial Pole:

https://web.archive.org/web/20180514095310/http://www.longcamp.com/polaris.html

http://faculty.humanities.uci.edu/bjbecker/ExploringtheCosmos/lecture4.html (http://faculty.humanities.uci.edu/bjbecker/ExploringtheCosmos/lecture4.html)

http://www-istp.gsfc.nasa.gov/stargaze/Sprecess.htm (http://www-istp.gsfc.nasa.gov/stargaze/Sprecess.htm)


The Black Sun getting closer to the Celestial Pole:

(https://image.ibb.co/n7en7J/Capture1.jpg)

Before the end of the Fourth World, the North Star was Great Bear; before the Flood, it was Saturn (see http://web.archive.org/web/20111014063837/http://juchre.org/nor/larson3.htm (http://web.archive.org/web/20111014063837/http://juchre.org/nor/larson3.htm) )


The Kutenai of Canada have a legend of a great fire that spread over the earth when the sun was struck by an arrow. Coyote was envious and shoots the sun at sunrise. His arrows caught fire, fell down and set fire to the grass. The Kutenai still fear that  the world will come to an end and  watch for Polaris, the North Star, and should it not be in place then the end of the world is imminent.

Inuit tribe elders declare that the Earth has shifted position:

http://www.whitewolfpack.com/2015/04/earth-has-shifted-inuit-elders-issue.html (http://www.whitewolfpack.com/2015/04/earth-has-shifted-inuit-elders-issue.html)

http://www.thebigwobble.org/2014/12/their-sky-has-changed-inuit-elders.html (http://www.thebigwobble.org/2014/12/their-sky-has-changed-inuit-elders.html)


Hopi Fire clan tablets revealed (with respect to Polaris):

https://web.archive.org/web/20170709211855/www.boloji.com/index.cfm?md=Content&sd=Articles&ArticleID=14151

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 20, 2015, 04:21:45 AM
THE TYRANNY OF THE ROCKET EQUATION RESOLVED: ETHER PHYSICS PROPULSION

The recent developments in magnetoplasmadynamics have confirmed the discoveries made over 25 years ago in Eastern Europe: a new type of nozzle design that will allow the rocket to fly much higher than a similar rocket with normal exhaust, and to even develop antigravitational forces.

Moreover, it proves, once and for all, not only the existence of ether waves, but also the fact that such a rocket could not possibly function in full vacuum: that is, it needs ether waves for the propulsion to work.

In the classic work Build An UFO With Your Own Means (published in 1999), professor C. Bursuc describes the revolutionary nozzle design which was tested by the military (includes the full data sheets for the experiments carried out by the Ministry of Defense in 1988).

"They built it in form of a rocket with ring shape exhaust. The rocket flew four times higher than a similar rocket with normal exhaust. Also they said that it must have developed antigravity on vertical flight because on horizontal flight it flew just 2.5 times longer than the rocket with normal exhaust. The professor did extensive research on the device. It was tested in a military facility: at the gas exhaust speed of 3.5 Mach the plasma cone changed into a globular flash that was separated from the device and driven outside with little air flow, like one does with soap baloons.

So this device is an gravity shielding - plasma spinning engine combined with a particle accelerator."


Let us describe the ether physics involved here.

At a speed of 3.5 Mach for the gas, the ring shape exhaust will BLOCK any gases on the outside (the gases in the atmosphere), forming a vacuum chamber where ONLY ether waves will be allowed to enter, thus a double tornado plasma propulsion device will be created; if the speed is allowed to increase, of course, the double tornado plasma will become a BALL LIGHTNING OBJECT.


(https://image.ibb.co/fh6G3y/bu1_zpsprblhrrw.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/bvnOiy/bu2_zpsth1zkuqo.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/fiB5wJ/bu3_zpsegov8qiz.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/hkBzOy/bu4_zpszlyb4jft.jpg)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 15, 2016, 02:31:09 AM
PROJEKT KRONOS: IMPLOSION OF THE ATOM - REVERSAL OF BIOCHIRALITY

(https://sites.google.com/site/naziabomb/_/rsrc/1284263389969/home/nazi-bell-project-background/Die_Glocke.jpg)

Project Kronos was awarded the priority classification "Kriegsentscheidend"  the highest known category of secrecy and funding priority known in the Third Reich (higher than the UFO design; already by 1936 Vril society members knew how to build an UFO, using a mercury gyro double torsion ball lightning tornado):

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1433567#msg1433567 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1433567#msg1433567)

From the Hunt for the Zero Point:

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/archivos_pdf/hunt_zeropoint.pdf (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/archivos_pdf/hunt_zeropoint.pdf) (chapter 20)

Following his capture, as much as Sporrenberg was able to divulge to Soviet intelligence and the Polish courts about the Bell was this, Witkowski said. The project had gone under two code names: "Laternentrager" and "Chroms" and always involved "Die Glocke"—the bellshaped object that had glowed when under test. The Bell itself was made out of a hard, heavy metal and was filled with a mercury-like substance, violet in color. This metallic liquid was stored in a tall thin thermos flask a meter high encased in lead three centimeters thick.
The experiments always took place under a thick ceramic cover and involved the rapid spinning of two cylinders in opposite directions. The mercury-like substance was code-named "Xerum 525." Other substances used included thorium and beryllium peroxides, code-named Leichtmetall.

Each test lasted for approximately one minute. During this period, while the Bell emitted its pale blue glow, personnel were kept 150 to 200 meters from it. Electrical equipment anywhere within this radius would usually short-circuit or break down.

During the tests, the scientists placed various types of plants, animals and animal tissues in the Bell's sphere of influence. In the initial test period from November to December 1944, almost all the samples were destroyed. A crystalline substance formed within the tissues, destroying them from the inside; liquids, including blood, gelled and separated into clearly distilled fractions.

Yet, even today researchers into this subject, have no idea what the Thule/Vril societies were actually aiming at with their Die Glocke project.


Implosion of the atom of mercury = using a high speed double torsion movement to capture laevorotatory subquarks (Vril), and turn the entire mechanism into a self-sustaining huge ball lightning device; the atom of mercury will implode from the level of protons to that of baryons.

Ether subquarks theory of the atom:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1401101#msg1401101 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1401101#msg1401101)


It is for this very reason, to attempt to do further research into the Kronos Projekt, that Rudolf Hess was dispatched to Antarctica to supervise the entire plan:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg976837#msg976837 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg976837#msg976837)

The Kronos Projekt = modification of the eighth chakra of the human body (the Kameswara Chakra, the Chakra of Rahu/Black Sun), in order to absorb DIRECTLY the positive tachyons/subquarks (Anu+) into the human aura, to attempt to replace at a faster rate the tachyons which are used up in the vital body in the normal course of everyday life.

However, there is a price to pay for this incursion into the aura: the astral body (emotional body) will no longer be able to connect with the higher emotional body or to develop a stronger bond; any possible reversal of the biochirality phenomenon must occur because of the influence/vibration of virtues within the higher emotional body, not  because of a mechanistic entrance into a very subtle domain.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 16, 2016, 02:51:51 AM
ROCHESTER, NY - TORONTO

(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/37/124639197_6d8031f5f0.jpg?v=0)


http://www.flickr.com/photos/davehuston/124639197/# (http://www.flickr.com/photos/davehuston/124639197/#)

Not only can we see the next tallest building, 298 meters, but also other skycrapers, like the Commerce Court West, 239 meters.

DISTANCE ROCHESTER NY TO TORONTO: 152.5 KM

http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/distances.html?n=421 (http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/distances.html?n=421)

CN Tower height = ~520 meters

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_Toronto (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_Toronto)

Next tallest building: 298 meters


The tallest building in Rochester measures only 135 meters:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_Rochester,_New_York (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_Rochester,_New_York)

View from above of Rochester: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rochester_aerial_aug_17_2007.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rochester_aerial_aug_17_2007.jpg)


CURVATURE FOR THE 152.2 KM DISTANCE: 454 METERS

ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE TO SEE THIS VIEW, ON A ROUND EARTH; there is no curvature over the lake Ontario, between Rochester and Toronto.

Using our visual obstacle formula:

h = AE = 215 meters (135 meters highest point in Rochester + 80 meters above lake Ontario level); 215 m = 0.215 km

we get

778 meters


Let us reduce the distance to 103 km; now, we will be some 80 meters above lake Ontario (80 m = 0.08 km).

The visual obstacle will measure 395 meters.

http://i113.photobucket.com/albums/n206/dharanis1/Capture_zpswhoewt2o.jpg (http://i113.photobucket.com/albums/n206/dharanis1/Capture_zpswhoewt2o.jpg)

BD = (R + h)/{[2Rh + h2]1/2(sin s/R)(1/R) + cos s/R} - R
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 18, 2016, 07:03:47 AM
MOON'S RECESSION RATE PARADOX

(http://www.icr.org/i/articles/imp/imp-110.gif)

"Currently, the moon is moving outward from the earth by 3.82 cm/yr (1.5 in/yr). However, this recession is highly nonlinear and would have been greater in the past. If one assumes unlimited extrapolation back in time, gravity theory shows the moon in direct physical contact with earth about 1.55 billion years ago. This is not to say that the moon was ever this near or this old. In fact, a moon located anywhere in the vicinity of the earth would be fragmented, resulting in a Saturn-like ring of debris encircling the earth. This follows because the earth’s gravity force would overcome the moon’s own cohesive force. The tides lead to a limited time scale for the moon, far less than 1.55 billion years. However, evolutionists assume that the moon and solar system are 4.6 billion years old. Also, life is said to have originated on earth about 3.5 billion years ago. The fundamental problem with the evolutionary time scale is obvious."

https://www.trueorigin.org/moonmb.php (https://www.trueorigin.org/moonmb.php)

The current lunar recession rate, after
orbital motions and oscillations are
subtracted, is 3.82 ± 0.07 cm/yr, or 1.5
in/yr .

The height or size of the tidal
bulges is proportional to 1/r3
where r is the earth-moon separation.
That is, the height of the tides increases
strongly as the earth-moon separation
decreases. Furthermore, the forces F1
and F2 themselves increase proportional
to 1/r3. Said another way, one can think
of this as positive feedback: As r decreases,
earth’s tidal bulges will grow
as 1/r3 and F1, F2
 will also increase as 1/r3.
As a result, the braking torque on
the earth’s rotation varies sharply as 1/r6.

Continuing this way, we obtain:

dr/dt = 2r/13t

Applying this equation to the present,
r = 384 thousand km, dr/dt = 3.82
cm/year, t gives the historical time at
which the moon would be positioned
at the earth’s location. The result is t =
1.55 billion years. This number should
be looked at as an approximate, extreme
limit on the moon’s age. The range of
alternate derivations is 1.4–2 billion
years, one-third to one-half of the moon’s
assumed age.

(Dr. Don DeYoung)

In order to try to offer any kind of an explanation, the official science has tried to bring up this kind of an argument: for a long period of history, the lunar recession was very small. Then, there was a sudden increase in the moon's recession rate.

However, Hansen's models (one continent only at the pole and another at the equator) bring up another even more difficult paradox: the Pangeea paradox.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=61424.msg1604304#msg1604304 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=61424.msg1604304#msg1604304)

There are scientists, such Robert Gentry, who have lowered the upper limit/timescale to well under 20,000-30,000 years, since even then the moon would have been far too close to the earth (heliocentrical context).


The Moon has astonishing synchronicity with the Sun. When the Sun is at its lowest and weakest in mid-winter, the Moon is at its highest and brightest, and the reverse occurs in mid-summer. Both set at the same point on the horizon at the equinoxes and at the opposite point at the solstices. What are the chances that the Moon would naturally find an orbit so perfect that it would cover the Sun at an eclipse and appear from Earth to be the same size? What are chances that the alignments would be so perfect at the equinoxes and solstices?

    Farouk El Baz,
    NASA


Who Parked Our Moon?

"Undoubtedly the greatest mystery concerning our Moon is how it came to be there in the first place. Prior to the Apollo missions, one serious theory as to the Moon’s origin was that it broke off of the Earth eons ago. Although no one could positively locate where on Earth it originated, many speculated the loss of material explained the huge gouge in the Earth, which forms the Pacific Ocean. However, this idea was discarded when it was found that there is little similarity between the composition of our world and the Moon.

A more recent theory had the Moon created out of space debris left over from the creation of the Earth. This concept proved untenable in light of current gravitational theory, which indicates that one large object will accumulate all loose material, leaving none for the formation of another large body. It is now generally accepted that the Moon originated elsewhere and entered the Earth’s gravitational field at some point in the distant past.

Here theories diverge — one stating that the Moon was originally a planet which collided with the Earth creating debris which combined forming the Moon while another states the Moon, while wandering through our solar system, was captured and pulled into orbit by Earth’s gravity. Neither of these theories are especially compelling because of the lack of evidence that neither the Earth nor the Moon seem to have been physically disrupted by a past close encounter. There is no debris in space indicating a past collision and it does not appear that the Earth and the Moon developed during the same time period.

As for the “capture” theory, even scientist Isaac Asimov, well known for his works of fiction, has written, “It’s too big to have been captured by the Earth. The chances of such a capture having been effected and the Moon then having taken up nearly circular orbit around our Earth are too small to make such an eventuality credible.”

Asimov was right to consider the Moon’s orbit — it is not only nearly a perfect circle, but stationary, one side always facing the Earth with only the slightest variation. As far as we know, it’s the only natural satellite with such an orbit.

This circular orbit is especially odd considering that the Moon’s center of mass lies more than a mile closer to the Earth than its geometric center. This fact alone should produce an unstable, wobbly orbit, much as a ball with its mass off center will not roll in a straight line. Additionally, almost all of the other satellites in our solar system orbit in the plane of their planet’s equator. Not so the Moon, whose orbit lies strangely nearer the Earth’s orbit around the Sun or inclined to the Earth’s ecliptic by more than five degrees. Add to this the fact that the Moon’s bulge — located on the side facing away from Earth — thus negating the idea that it was caused by the Earth’s gravitational pull — makes for an off-balanced world.

It seems impossible that such an oddity could naturally fall into such a precise and circular orbit. It is a fascinating conundrum as articulated by science writer William Roy Shelton, who wrote, “It is important to remember that something had to put the Moon at or near its present circular pattern around the Earth. Just as an Apollo spacecraft circling the Earth every 90 minutes while 100 miles high has to have a velocity of roughly 18,000 miles per hour to stay in orbit, so something had to give the Moon the precisely required velocity for its weight and altitude … The point—and it is one seldom noted in considering the origin of the Moon — is that it is extremely unlikely that any object would just stumble into the right combination of factors required to stay in orbit. ‘Something’ had to put the Moon at its altitude, on its course and at its speed. The question is: what was that ‘something’?”

If the precise and stationary orbit of the Moon is seen as sheer coincidence, is it also coincidence that the Moon is at just the right distance from the Earth to completely cover the Sun during an eclipse? While the diameter of the Moon is a mere 2,160 miles against the Sun’s gigantic 864,000 miles, it is nevertheless in just the proper position to block out all but the Sun’s flaming corona when it moves between the Sun and the Earth. Asimov explained: “There is no astronomical reason why the Moon and the Sun should fit so well. It is the sheerest of coincidences, and only the Earth among all the planets is blessed in this fashion.” "

Of course, now we know that the Moon does not cause the solar eclipse at all, see the full description of the Allais effect.

http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss2.htm#Nebular (http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss2.htm#Nebular)
http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss2.htm#Fission (http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss2.htm#Fission)
http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss2.htm#Capture (http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss2.htm#Capture)
http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss2.htm#Accretion (http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss2.htm#Accretion)
http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss2.htm#Planetary (http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss2.htm#Planetary)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 20, 2016, 01:51:58 AM
JOURNEY INSIDE A BOSON

Secret Life of Nature (Peter Tompkins)

But first I had to be sure there really was an acceptable
correspondence between the theosophists' description of material
atoms and the "reality" of orthodox physicists.

To find out I went in search of the first qualified theoretical physicist
to reevaluate the theosophists' pioneering work in Occult Chemistry,
Dr. Stephen M. Phillips, a professor of particle physics. Phillips's book
Extrasensory Perception of Quarks, published in 1980, while dealing with
the most advanced nuclear theories, including the nature of quarks,
postulated particles even smaller than quarks as yet undiscovered by science.
Analyzing twenty-two diagrams of the hundred or so chemical
atoms described in Occult Chemistry by his two co-nationals at the turn
of the century, Phillips found it hard to avoid the conclusion that
"Besant and Leadbeater did truly observe quarks using ESP some 70
years before physicists proposed their existence." What is more, their diagrams
indicated "ultimate physical particles" even smaller than quarks.

By the time I discovered Phillips on the southern coast of England
in the seaside resort of Bournemouth, he had checked another eighty four
of the theosophists' atoms: all were seen by him to be 100 percent
consonant with the most recent findings of particle physicists. Every
one of the 3,546 subquarks counted by Leadbeater in the element of
gold could be correctly accounted for by Phillips.

Prompt and committed approval of Phillips's conclusions had already
come from the noted biochemist and Fellow of the Royal Society,
E. Lester Smith, discoverer of vitamin B12. At home in both the
mathematical language of physics and the arcane language of theosophy,
Smith spelled out his support in a small volume, Occult Chemistry
Re-evaluated. And Professor Brian Josephson of Cambridge University,
a Nobel Prize winner in physics, was sufficiently impressed by Phillips's
radical thesis to invite him to lecture on the subject at the famous
Cavendish Laboratory in 1985.


During this same period, fifty-six more elements were studied and
described by the theosophists, including five as yet unknown to science--promethium,
astatine, fancium, protoactium, and technitium--plus
six isotopes, though it was not then known that an element could
have atoms of more than one weight: its isotopes. Isotopes consist of
nuclei with the same number of protons but a different number of neutrons,
and an element can have as many as ten or more isotopes. Neon
(mass number 20) and a variant meta-neon (mass number 22) were
correctly described in The Theosophist in 1908, some six years before
Frederick Soddy, another British physicist, introduced the concept of
isotopes to science, for which he, too, received a Nobel Prize.


At this point there appeared on the scene another psychic with an even
more particulate blueprint for the Higgs theory and its superstring
bedfellow. In 1991 Phillips was contacted by a Canadian psychotherapist
in Toronto, Ron Cowen, who had recognized in Phillips's book
pictures similar to the mental images he experienced during the
meditations he had been practicing for twenty years.

Intrigued by the prospect of further validating the nature of the
Leadbeater and Besant UPA, or subquark, Phillips traveled to Toronto
to the Dharma Center, where he tape-recorded
Ron Cowen in several many-houred sessions as the psychic
used his remarkable talent to delve even deeper into the microscopic
world of superstrings and gluons.

In a detailed paper-of which the following account is but a
precis, Phillips describes how Ron, given a capsule of hydrogen, but
without being told what it contained, used his ESP to penetrate the
glass and capture an object that gave him the impression of consisting
of two overlapping triangles with spheres at their corners, clearly,
says Phillips, two hydrogen nuclei, precisely as described by the theosophists.

Taking a closer look at one walnut, Ron saw that two threads came
out of it, one of which appeared fainter than the other. The clearer one
looked like a tangled, twisted piece of string, which could be pulled
out into a straight line with little effort and which, on being relaxed,
resumed its tangled state.

Thinking he would see a spiral within one of these strings, Ron
magnified it. Instead he saw a stream of bubbles flowing back and forth
so quickly he could not observe the moment they reversed direction.
As the bubbles came out of the walnut in single file to move along
what looked like a tube, some form of energy appeared to expand
them to their maximum over a distance of up to ten bubble diameters.
Then the current reversed.

That Ron should be able to see and describe such a bubble was amazing
enough, the diameter of the walnut-subquark being somewhere in
the neighborhood of 0.ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo1 cm.

[bubble = boson]

[distance between bosons occupied by antibosons]

Fastening his attention onto a single bubble, Ron saw that as it
moved through the tube the tube rotated one instant in one direction,
next in the opposite, clockwise as the bubbles moved away, counterclockwise
as they moved toward him, though again he could not
distinguish the actual instant of transition. Estimating the distance between
successive bubbles as about six times the width of a bubble, Ron
noted that as each bubble passed, the tube seemed to collapse very
slightly, its edges no sharper than the boundary between two liquids.
Managing to move along with a bubble-obviously not moving his
physical body but his viewpoint-Ron saw that it was shaped like a fat
doughnut, with an indented sort of cap that led the bubble's motion
and trailed a tail. Wanting to see what was happening close up to one
of the walnuts, Ron approached a thread that appeared to link two
walnuts. Inside the thread, close to the walnut's outer surface, he found
himself moving in a graceful spiral. Down he went, like Alice in
Wonderland, through the coils of the UPA, about three times counterclockwise,
then along another spiral in a clockwise sense, feeling himself
being swept along, losing count of the turns. Deciding to follow
the rotation of the thread as seen from outside rather than by moving
along it, Ron went back up to the top of the UPA and got out of its
vortex. This enabled him to establish an essential feature of the threads:
they were one single thread.

So where did the bubblescome from and where did they go?
Moving back close to a thread,
Ron noticed that as a bubble in the thread entered the walnut it got
suddenly larger and became a puff of mist.This occurred at the surface
and caused a slight shock wave to dissipate inside the walnut while the
bubble disappeared before reaching the graceful gentle curve inside
its host. On the other side of the walnut, relatively smaller bubbles
streamed gently out through the other end of the thread, appearing as
if from nothing.


On closer inspection, the bubbles seemed to Ron to be created in
the corkscrew spiral near the exit because there was no sign of bubbles
at the start of this spiral. As the bubbles flowed back into the walnut,
instead of forming a puff like those entering from the other thread,
they simply shrank down to nothing.

Whenever bubbles reversed direction, the tail would fade away, to
reappear on the opposite side.
On the bubble's bow, small concentric
circles like shock waves formed along the surface, like a cap. Bubbles
seemed to consist of nothing but a boundary surface, with no structural
features inside. Bubbles in what to Ron was thread number two
started out as mere squiggles of energy, pointed at both ends.Then the
squiggle got fatter, turning into the stable tadpole shape.


[squiggle of energy = smallest particle of quantum mechanics]


http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1401101#msg1401101 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1401101#msg1401101) (ether subquark quantum mechanics)

https://web.archive.org/web/20120128042636/http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_09_4_phillips.pdf (https://web.archive.org/web/20120128042636/http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_09_4_phillips.pdf) (classic work on subquarks and ether)


A boson is a cavity resonator.

What is the structure of the tail, so far the smallest particle known to science?

The Gizeh Pyramid is a large scale model of the particles which do make up the tail (which itself becomes a boson or an antiboson).

One of the most mysterious features of this Pyramid is the scale of its measurements: certainly the pyramid could have been built larger or smaller (keeping all of the proportions equal, of course), but it could only function if and only if it was built to its present scale.

Let us imagine our Universe (https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1918/9859/products/36_037_2048x2048.JPG?v=1507005205 ) to be the size of a subquark (https://www.alliancesforhumanity.com/matter/matter_files/image007.jpg ). We know that a subquark has some 14 billion bosons (and many more antibosons) inside its structure, and that a boson consists of two inverted pyramids which exchange aether and ether. Then, roughly, the Gizeh Pyramid would correspond to the size of such a boson’s interior pyramids.

In the center of the boson we have the two apexes (called parabindu) which rotate as follows:

http://www.eaglespiritministry.com/pd/howto/images/mt_01.gif (http://www.eaglespiritministry.com/pd/howto/images/mt_01.gif)

One is a shadow of the other.

The virtual (thought-like) pyramid is facing downwards: this is called the aparabindu particle in vedic physics. It produces aether, the medium needed for the sound to propagate.

The upward facing pyramid (also called aparabindu; imagination) produces sound, which activates the shadow/thought pyramid.

“The universe is more like a giant thought than a giant machine and the substance of the great thought is consciousness which pervades all space.”
Sir James Jeans

Spirit – transcendent verb
Thought/Emotion – intentional/visualized verb (desire)
Imagination – potential verb (word for the idea/emotion) (knowledge)
Sound – manifested verb (action)


SOUND and SILENCE

ETHER and AETHER

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 20, 2016, 09:05:01 AM
THREE BODY PROBLEM PARADOX


http://www00.unibg.it/dati/bacheca/63/21692.pdf (http://www00.unibg.it/dati/bacheca/63/21692.pdf)

The usual Newtonian model of the Solar system assumes that, for most purposes, it is sufficiently accurate to describe the orbits of each planet as an ellipse with its focus at the Sun. If each ellipse is replaced by the equivalent epicycle , the model is just as accurate.

It therefore follows that if Ptolemy had used an origin at the Sun then a simple model that represented the orbit of each planet by a simple offset epicycle would have represented the orbits of the planets just as accurately as the Newtonian model based on ellipses.

He (Kepler) gave the numerical values to the parameters of the ellipses that matched Brahe’s observations , and that settled the question ellipses were in, epicycles were out. He never stated and may not have noticed that every ellipse is an epicycle, so if he had calculated the epicycle parameters that corresponded to his ellipses the epicycles would have fitted the data just as well.



Mathematics applied to deterministic problems in the natural sciences (C.C. Lin/L.A. Segel), chapter 2: Deterministic systems and ordinary differential equations (pg. 36-70)

To accomplish a mathematical formulation, we adopt a polar coordinate system (r, θ) with the sun as the origin.

The second law of Kepler then states that, following the orbit (r(t), θ(t)) of a planet,

r2dθ/dt = h

The first law of Kepler states that the orbit can be described by the simple formula,

r = p/(1 + ecosθ)

Then one can show that the acceleration in the radial direction is

ar = d2r/dt2 - r(dθ/dt)2 = -h2/pr2

Thus the acceleration is inversely proportional to the square of the radial distance.

Newton, by combining the above results with his second law of motion, was led to formulate the present form of the law of universal gravitation.

This, in turn, leads to a system of N particles in gravitational interaction; e.g., the solar system comprising the sun and the nine major planets.


But, there were no Copernicus, Galilei, Kepler or Newton.
 

Newton and Leibniz did not invent Calculus - Newton copied the three laws of motion from the Vaiseshika Sutra - Indian mathematical analysis results were also imported from a third source:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1574605#msg1574605 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1574605#msg1574605)


Copernicus, a fictional character invented at least two hundred years later:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1643860#msg1643860 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1643860#msg1643860)


The falsification of the biographies of Galilei and Kepler:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1638725#msg1638725 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1638725#msg1638725)


A mathematical formulation of the planetary orbits, based on Newton's laws of motion and gravitation and Kepler's supposed elliptical orbits then will lead directly to the THREE/N BODY PROBLEM PARADOX.

This means that the entire foundation of RE/Heliocentrical mechanics/astrophysics is based on extremely false premises.

Moreover, whoever set up the entire system, had to drastically modify the diameters of all the planets, and also their distances from the Earth/Sun in order to construct a system of differential equations which led directly to nonsensical results, i.e., the n-body problem paradox.

That is, the three body problem cannot be explained using the conventional approach: attractive gravity. A system consisting of a star (Sun), a planet (Earth), and a satellite of the planet (Moon) cannot be described mathematically; this fact was discovered long ago by Henri Poincare, and was hidden from public view:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg987360#msg987360 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg987360#msg987360)

(KAM theory, homoclinic orbits, Smale horseshoes)


The quote from Henri Poincare, the greatest mathematician in the world at the end of the 19th century (S. Ramanujan was to appear some ten years later on the scene), has been deleted/censored from textbooks on the celestial mechanics at the undergraduate/graduate level.

A differential equation (initial value d.e.) approach to celestial mechanics IS IMPOSSIBLE.

As Poincare experimented, he was relieved to discover that in most of
the situations, the possible orbits varied only slightly from the initial
2-body orbit, and were still stable, but what occurred during further
experimentation was a shock. Poincare discovered that even in some of the
smallest approximations some orbits behaved in an erratic unstable manner. His
calculations showed that even a minute gravitational pull from a third body
might cause a planet to wobble and fly out of orbit all together.


Here is Poincare describing his findings:

While Poincare did not succeed in giving a complete solution, his work was so impressive that he was awarded the prize anyway. The distinguished Weierstrass, who was one of the judges, said, 'this work cannot indeed be considered as furnishing the complete solution of the question proposed, but that it is nevertheless of such importance that its publication will inaugurate a new era in the history of celestial mechanics.' A lively account of this event is given in Newton's Clock: Chaos in the Solar System. To show how visionary Poincare was, it is perhaps best if he described the Hallmark of Chaos - sensitive dependence on initial conditions - in his own words:

'If we knew exactly the laws of nature and the situation of the universe at the initial moment, we could predict exactly the situation of that same universe at a succeeding moment. but even if it were the case that the natural laws had no longer any secret for us, we could still only know the initial situation approximately. If that enabled us to predict the succeeding situation with the same approximation, that is all we require, and we should say that the phenomenon had been predicted, that it is governed by laws. But it is not always so; it may happen that small differences in the initial conditions produce very great ones in the final phenomena. A small error in the former will produce an enormous error in the latter. Prediction becomes impossible, and we have the fortuitous phenomenon.' - in a 1903 essay 'Science and Method'


That is why the conspirators had to invent a very complicated new theory, called chaos theory, with the help of G.D. Birkhoff and N. Levinson; their work was the inspiration for S. Smale's horseshoe map, a very clever way to describe Poincare's original findings as "workable" and "manageable". The formidable implications are, of course, that chaotical motion of the planets predicted by the differential equation approach of the London Royal Society is a thing that could happen ANYTIME, and not just some millions of years in the future, not to mention the sensitive dependence on initial conditions phenomenon.

Even measuring initial conditions of the system to an arbitrarily high, but finite accuracy, we will not be able to describe the system dynamics "at any time in the past or future". To predict the future of a chaotic system for arbitrarily long times, one would need to know the initial conditions with infinite accuracy, and this is by no means possible.

This is why the computer model of Jacques Laskar is pure fantasy, as it is completely detached from reality.


http://ptrow.com/articles/ChaosandSolarSystem5.htm (http://ptrow.com/articles/ChaosandSolarSystem5.htm)


http://web.archive.org/web/20090108031631/http://essay.studyarea.com/old_essay/science/chaos_theory_explained.htm (http://web.archive.org/web/20090108031631/http://essay.studyarea.com/old_essay/science/chaos_theory_explained.htm)

RE theory requires a full void, otherwise the equations which "describe" the orbits of the planets will have to include friction terms.


KEPLER MOTION

In an appropriate coordinate system, the motion of a planet around the sun (considered as fixed) with the attractive force being proportional to the inverse square of the distance /z/ of the planet from the sun is given by the solution of the second order conservative system with the potential function -/z/^-1 for z =/0.

A mechanical system without friction can be described in the Hamiltonian formulation.

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-662-46042-9_4#page-1

References for Celestial Mechanics and Hamiltonian mechanics:

V.I. Arnold, Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics, Springer-Verlag, 1978

C.L. Siegel and J. Moser, Lectures on Celestial Mechanics, Springer-Verlag, 1971

J. Moser, Stable and Random Motions in Dynamical Systems, Princeton Univ. Press, 1973

Area Preserving Maps, Nonintegrable/Nearly Integrable Hamiltonians, KAM Theory:

http://www.math.rug.nl/~broer/pdf/kolmo100.pdf (http://www.math.rug.nl/~broer/pdf/kolmo100.pdf)


(https://image.ibb.co/i5GVwJ/po_zpssqpn8hkw.jpg)

Here is an introduction to homoclinic tangles/orbits, explained visually:

http://www.math.umn.edu/~rmoeckel/presentations/PoincareTalk.pdf (http://www.math.umn.edu/~rmoeckel/presentations/PoincareTalk.pdf)



Now, let us get more technical in describing the stability of the heliocentrical solar system.

Two of the greatest Soviet mathematicians of the 20th century, A.N. Kolmogorov and V.I. Arnold asked the following question: to what extent the geometric structure of the quasi-periodic dynamics of a Hamiltonian system persists under small perturbations that destroy the toroidal symmetry?

This led to the famous KAM theory (Kolmogorov-Arnold-Moser); however, it is valid for "sufficiently" small perturbations.

In reality, the perturbations in the solar system are far too large to apply KAM theory.

So, the mathematicians have to rely on computing Lyapunov exponents, in order to try to predict any region of instability/chaos.

Even in this case, the measured Lyapunov exponent may have no relation to the true exponent: great care has to be taken in computing such quantities.

In 1989, J. Laskar proudly announced that the exponential divergence time for the solar system is 5 million years.

However, again, this calculation DOES NOT take into account the sensitivity of the results due to uncertainties of the knowledge of true masses and the INITIAL CONDITIONS of the planets.


Jack Wisdom (MIT): It is not possible to exclude the possibility that the orbit of the Earth will suddenly exhibit similar wild excursions in eccentricity.

The exponential divergence of chaotic trajectories precludes long-term prediction given the limited knowledge of the state of our solar system.


Lyapunov exponents and symplectic integration.


Let d(t) be the distance between two solutions, with d(0) being their initial separation. Then d(t) increases approximately as d(0)eλt in a chaotic system, where λ is the Lyapunov exponent. The inverse of the Lyapunov exponent, 1/λ, is called the Lyapunov time, and measures how long it takes two nearby solutions to diverge by a factor of e.

Since the solar system is not integrable, and experiences unpredictable small perturbations, it cannot lie permanently on a KAM torus, and is thus chaotic.


Sussman and Wisdom's 1992 integration of the entire solar system displayed a disturbing dependence on the timestep of the integration (measurement of the Lyapunov time).


Thus, different researchers who draw their initial conditions from the same ephemeris at different times can find vastly different Lyapunov timescales.

Wayne Hayes, UC Irvine


To show the importance and the dependence on the sensitivity of the initial conditions of the set of differential equations, an error as small as 15 meters in measuring the position of the Earth today would make it impossible to predict where the Earth would be in its orbit in just over 100 million years' time.


To put it bluntly: there is no way to predict anything pertaining to the heliocentrical solar system based on Newton's description of the orbit of the planets using a set of nonlinear differential equations.


Let us take a closer look the chaotic dynamics of planetary formation; thus, a clear indication that the initial conditions cannot be predicted with accuracy (as we have seen, a mere 15 meters difference in the data will have catastrophic consequences upon the calculations).

OFFICIAL SCIENCE INFORMATION

Four stages of planetary formation

Initial stage: condensation and growth of grains in the hot nebular disk

Early stage: growth of grains to kilometer-sized planetesimals

Middle stage: agglomeration of planetesimals

Late stage: protoplanets


For the crucial stages, the initial and early stages, prediction becomes practically impossible.

As if this wasn't enough, we have absolute proof that in the age of modern man planet Earth underwent sudden pole shifts (heliocentrical version), thus making null and void any integration of the solar system/Lyapunov exponents calculations which do not take into account such variations of the system's parameters:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1635693#msg1635693 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1635693#msg1635693)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1546053#msg1546053 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1546053#msg1546053)

Let me show you what sensitive dependence on initial conditions means, using one of the most famous examples: the Lorenz attractor butterfly effect.

In 1961, Lorenz was running a numerical computer model to redo a weather prediction from the middle of the previous run as a shortcut. He entered the initial condition 0.506 from the printout instead of entering the full precision 0.506127 value. The result was a completely different weather scenario.

Here is the set of Lorentz equations:

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/math/b/0/e/b0ea9119f6aaa31302164c4212cce72d.png)

Now, the set of differential equations which describe the planetary orbits is much more complicated than this.


Again, to put it bluntly: there is no way to predict anything pertaining to the heliocentrical solar system based on Newton's description of the orbit of the planets using a set of nonlinear differential equations.

The true sizes/masses of the planets and the Sun were modified in such a way AS TO TEMPORARILY FIT the set of ordinary differential equations.

This set of ordinary differential equations cannot predict anything relating to the future of the solar system even if we look at a time scale of some three hundred years from now; in the same manner, they cannot say anything about the past beyond the same three hundred year mark.

We have at our disposal the most formidable proof, the Gauss Easter formula, which does show that the entire history of the world, its very chronology, was faked/falsified at least after 1700 AD. (see page 1 of the present thread).

Here are the official RE equations of motion:

(https://image.ibb.co/kyYFVd/qu1_zpsilsnpvcb.jpg)

They lead directly and conclusively to homoclinic tangles; moreover, since the initial conditions cannot be known at all, with any degree of precision, it means that this set of equations cannot be used at all to describe any orbits of any planets.

(https://image.ibb.co/e2EYGJ/gil00_zpslwerxjhx.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/d4EawJ/gil01_zpsbzfkgbpu.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/mtf4qd/gil02_zpsodpyookj.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/gDuxAd/gil03_zpsibabxpcg.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/b8Giiy/gil04_zps4wcpajjf.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/nPa9Oy/gil05_zpsmmpvvhcu.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/dx9VVd/gil06_zpsljjqeiia.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/bys63y/gil07_zpsalpm8lqo.jpg)

(from the classic work by Charles Ginenthal, Newton, Einstein, Velikovsky)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 22, 2016, 11:16:17 PM
MARTIAN FAINT YOUNG SUN PARADOX

The faint young sun paradox, one of the most devastating arguments to be used against heliocentricity, cannot be resolved; but at least mainstream scientists have given it their best, for the past fifty years, in order to find a solution:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1707290#msg1707290 (https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1707290#msg1707290)

In the case of Mars, however, they will not even try to attempt to put forward any hypotheses.


Today, Mars has a temperature far too cold to allow water on its surface. Therefore, as one goes back into the past, the temperature of Mars’ atmosphere will become even colder because the Sun was cooler in that far distant period.

Eric Burgess, as early as 1985, addressed this problem:

“The problem with Mars is even more difficult to resolve. Today, Mars is a
frozen world, yet in times past, large quantities of liquid water must have flowed
across its surface to sculpt the erosional features seen today. Yet, at the time of a
lower solar luminosity, Mars would be expected to be much colder than today.”

Jeffrey S. Kargel gives a more in depth description of this problem:
“The emerging vision of a once-watery Mars poses a serious dilemma. Mars is
now so remote from the Sun that water is frozen solid (in equilibrium with the barest
trace of water vapor), and the radiation environment billions of years ago was much
worse. The Sun has steadily brightened with time, and running the clock backward
make the Sun an even fainter object delivering only 70% as much heat and light 4
billion years ago as it does today. Yet, Martian geology indicates that liquid water
was present [then]."

“Mechanisms involving alternatives to ice and water could not explain certain
features and soon fell by the wayside, but so did some of the water – and ice –
related hypotheses. For instance, the wind hypothesis for the origin of [massive
flooding] outflow channels failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for erosional
terraces and ‘high water’ marks [observed] in Martian channels, the transport and
deposition of large boulders and the chaotic nature and origin of chaotic nature and
origin of collapse[d land] of the sources of the [immense] outflow channels. The
proposed eolian [wind sculpted] origin of Martian channels had no sustaining
power and it withered and blew away without a sound foundation; most of these
non-water ideas were soon forgotten.”

Having failed to supply non-water sources to explain the evidence, the scientists tried
to “finagle” with the atmosphere and “rethink” certain gases existed that produced a greenhouse effect to allow water to flow on Mars in its early history.

Careful calculations contradict the early greenhouse effect thesis for Mars. Mars’ atmosphere containing carbon dioxide carbon monoxide and water vapor, would not have been able to last. These gasses, the calculations show, would have condensed out of it quite rapidly and permanently. Therefore, much more carbon dioxide would be required to heat the atmosphere to offset the condensation problem. Secondly, where did all this extra carbon dioxide come from? By analogy with the early Earth, one can get some idea of the enormity of the problem.

Kasting explains:
“Warming early Mars is a challenging problem, both because of the planet’s
distance from the Sun and because the Sun, itself, was less bright. . .
“In climate calculations . . . we initially determined that this low solar flux could
have been offset by a CO2 - H2O atmosphere with a surface pressure of about 5 bars
[5 times that of the Earth]. However, we failed to account for the fact that CO2
should have condensed in the upper parts of our model troposphere . . .
“When we revised our calculations to include this effect, we got a rather
surprising result. We found it was impossible to warm early Mars with CO2! . . .
The results show that for the present [day] solar flux, Mars’ surface temperature
could be raised to arbitrarily high values by adding CO2 to its atmosphere. About
2-3 bars of CO2 would be sufficient to being the average temperatures above the
freezing point of water . . .
“For early Mars, though, the result of increasing atmosphere CO2 levels are
entirely different. At 3.8 Ga [billion years ago], the latest time when most of the
valleys could have formed, the solar flux [to Mars] was still only 75 percent of its
present value . . . and it takes us back to the question: How can we explain the
fluvial features? . . .
“Couldn’t one simply add more CO2 . . . and thereby make them warmer? The
answer is no, for two reasons . . . at high CO2 pressures and low solar fluxes, CO2
. . . forms clouds of CO2 ice . . . surprisingly, CO2 clouds would actually have
warmed Mars’ surface . . . But the process of forming the CO2 clouds would
[remove heat and] have helped limit greenhouse warming . . .
“A second equally important factor in limiting the magnitude of the greenhouse
effect on early Mars is the effect of CO2 on the planet’s albedo [reflection of
sunlight by cloud cover back to space] . . . Hence, when the atmosphere pressure
increases, more sunlight is scattered back into space, and the planetary albedo
increases, cooling the climate [even more greatly]. Both these factors make it
difficult or impossible to warm early Mars.”

(Charles Ginenthal, from his classic work: Newton, Einstein, Velikovsky)


There would be only one solution, in the heliocentrical context: that Mars was in an
orbit closer to the Sun recently.

However, this would shatter the very foundation of the present day approach to celestial mechanics detailed in my previous article: the stability of the orbits of planets.

Moreover it brings into play the same paradoxes encoutered in describing Earth's past pole shifts (heliocentrical context): how did the Earth (and Mars) manage to REGAIN their rotational speed around their own axis?

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1635693#msg1635693 (https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1635693#msg1635693)

The sudden shift in the direction of the axis of Earth (or Mars) would have meant a slowing down of the velocity of the diurnal rotation of the Earth, and there would have no way for the Earth (or Mars) to regain the same velocity of the diurnal rotation as before.


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 25, 2016, 12:20:41 PM
PERSEID METEOR SHOWER PRECESSIONAL PARADOX

While precession theory works in determining orientation to points outside the solar system it does not work and is not applied to locating fixed points within the solar system. One example of that is the Perseid meteor shower.

"Perseids Meteor Shower shows that the Earth goes around the Sun 360 degrees in a
tropical year."


There are certain meteor showers that can be seen regularly on the same date each year.
They are thought to be the result of the Earth, moving along its orbital path around the
Sun, crossing through that point in space where a comet once intersected our orbit path.
The leftover debris hitting our atmosphere is the cause of these annual meteor showers
that come and go like clockwork. One of the strongest and most well known is the
Perseid Meteor which peaks each year every August 11th and 12th (my birthday). Ever
since I can remember this meteor shower has occurred on my birthday.

Sometime around the mid1500’s, after the St. Lawrence feast day had been established as August 10th, people began to call this meteor shower the “Tears of Saint Lawrence”, because right after the feast day the meteor shower would peak for a day or two. Still today the peak of this meteor shower is August 11th and 12th.

As long as the Earth goes around the Sun 360 degrees equinox to equinox, and we keep
our current system of leap corrections we should continue to see this meteor shower
peak every August 11th and 12th for centuries to come. This is because our current
calendar system of time loses less than 1 day every 3200 years relative to the actual
motion of the equinox within the calendar. In other words the equinox remains fixed
within the calendar moving only slightly for differences between the calendar days (365)
and the Earth’s actual rotations in a tropical year (365.2422) and always quickly adjusted
by leap days every four years.

BUT WAIT, lunisolar precession theory says the Earth does not go around the Sun 360
degrees every equinox. It says it comes up 50 arc seconds short of 360 degrees every
tropical year and this is why we see the fixed stars precess by 50 arc seconds per average
tropical year. But if the Earth does not go around the sun 360 degrees then the Perseid
meteor shower should reflect precession and slip through the calendar 1 day in every 72
years, meaning it should have moved almost six days exactly since the Gregorian
Calendar Reform in 1582.
We know the fixed stars “outside the solar system” have
indeed appeared to move by this much in that time period due to precession but why
hasn’t the Perseid reference point “within the solar system” changed by this same amount of precession? If precession is caused by local sources wobbling the Earth then anything and everything outside the Earth should appear to move at the same rate, excluding proper motion.

Answer: The Earth does not change orientation to the Perseid meteor shower, or to the
Moon, or to eclipses, or to any points of planetary occultations or to anything within the
solar system, because local wobbling of the Earth does not cause precession. What we
call precession only occurs relative to the fixed stars and objects “outside the solar
system” because precession is actually due to the motion of the solar system itself.

http://www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/bri/research/papers/ComparisonPaper.pdf (http://www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/bri/research/papers/ComparisonPaper.pdf)


Another marker is the Perseid meteor shower linked to comet Swift Tuttle that is an annual event that has been observed for the last 2,000 years, making it useful for the analysis of the precession of the equinoxes. The radiant of the shower apparently comes out of the constellation of Perseus on or about August 12 to 13 of each year and continues to as late as August 24th with the peak occurring on the 13th. Some Catholics refer to the Perseid meteor shower as the "tears of St. Lawrence", as August 10th is the date of the saint's martyrdom. This phenomenon that is linked to the Perseid meteor shower is dated for August 10, between the years of 225 – 258 AD given for the lifetime of this early Christian that was put to death by the Romans. This execution took place on August 10, 258 when a meteor shower was noted and hence the connection. If we account for precession over the same period of 1,753 years, we should see a difference of 24.3 degrees of precession. This should have put the meteor shower on or about July 16th, instead of August the 10th as recorded. The Perseid shower has been noted almost continually year after year from that time to this, except during unusual circumstances of the darkening or the skies post 535 AD and the following dark ages. This one instance and others like it suggest that the precession has some other cause than the solar system.

http://hubpages.com/education/The-Precession-Problem (http://hubpages.com/education/The-Precession-Problem)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 26, 2016, 08:24:50 AM
PERSEID METEOR SHOWER PRECESSIONAL PARADOX II


Official chronology of history

By tradition, St Lawrence was sentenced at San Lorenzo in Miranda, imprisoned in San Lorenzo in Fonte, and martyred at San Lorenzo in Panisperna. The Almanac of Philocalus for the year 354 mentions that he was buried in the Via Tiburtina in the Catacomb of Cyriaca by Hippolytus and Justin the Confessor, a presbyter. One of the early sources for the martyrdom was the description by Aurelius Prudentius Clemens in his Peristephanon, Hymn II.

St Lawrence is one of the most widely venerated saints of the Roman Catholic Church. Legendary details of his death were known to Damasus, Prudentius, Ambrose and Augustine. The church built over his tomb, San Lorenzo fuori le Mura, became one of the seven principal churches in Rome and a favorite place for Roman pilgrimages. Devotion to him was widespread by the fourth century. Since the Perseid Meteor Shower typically occurs every year in mid-August on or near his feast day, some refer to the shower as the "Tears of St Lawrence."

On 10 August, year 258 AD, the execution of St Lawrence was carried out.

His celebration on 10 August has the rank of feast throughout the Catholic world.

http://througheternity.tumblr.com/post/94146358934/night-of-the-shooting-stars-san-lorenzo (http://througheternity.tumblr.com/post/94146358934/night-of-the-shooting-stars-san-lorenzo)


The Escorial Palace, at the foot of Mount Abantos in the Sierra de Guadarrama, was built by King Philip II of Spain to commemorate the victory over King Henry II of France at the Battle of St Quentin, which took place on the feast of St Lawrence, 10 August 1557.

"On August 10 1566, the feast-day of Saint Lawrence, at the end of the pilgrimage from Hondschoote to Steenvoorde, the chapel of the Sint-Laurensklooster was defaced by a crowd who invaded the building. It has been suggested that the rioters connected the saint especially with Philip II, whose monastery palace of the Escorial near Madrid was dedicated to Lawrence, and was just nearing completion in 1566"


One of the earliest descriptions of an August meteor display was briefly mentioned in a book written by Pieter van Musschenbroeck in 1762. In volume two of his book, Introduction a la Philosophie naturelle, he noted that after the heat of summer, falling stars are seen during August, at least in Belgium and the cities of Leiden and Utrecht in the Netherlands.

http://www.examiner.com/article/the-perseids-are-coming-1 (http://www.examiner.com/article/the-perseids-are-coming-1)


Citing Quetelet, 'a superstition has 'for ages' existed among the Catholics of some parts of England and Germany that the burning tears of St. Lawrence are seen in the sky on the night of the 10th of August; this day being the anniversary of his martyrdom.'

http://www.qsl.net/w8wn/hscw/prop/perseids.html (http://www.qsl.net/w8wn/hscw/prop/perseids.html)


He also searched historical sources for evidence that August meteors had been seen in previous years around the same date. He found seven cases, from 1029 in Egypt to 1833 in England.

The earliest discoverers of the Perseids were anonymous, and their feat lay buried in an English farmer's almanac. Both Quetelet and Herrick chanced upon it. Bravely, Herrick acknowledged, "The annual occurrence of a meteoric display about the 10th of August appears to have been recognized for a very great length of time." Thomas Furley Forster of London had recorded it in 1827 in his Pocket Encyclopaedia of Natural Phenomena. "According to Mr. T. Forster," Herrick reported in October 1839, citing Quetelet, "a superstition has 'for ages' existed among the Catholics of some parts of England and Germany that the burning tears of St. Lawrence are seen in the sky on the night of the 10th of August; this day being the anniversary of his martyrdom."

"The peasants of Franconia and Saxony have believed for ages past that St. Lawrence weeps tears of fire which fall from the sky every year on his fete (the 10th of August)," Herrick wrote, quoting a Brussels newspaper.

http://www.skyandtelescope.com/observing/celestial-objects-to-watch/the-discovery-of-the-perseid-meteors/ (http://www.skyandtelescope.com/observing/celestial-objects-to-watch/the-discovery-of-the-perseid-meteors/)


Sometime around the mid1500’s, after the St. Lawrence feast day had been established as August 10th, people began to call this meteor shower the “Tears of Saint Lawrence”, because right after the feast day the meteor shower would peak for a day or two. Still today the peak of this meteor shower is August 11th and 12th.

But if the Earth does not go around the sun 360 degrees then the Perseid
meteor shower should reflect precession and slip through the calendar 1 day in every 72
years, meaning it should have moved almost six days exactly since the Gregorian
Calendar Reform in 1582.


If we account for precession over the same period of 1,758 (2016 - 258) years, we should see a difference of 24.3 degrees of precession. This should have put the meteor shower on or about July 16th, instead of August the 10th as recorded.


Each and every account of the official chronology of history tells us that the Perseid meteor shower occurred each and every year in the month of August, peaking around August 11th or 12th.

Yet, this fact defies the very definition of the gradual shift in the orientation of Earth's axis of rotation (precession).

Obviously, there was no precession of the axis of rotation of Earth in the past; the Perseid meteor shower offers another definite proof that the official chronology of history was totally and completely forged.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 26, 2016, 11:13:53 PM
THE ACCELERATION OF THE ANNUAL PRECESSION PARADOX

As can be seen from the chart below, the precession rate (now 50.29 arc seconds per year) has been accelerating over the last 100 years. This means the calculated time required to complete one precession cycle has been falling. Note that the precession rate was under 50.255 arc seconds before 1900 when Simon Newcomb first began to keep accurate records, (meaning a complete precession cycle would have taken about 25,790 years), but now just 100 years later, the rate is 50.29 arc seconds per year and the computed time to complete one full cycle is down under 25,770 years. That is a decline of 20 years of periodicity in just 100 years of record keeping. Also, the trend is fairly consistent year over year and it is accelerating.

If the local gravity theory of lunisolar precession were correct, and this trend was extrapolated back a few hundred thousand years then precession would have been virtually non-existent even though the Sun and Moon exerted about the same gravitational influence as they do now. And if this trend were extrapolated forward a few million years the Earth might be wobbling so severely it would retrograde a day for every day it spins, and essentially stop moving or go into reverse!

Following is a chart with points representing the actual annual calculated precession rates
for the last 100 plus years. The early calculations are by Simon Newcomb and the later
by Williams or the Astronomical Almanac. We have drawn a line in the middle of the
dots to show the slope of the trend. If precession were the result of our Sun’s motion
around another object (causing a reorientation of the Earth) then according to Kepler’s
laws any trend line would reflect the signature of an elliptical orbit.

(http://www.sott.net/image/s3/64591/full/precession_trends.gif)

Figure 1. Current trends in precession. Source: 1900-1980 The American Ephemeris and
Nautical Almanac;
1981-2002 The Astronomical Almanac. United States Naval Observatory


However, in the lunisolar model (local gravity) the changing trend in precession rates was entirely unexpected.

The fact of the matter is the gravity of the Sun and Moon have been very stable for
millions of years [according to the official theory of astrophysics] and there should be no reason in the lunisolar model for this significant upward trend in the wobble rate. If  anything it might be expected to slightly “decrease” under lunisolar theory as the Moon moves a fraction of an inch farther from Earth each year and as the Sun burns up a small fraction of its mass each year. But frankly these amounts are so negligible relative to the mass and scale involved that the precession rate should be noticeably stable year after year – if these masses are indeed the cause of the wobble. Lunisolar theorists not only need to find new inputs to the precession formula for the sake of accuracy, they need to offset these slight diminishments in gravitational forces and come up with larger effects in the opposite direction.

W. Cruttenden


The Allais Effect (axial precession is not related to Newtonian mechanics)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1642033#msg1642033 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1642033#msg1642033)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 27, 2016, 04:36:01 AM
THE ACCELERATION OF THE ANNUAL PRECESSION PARADOX II

(https://image.ibb.co/i6AbDn/pre1.jpg)

"Calculated precession rates over the last 100 years show increasing precession rates which produce a declining precession cycle period.

The precession rate goes up each year. The Astronomical Almanac gives a rate of 50.2564 (arc seconds) for the year 1900. In that year, the top astronomer in America, Simon Newcomb, used a constant of .000222 as the amount the precession rate will increase per year. The actual constant increase since that time is closer to .000330 (about 50 % higher than expected) and it is increasing exponentially (faster each year)."

 
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 27, 2016, 11:41:16 AM
PERSEID METEOR SHOWER PRECESSIONAL PARADOX III

http://www.academia.edu/1334605/_Bronzino_s_Martyrdom_of_St._Lawrence._Counter_Reformation_Polemic_and_Mannerist_Counter_Aesthetics._RES_46_Polemical_Objects_2004_99-121 (http://www.academia.edu/1334605/_Bronzino_s_Martyrdom_of_St._Lawrence._Counter_Reformation_Polemic_and_Mannerist_Counter_Aesthetics._RES_46_Polemical_Objects_2004_99-121)

These possibilities will be explored in relation to one work, often seen as a colossal apotheosis of Mannerist art in all its supposedly effete virtuosity and courtly sycophancy: Bronzino's Martyrdom of St. Lawrence in the basilica of San Lorenzo in Florence. The massive fresco was commissioned from Agnolo Bronzino by Duke Cosimo de Medici in 1565 and unveiled on August 10, 1569, the feast day of the Medici family saint.


Roman worship of the Perseid meteor shower, mentioned in the official chronology of history:

Il culto di Priapo si diffuse in Italia intorno al III secolo a.c. come augurale per la fertilità dei campi, mescolandosi a Pan, Dioniso, Luperco e Fauno. Inuo-Priapo si manifestava benigno ogni anno, intorno al 10 di Agosto, con una pioggia dal cielo, a garanzia di un ricco raccolto per l'anno successivo. Questo sciame meteorico annuale, è oggi noto come "lacrime di San Lorenzo".

(from a very extensive work on the subject, published by the progettofahrenheit website)


These historical accounts from the official chronology prove clearly that there was never a shift in the axis of rotation of the Earth: the Perseid meteor shower falling each and every year on August 10 defies the precession of the Earth hypothesis.

Gauss' Easter formula proves that the Council of Nicaea could not have taken place before the year 876-877 AD, and that the vernal equinox fell on March 21, in the year 743 AD (and not in the year 325 AD).

The acceleration of the annual precession shows that this phenomenon has nothing to do with attractive gravity (lunisolar theory).

The Allais effect proves that precession is not related at all to Newtonian mechanics.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 30, 2016, 03:39:38 AM
FIRST LAW OF PLANETARY MOTION PARADOXES


In an earlier message it was shown that Kepler's first law leads directly to the "law" of universal gravitation, which in turn resulted in the three body problem paradox and the spurious results which accompany this phenomenon.

However, Kepler's first law was fudged to begin with.

Kepler published his first law of planetary motion based on the data gathered by Tycho
Brahe in 1609. The law states that planets orbit the sun in ellipses with the sun at one focus.


“Almost 400 years later, William H. Donohue undertook the task of translating
Kepler’s 1609 Astronomia Nova into the English New Astronomy (Donohue 1992)
when in the course of his work he redid many of Kepler’s calculations, he was
startled to find some fundamental inconsistencies with Kepler’s reporting of these
same calculations
(Donohue 1988). Writing of Donohue’s pathbreaking work in
The New York Times, William Broad (1990) summarized Donahue’s findings
saying that although Kepler claimed to have confirmed the elliptical orbit by
independent observations and calculations of the position of Mars, in fact Kepler
derived the data from the theory instead of the other way around . . .

“But a close study of Kepler’s New Astronomy . . . shows that the plotted points
[he used] do not fall exactly on the ellipse (of course, measurements rarely fall
exactly on a theoretical curve because they usually have random error sources
incorporated into them.) Curtis Wilson (1968), however, carries error argument
further. The lack of precision inherent in the method . . . would have forced Kepler
to use the plotted points only as a guide to his theorizing . . .
“After detailed computational arguments Donahue concluded the results
reported by Kepler . . . were not at all based on Brahe’s observational data; rather
they were fabricated on the basis of Kepler’s determination that Mars’s orbit was
elliptical. Donahue reasons that Kepler must have gone back to revise his earlier
calculations
that were made prior to his understanding that the orbit of Mars was
actually elliptical. Thus, anyone who cared to check Kepler’s tables would find
numbers that are consistent with the elliptical orbit [he] postulated for Mars and
would be inclined to believe that the numbers represented observational data. In
fact, they were computed from the hypothesis of an elliptical orbit and then
modified for measurement error
; such data, if they were truly observations, would
be prime facie evidence of the theories’ correctness.

So Donahue . . . realized that the theory was not obviously derivable from the
observations, . . . ‘Not only would the numbers be confused, but Kepler saw clearly
that no satisfactory theory could come from such a procedure. . . [Instead], he chose
a short cut
.’ He became so convinced of what drove these physical processes that he subjectively projected his personal nonobservational-based belief onto the reporting scene to convince others in the scientific community of the validity of his theories.”

Thus, the very first law of planetary motion was built not on observation but on theory
and the mathematics was then employed to prove the theory not test it.

(from the classic work by Charles Ginenthal, Newton, Einstein, Velikovsky)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 30, 2016, 05:20:33 AM
FIRST LAW OF PLANETARY MOTION PARADOXES II

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1988JHA....19..217D (http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1988JHA....19..217D)

Kepler's fabricated figures, by W.H. Donohue

The scholar, William H. Donahue, said the evidence of Kepler's scientific fakery is contained in an elaborate chart he presented to support his theory.

The discovery was made by Dr. Donahue, a science historian, while translating Kepler's master work, ''Astronomia Nova,'' or ''The New Astronomy,'' into English. Dr. Donahue, who lives in Sante Fe, N.M., described his discovery in a recent issue of The Journal of the History of Astronomy.

The fabricated data appear in calculated positions for the planet Mars, which Kepler used as a case study for all planetary motion. Kepler claimed the calculations gave his elliptical theory an independent check. But in fact they did nothing of the kind.

''He fudged things,'' Dr. Donahue said, adding that Kepler was never challenged by a contemporary. A pivotal presentation of data to support the elliptical theory was ''a fraud, a complete fabrication,'' Dr. Donahue wrote in his paper. ''It has nothing in common with the computations from which it was supposedly generated.''

But when Dr. Donahue started working through the method to make sure he understood the basis for Kepler's chart, he found his numbers disagreeing with those of the great astronomer. After repeatedly getting the wrong answers for the numbers displayed on Kepler's chart, Dr. Donahue started trying other methods. Finally, he realized that the numbers in the chart had been generated not by independent calculations based on triangulated planetary positions, but by calculations using the area law itself.

''He was claiming that those positions came from the earlier theory,'' Dr. Donahue said. ''But actually all of them were generated from the ellipse.''


Thus, the notion that a planet orbits the Sun in an elliptical orbit was a simple fabrication, based on fudged data.


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 30, 2016, 08:20:02 AM
FIRST LAW OF PLANETARY MOTION PARADOXES III

No planet could revolve around the Sun in an elliptical orbit based on Newtonian mechanics.


We have a tangential velocity and a centripetal acceleration—which causes a so-called instantaneous centripetal velocity. Newton assigned the centripetal acceleration to gravity and the tangential velocity to the orbiting body itself. That is, the tangential velocity is not caused by the gravitational field. How could it be? It is perpendicular to that field, whether the field is rectilinear or curved. It is stated explicitly that the earth had this velocity before it entered the orbit. Newton calls it the body's "innate motion."

Neither Kepler nor Newton nor Einstein nor anyone else has tried to build a necessary connection between the tangential velocity and the centripetal acceleration, not with elliptical orbits or any other orbits.

All orbits, whether elliptical or circular, are assumed by historical and current theory to be composed of only two motions, a centripetal acceleration caused by gravity, and a velocity due to the orbiter’s “innate motion.”

The orbiter must retain its innate motion throughout the orbit, no matter the shape of the orbit. If it did not, then its innate motion would dissipate. If it dissipated, the orbit would not be stable. Therefore, the orbiter always retains its innate motion over each and every differential. If we take the two most important differentials, those at perihelion and aphelion, and compare them, we find something astonishing. The tangential velocities due to innate motion are equal, meaning that the velocity tangent to the ellipse is the same in both places. But the accelerations are vastly different, due to the gravitational field. And yet the ellipse shows the same curvature at both places.

(https://s15.postimg.org/xvpuuxyyz/ell1.jpg)

This is physically impossible. Using the given motions, the ellipse is impossible to explain. The logical creation of an ellipse requires forces from both foci, but one of our foci is empty.

The vector accelerations in the diagram show that the innate velocity vector arrows
sideward/tangential to the orbit are the same length; that is V1 equals V2. However, the centripetal gravitational vector arrows inward to the sun are not equal: A1 is not equal to a2. Because of these inequalities we are led to an immense gravitational contradiction between Newtonian law and the equal arc shapes at perihelion (closest point to the sun) and aphelion (most distant point from the sun).

I know that many will cringe that I have claimed in my illustration that v1 = v2. Don't I know that the orbital velocity varies in an elliptical orbit? Yes I do. Once more, my velocities are not orbital velocities, they are tangential velocities.

In a nutshell, the orbital velocity describes an arc or curved line. It is the vector addition of the tangential velocity and the centripetal acceleration, over the same interval. Unfortunately, contemporary physics has forgotten his distinction. It usually conflates orbital velocity and tangential velocity. But the tangential velocity does not curve. It is a straight-line vector with its tail at the tangent. It does not curve even at the limit. It only gets very small at the limit. By going to the limit or to Newton's ultimate interval we do not curve the tangential velocity, we straighten out the arc. That is to say, we straighten out the orbital velocity so that we can apply a vector addition to it, putting it in the same equation as the straight tangential velocity.

To make the ellipse work, you have to vary not only the orbital velocity, but also the tangential velocity. To get the correct shape and curvature to the orbit, you have to vary the object's innate motion. But the object's innate motion cannot vary. The object is not self-propelled. It cannot cause forces upon itself, for the convenience of theorists or diagrams. Celestial bodies have one innate motion, and only one, and it cannot vary.


The orbital velocity varies; the perpendicular velocity cannot, sinced the perpendicular velocity expresses Newton's "innate motion". This means the only primary vector you can vary is the acceleration vector. In any gravitational field, that is the only non-compound vector that can be varying, without cheating in some way. Look closely at the diagram above. If you vary only the length of the acceleration vector, in the vector addition, then you must vary the curvature. The orbiter is going more slowly at aphelion, and this slower orbital velocity is due to the smaller acceleration vector, and only to the smaller acceleration. But if this is true, then the orbiter can't be describing the curve that is drawn by the ellipse. An orbiter with a given "innate motion" and a larger acceleration cannot possibly be describing the same curve as that same orbiter with the same innate motion and a smaller acceleration.

If we rigorously study the variable assignments of Kepler and Newton, what we find is this shape, not the ellipse:

(https://s23.postimg.org/axvifycmz/ell2.jpg)

You see, the curvature cannot be the same on both sides if the innate motion or tangential velocity is a constant.

As you can see [using gravitational theory], the orbital velocity at perihelion
[V2] is indeed greater than at aphelion [V1] as shown by the [hypotenuse] length of
the vector. But the tangential [sideward innate motion] or perpendicular velocities
at all points on the orbital path must be the same. Therefore, we must find the
curvatures [at perihelion and aphelion] as I have drawn them here. Now, perhaps,
you can more clearly see that [the differences in the curvatures of] these two ‘ends’
of the ellipses cannot be made to meet up [to form an ellipse]. You cannot have a
greater [sharper] curvature at perihelion and less [wider] curvature at aphelion and
draw any shape [in which the ends of these curves] will meet up.

An ellipse is simply not a potential orbit for the balancing of a tangential velocity and a single centripetal acceleration.

The usual answer to this is to show a summing of potential and kinetic energies in a closed loop and prove mathematically that all energy is conserved. But this fails to address the issue. I am not complaining here about a sum or an integral. Mathematically I am pointing at differentials. If you look at individual motions in any orbit that has three or more bodies, you will find that the differentials show a variation in the tangential velocity of the orbiting body. But natural bodies like planets and stars and moons cannot vary their tangential velocites on demand of the math. As I said, they are not self-propelled. They cannot make any corrections. If the differentials are showing a variation, this variation must be explained by an external force. Gravitational theory gives us no force to explain it.

Elliptical orbits cannot be explained with current gravitational theory, not Kepler's, not Newton's, not Einstein's.

M. Mathis


The tremendously important consequences of this evidence are breathtaking.

But of greatest importance, gravitational theory, as it is currently applied, cannot be made to conform with the “shapes” or the equations regarding elliptical orbits. The arcs simply do not meet up to form an ellipse with the sun at one focus. This not only applies to planetary orbits, but the failure of Newton’s laws and Einstein’s curved space explanation of these laws, also fail to explain elliptical orbits for every orbiting body in the universe for every planet orbiting a star, for every natural satellite orbiting a planet, for every asteroid orbiting the sun, even in the asteroid belt, as well as for every comet doing the same. It fails as well for the objects in the Kuiper belt and those in the Oort cloud belt. It fails for all the double, triple elliptically orbiting star systems in the galaxies that number into untold billions. All the small satellite galaxies orbiting the Milky Way Galaxy in elliptical orbits cannot do so based strictly on Newton’s laws. And what applies to our galaxy applies to the hundreds of billions of other galaxies in the universe which contain planetary systems, asteroids, comets planetary satellites and double, triple etc. orbiting stellar systems. Even the globular clusters in our galaxy on highly elliptical orbits, which number over 150, fail to meet this test. Galaxies orbiting other galaxies also fail to meet this test.

C. Ginenthal


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 30, 2016, 11:32:48 PM
FIRST LAW OF PLANETARY MOTION PARADOXES IV

The unbelievable deception used in the making of Kepler's works continued unabated with Newton's Principia.


I will be sent to the Principia, where Newton derives the equation a = v2/r. There we find the velocity assigned to the arc. True, but a page earlier, he assigned the straight line AB to the tangential velocity: "let the body by its innate force describe the right line AB". A right line is a straight line, and if Newton's motion is circular, it is at a tangent to the circle. So Newton has assigned two different velocities: a tangential velocity and an orbital velocity. According to Newton's own equations, we are given a tangential velocity, and then we seek an orbital velocity. So the two cannot be the same. We are GIVEN the tangential velocity. If the tangential velocity is already the orbital velocity, then we don’t need a derivation: we have nothing to seek! If you study Newton's derivation, you will see that the orbital velocity is always smaller than the tangential velocity. One number is smaller than the other. So they can't be the same.

The problem is that those who came after Newton notated them the same. He himself understood the difference between tangential velocity and orbital velocity, but he did not express this clearly with his variables. The Principia is notorious for its lack of numbers and variables. He did not create subscripts to differentiate the two, so history has conflated them. Physicists now think that v in the equation v = 2πr/t is the tangential velocity. And they think that they are going from a linear expression to an angular expression when they go from v to ω. But they aren't.

This problem has been buried ever since Newton used his new calculus to find the orbital or curved velocity given the tangential velocity. In The Principia, he is given the tangential velocity or straight-line motion, and he derives the orbital or curved motion from it, using his ultimate interval (like a limit). The velocity variable in a=v2/r must then be this new orbital velocity. So the old tangential velocity is lost. It has been buried from sight ever since. But in the ellipse, or any real orbit, we must continue to monitor the old tangential velocity, since we cannot allow it to vary without giving a mechanical explanation of that variation. If we see it varying in the ellipse, as I have shown, then we must ask how a planet can vary its innate motion to suit an orbit. How can either the planet itself, or the gravitational field, cause that velocity to vary? The planet cannot, because it is not self-propelled or self-correcting. The gravitational field cannot, because the gravitational field has no mechanism to influence that vector. Even Einstein admitted that the gravitational field had no influence at the tangent.

http://milesmathis.com/angle.html (http://milesmathis.com/angle.html) (you cannot put an orbital velocity into a linear kinetic energy equation; if you have an orbit and want to use the linear kinetic energy equation, you must use a tangential velocity)

http://milesmathis.com/lagrange2.html (http://milesmathis.com/lagrange2.html) (on the misconceptions about kinetic energy and potential energy)

The tangential velocity is equal to the initial velocity of the planet, before capture by the field. The orbital velocity is the composite of the tangential velocity and the centripetal velocity. If the earth had only a tangential velocity, its trajectory would not curve. If it had only a centripetal velocity, it would move directly into the sun. It orbits because its trajectory is a vector addition of the two.


http://milesmathis.com/avr.html (http://milesmathis.com/avr.html) (the incredible trickery used by Newton to HIDE the fact that orbital velocity is not the same thing as tangential velocity)

I quoted Newton above as saying that the arc was the velocity, as derived by his method and by his equations (which still stand today). This means that the variable v in all final equations must be understood to be the orbital velocity. It is not the tangential velocity. The tangential velocity is shown by a straight-line vector along the tangent. That means that it moves in that direction. That is what the vector stands for. The tangential velocity does not curve, and it does not follow the curve of the arc. In the diagram above, the tangential velocity over the first interval is AB and the orbital velocity is Ab. Newton gives us the tangential velocity to start with, when he gives us AB; then we seek the orbital velocity. The velocity that follows the curve of the arc is the orbital velocity, and it is the velocity variable in Newton's final equation a = v2/r. Historically, physicists have not kept these two velocity variables separate, but you must learn to do so as you follow the arguments and diagrams in this paper. The two velocities have become conflated, and when we get to modern equations like v = rω, there is confusion about what v we are talking about. Contemporary textbooks tell us that the v in that equation is tangential velocity, but it isn't. It is orbital velocity.

M. Mathis


Thus we can understand how the conservation of momentum argument cannot be used to explain at all the elliptical orbit of a planet (or of a satellite): the tangential velocity (the "innate" motion) of a planet cannot change or vary.


"But because he later failed to differentiate between the tangential velocity and the orbital velocity, both his and Kepler's analyses of orbits have come down to us hiding magnificent messes.

An analysis of the differentials must show a variation in the tangential velocity of all orbiters, in order to correct for forces outside the main two. But orbiters cannot vary this velocity. They are not self-propelled. Newton told us that this tangential velocity was innate; an innate motion cannot vary. We have not shown any mechanism or cause of this variance, therefore we cannot let it vary. To put it another way, the variance is totally unexplained and unsupported. It has been covered up, possibly on purpose.

What this means is that orbital mechanics is just magic.

Kepler's ellipse has the same hidden problem, a problem caused by the general ignorance of the difference between orbital and tangential velocity. Kepler's ellipse doesn't work mechanically, since his second focus is uninhabited. The orbiter is forced to vary its tangential velocity to suit the math of the summed circuit, but no explanation of how it could do this is offered."
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 03, 2016, 04:08:04 AM
FIRST LAW OF PLANETARY MOTION PARADOXES V

The unit measuring rod thus appears a little shortened in relation to the system of co-ordinates by the presence of the gravitational field, if the rod is laid along a radius. With the tangential position, therefore, the gravitational field of the point of mass has no influence on the length of a rod.

A. Einstein (The Foundation of the Generalised Theory of Relativity, 1916)

Even in the catastrophically flawed GTR, we are told that if you have a point gravitational source lengths are contracted in the direction of the source and are not contracted normal to that direction.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=65085.msg1736864#msg1736864 (https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=65085.msg1736864#msg1736864) (total demolition of STR/GTR)


"But in the ellipse, or any real orbit, we must continue to monitor the old tangential velocity, since we cannot allow it to vary without giving a mechanical explanation of that variation. If we see it varying in the ellipse, as I have shown, then we must ask how a planet can vary its innate motion to suit an orbit. How can either the planet itself, or the gravitational field, cause that velocity to vary? The planet cannot, because it is not self-propelled or self-correcting. The gravitational field cannot, because the gravitational field has no mechanism to influence that vector. Even Einstein admitted that the gravitational field had no influence at the tangent."


While the radial motion components are a function of the gravitational force between the objects, tangential velocities are not affected by gravitation.

http://www.school-for-champions.com/science/gravitation_center_of_mass_tangential_motion.htm#.VyiCp9R961v (http://www.school-for-champions.com/science/gravitation_center_of_mass_tangential_motion.htm#.VyiCp9R961v)


The kinetic energy K of a planet is ½mv², where v is the planet's tangential velocity.

"An analysis of the differentials must show a variation in the tangential velocity of all orbiters, in order to correct for forces outside the main two. But orbiters cannot vary this velocity. They are not self-propelled. Newton told us that this tangential velocity was innate; an innate motion cannot vary. We have not shown any mechanism or cause of this variance, therefore we cannot let it vary. To put it another way, the variance is totally unexplained and unsupported. It has been covered up, possibly on purpose.

What this means is that orbital mechanics is just magic."


This is the very reason why Kepler's New Astronomy HAD to be faked: there is no such thing as an elliptical orbit of a planet around the Sun.

The entire data on Mars was falsified/fudged (as we have seen in the first two parts of this series), and, as was noted in an important work on astrophysics: The Astronomia Nova is aimed at the mathematical construction of the Mars orbit in particular.


Even greater problems arise when we try to imagine how the earth was captured by the sun. How is an orbit like this created? How is any planetary orbit created? The textbooks never go there. By giving us the ball-on-a-string illustration, the book leaves the impression that the analogy is complete; that is, that the tangential velocity and the acceleration are conceptually connected in both instances. We are left with a fait accompli: since the two motions are tied to one another with the ball on a string, the two motions must be tied in the earth/sun example, and there is nothing to explain. But there is an awful lot to explain. To start with, in reality an orbit like this creates a hairline balance of two independent motions. The tangential motion and the centripetal motion must be perfectly balanced or the orbit will deteriorate immediately in one direction or another (inward or outward). Any satellite engineer knows this. There is one perfect distance that creates a stable orbit for a given velocity. Any other orbit requires the satellite to speed up or slow down—to make corrections. Obviously, the earth cannot make any corrections. It is not self-propelled. It cannot speed up or slow down. Therefore it must be taken to its optimum distance and kept there.

Now, think of the earth's orbit for a moment. Let's work backwards and see if we can imagine how the earth might get to that optimum distance, with just the optimum tangential velocity. If you reverse time, and conceptually back the earth out of orbit, you see that the only way you can do so is if you accelerate it out of there. If you keep the same velocity, it stays in orbit. If you decelerate, then it crashes into the sun. So you must accelerate the earth out of the orbit. But that means that unless the earth was ejected by the sun, it had to decelerate to reach its present position. If it is coming from outer space into the field of the sun, it must somehow decelerate in order to fall into its current position. But how can an object entering a gravitational field decelerate? It is getting closer to the sun: it should be accelerating. The only possibility appears to be a fortunate collision that accidentally throws it into the perfect spot. Even a planet ejected by the sun cannot reach any possible orbit, without a collision, since an ejected planet will not have any velocity tangential to the sun. There is no way to eject an object from the center of its future orbit with a velocity tangential to that orbit.

So, the unavoidable implication of historical theory is that all orbits must have been created by fortuitous collisions, either by planets arriving from outer space or being ejected by the sun. The problem is that planets arriving in orbits immediately after collisions are going to be damaged planets. Most likely they are going to be out of round. They are going to be missing chunks. This is a problem since imperfect planets create perturbations in orbits. Spins and wobbles are created, which cause uneven velocities and uneven forces. This should be fatal since the sort of orbit described by current theory is not correctable. There is no margin of error. Either the forces balance or they do not. If they do not, then the orbit should not be stable.

Some will interrupt here to point out that current theory provides that the earth was formed from a solar disc. It was not captured or ejected; it was simply always there, in some form. It congealed out of the nebula. But this answers nothing, for current theory fails to explain how this primordial disc of pre-planets or planetoids achieved its tangential motion in the first place (see below). Gravitational theory provides absolutely no mechanism, not even one as magical as gravity, to explain rotational motion in a gravitational field. It is the same question as to why galaxies rotate like wheels: they just do. We have a partial answer for why the stars don’t fly out into space: gravity. But we have no answer at all for why the stars move sideways to the gravitational field of the galaxy. If they weren’t captured, what set them in motion? The pat answer is “a spinning gravitational field”, but if you ask how a gravitational field imparts tangential velocity you get no answer. It is implied that the spin of the sun about its own axis somehow set the whole solar system to spinning, but this is mystical in the extreme. Almost no one thinks that the moon’s orbit is caused by the rotation of the earth about its own axis. No one thinks this because there is no mechanism to link the rotation of the earth to the orbit of the moon. There is no mechanism to link the orbit of the solar disc to the spin of the sun either, and yet it is accepted at face value.

M. Mathis
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 10, 2016, 11:19:02 PM
FIRST LAW OF PLANETARY MOTION PARADOXES VI


(https://s23.postimg.org/cuq7mp4ln/sothic3.jpg)

The ellipse, as a logical-looking orbit, falls apart from the very start.

"But, let's build that ellipse again, starting from aphelion. Let us draw the whole thing, just accepting that an ellipse must somehow be created, since we have evidence of them in the solar system. Finally, let us look for the "equivalent" circular orbit.


Meaning that if we have the same planet with the same initial velocity and we want to put it into a circular orbit, where do we put it? Turns out that the circle is completely outside the ellipse, and that it has a lot greater area. Remember that the only way we can explain the planet in ellipse beginning to dive toward the sun as we move it past aphelion is that its velocity is not great enough to keep it in circular orbit."


Remember, we find ourselves AT THE APHELION POINT WHERE THE GRAVITATIONAL FIELD CANNOT INFLUENCE THE TANGENTIAL VELOCITY OF THE PLANET.


"Therefore, to put it into a stable circular orbit, we must move it further away from the sun at aphelion. If we do that then this distance becomes the radius of the circle, and we have our circular orbit. As you can see from this simple illustration, the path of the ellipse never crosses the path of the "equivalent" circle. If that is true, then the planet in ellipse can never reach a point where its perpendicular velocity overcomes the centripetal acceleration produced by the gravitational field. It never achieves a temporary escape velocity. No, it simply spirals into the sun. Its orbital velocity increases, yes. The "orbital velocity" continues to increase until the planet burns up in the sun's corona."



http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1988JHA....19..217D (http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1988JHA....19..217D)

Kepler's Fabricated Figures, by W.H. Donohue


With regard to the flight of the Phoenix, the solar transit of Mercury:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1650377#msg1650377 (https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1650377#msg1650377)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1722427#msg1722427 (https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1722427#msg1722427)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 13, 2016, 03:51:12 AM
STATIONARY EARTH: THE ULTIMATE PROOF


“In the United States Albert Michelson and Edward Morley had performed an experiment
which confronted scientists with an appalling choice. Designed to show the existence of the ether…it had yielded a null result, leaving science with the alternatives of tossing aside the key which had helped to explain the phenomena of electricity, magnetism, and light or of deciding that the earth was not in fact moving at all.” (Einstein: The Life and Times, p. 57).

On the Relative Motion of the Earth and the Luminiferous Ether: The actual displacement was certainly less than the twentieth part of this...It appears, from all that precedes, reasonably certain that if there be any relative motion between the Earth and the luminiferous ether, it must be small; quite small enough entirely to refute Fresnel’s explanation of aberration, and that the velocity of the Earth with respect to the ether is probably less than one-sixth the Earth’s orbital velocity, and certainly less than one-fourth.

“On the Relative Motion of the Earth and the Luminiferous Ether,” Art. xxxvi, The American Journal of Science, editors James D and Edward S. Dana, No. 203, vol. xxxiv, November 1887, p. 341.

In the 1881 experiment they wrote the following, using the square of the velocity as proportional to the fringe-shifting to get the one-sixth value:

Considering the motion of the Earth in its orbit only, this displacement should be 2D v2/V2 = 2D × 10-8. The distance D was about eleven meters, or 2 × 107 wavelengths of yellow light; hence, the displacement to be expected was 0.4 fringe. The actual displacement was certainly less than the twentieth part of this, and probably less than the fortieth part. But since the displacement is proportional to the square of the velocity, the relative velocity of the Earth and the ether is probably less than one-sixth the Earth’s orbital velocity, and certainly less than one-fourth.

A. A. Michelson and E. W. Morley, “On the Relative Motion of the Earth and the Luminiferous Ether,” Art. xxxvi, The American Journal of Science, eds. James D and Edward S. Dana, No. 203, vol. xxxiv, November 1887, p. 341.


What, precisely, do all these figures mean in regard to the heliocentric/geocentric debate? In the heliocentric theory, the Earth is moving through the ether with both a diurnal and translational movement, that is, it spins on its axis at about 1054 mph (0.45 km/sec) and orbits the sun at about 66,000 mph (30 km/sec), which means that the Earth’s rotation speed is 1.6% of its revolution speed.

Clearly, then, the bulk of the ether resistance against the Earth will come from the translational movement as opposed to the diurnal rotation. But if we subtract the translational movement, the remaining resistance will come only from the diurnal movement. This situation is identical to what would occur in the geocentric model, since in the geocentric system there is no translational movement of the Earth against the ether, yet there is a diurnal movement. In other words, the universe’s ether is rotating around a fixed Earth at the same rate that the Earth in the heliocentric system would be rotating against the fixed ether, that is, on a 24-hour basis.

Accordingly, in the geocentric system only the diurnal movement of the Earth against the ether will show up as fringe shifts in the interferometer experiments, and thus we would expect a measurement of shifts much less than the fringe shifts corresponding to the translational movement of 30 km/sec. All things being equal, we would expect the diurnal movement to produce fringe-shifting corresponding to a mere fraction of the fringe-shifting expected for 30 km/sec.

This is precisely what we find in the description given above by Michelson and Morley (albeit, they did not attribute it to a non-translating Earth). They tell us that: “The actual displacement was certainly less than the twentieth part of this.” A “twentieth part” of the fringe shifting corresponding to 30 km/sec brings us to fringe shifting corresponding to at least 1.5 km/sec. After they run this figure through their calculations, Michelson and Morley then tell us: “the velocity of the Earth with respect to the ether is probably less than one-sixth the Earth’s orbital velocity, and certainly less than one-fourth.” One sixth of 30 km/sec is 4.8 km/sec, which agrees precisely with the average of 4.0 km/sec in the majority of the interferometer experiments. In brief, the geocentric model has a simple explanation for the unexpected results of the Michelson-Morley experiment: the Earth is fixed and the universe and its ether rotate around it.

Perhaps just as important concerning the Michelson-Morley experiment was, even with this small evidence of ether movement, the two scientists concluded that Fresnel’s “explanation of aberration” was “refuted” by their 1887 interferometer experiment. We will recall that Fresnel explained Arago’s stellar aberration results by postulating that it was caused by glass mediums “dragging” ether against an immobile ether that surrounded the glass. Interestingly enough, Michelson and Morley had previously stated in 1886 that, after the repeat of Fizeau’s experiment in 1884, they had, at that time, confirmed Fresnel’s formula stating: “the result of this work is therefore that the result announced by Fizeau is essentially correct: and that the luminiferous ether is entirely unaffected by the motion of the matter which it permeates.” So we have Michelson and Morley giving us two different stories, but the one to which they adhere is the 1887 judgment showing that science had no answer to Arago’s experiment and that the Earth’s 30 km/sec clip through space was coming to a screeching halt unless somebody could come up with an explanation.

Still, since the measured ether movement came nowhere near the expected 30 km/sec, the science community invariably considered the Michelson-Morley results as “null.” There were a few voices, however, that did not consider the results trivial. As early as 1902, W. M. Hicks, made a thorough criticism of the experiment and concluded that instead of giving a null result, the numerical data published in Michelson-Morley’s paper shows distinct evidence of an expected effect (i.e., ether drift). Unfortunately, the science community has completely ignored Hicks’ paper.


 

I would also add that if we calculate based on the raw data of the 1881 experiment, and since MM said that the displacement was between one twentieth and perhaps less than one fortieth of what they expected, if we take one fortieth of 30 km/sec we have 0.75 km/sec. One fiftieth would be precisely 0.45 km/sec, the exact figure corresponding to the movement of ether you stated at the equator.

 

In any case, the important theme we wanted to being out in GWW in light of all these experiments is: (a) the fringe shifts were no where near what would be expected for an Earth moving at 30km/sec around the sun, and (b) that the results of all the interferometer experiments showed that they did not exhibit “null” results, but results in keeping with some movement between Earth and its environment (ether-drift currents circulating above the Earth).

 

The heliocentrists, of course, are in a quagmire either way, since if they choose to attribute the ether drift to a rotation of the Earth in an immovable environment, then they must also incorporate a revolution of the Earth around the sun to account for the seasons, which then requires at least a 30 km/sec drift, and thus the whole thing falls like a house of cards.

(from Galileo Was Wrong, R. Sungenis)


The Michelson-Morley experiments were taken to a more precise level by Dr. Dayton Miller (Princeton University).

http://www.orgonelab.org/miller.htm (http://www.orgonelab.org/miller.htm)

"The effect [of ether-drift] has persisted throughout. After considering all the possible sources of error, there always remained a positive effect." — Dayton Miller (1928)


http://www.freelists.org/post/geocentrism/Point-a-the-ether,15 (http://www.freelists.org/post/geocentrism/Point-a-the-ether,15)



The most significant development since Miller has been the
experiments of Yuri Galaev of the Institute of Radiophysics and
Electronics in the Ukraine. Galaev made independent measure-
ments of ether-drift using radiofrequency and optical wave
bands. His research "confirmed Miller's results down
to the details".

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1722791#msg1722791 (https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1722791#msg1722791)

Yuri Galaev, Ph.D.; Senior research officer of the Institute for Radiophysics & Electronics National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, and corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences (RANS)

THE MEASURING OF ETHER-DRIFT VELOCITY AND KINEMATIC ETHER VISCOSITY WITHIN OPTICAL WAVES BAND Yu.M. Galaev The Institute of Radiophysics and Electronics of NSA in Ukraine


Dr. Galaev remarks:

Orbital component of the ether drift velocity, stipulated by the Earth movement around the Sun with the velocity 30 km/sec, was not detected [during the Dayton Miller experiments].


Dr. Galaev also concludes:

The method action is based on the development regularities of viscous liquid or gas streams in the directing systems. The significant measurement results have been obtained statistically. The development of the ether drift required effects has been shown. The measured value of the ether kinematic viscosity on the value order has coincided with its calculated value.


The most precise experiments ever undertaken in ether-drift detection thus prove that the Earth does not orbit the Sun at a speed of 30km/s.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 17, 2016, 11:49:22 PM
ORBITAL MOTION SAGNAC EFFECT PARADOX

Why is there no requirement for a Sagnac correction due to the earth’s orbital motion?

Why is the Earth orbital Sagnac effect missing from GPS?


The Sagnac effect is totally explained by ether theory since there is no such thing as the theory of relativity:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=65085.msg1736864#msg1736864 (https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=65085.msg1736864#msg1736864) (total demolition of STR/GTR)

The Sagnac effect proves that it is the ether which is rotating above a fixed Earth.


In GPS the actual magnitude of the Sagnac correction
due to earth’s rotation depends on the positions of
satellites and receiver and a typical value is 30 m, as the
propagation time is about 0.1s and the linear speed due
to earth’s rotation is about 464 m/s at the equator. The
GPS provides an accuracy of about 10 m or better in positioning.
Thus the precision of GPS will be degraded significantly,
if the Sagnac correction due to earth’s rotation
is not taken into account. On the other hand, the orbital
motion of the earth around the sun has a linear speed of
about 30 km/s which is about 100 times that of earth’s
rotation. Thus the present high-precision GPS would be
entirely impossible if the omitted correction due to orbital
motion is really necessary.


In an intercontinental microwave link between Japan and
the USA via a geostationary satellite as relay, the influence
of earth’s rotation is also demonstrated in a high-precision
time comparison between the atomic clocks at two remote
ground stations.
In this transpacific-link experiment, a synchronization
error of as large as about 0.3 µs was observed unexpectedly.


Meanwhile, as in GPS, no effects of earth’s orbital motion
are reported in these links, although they would be
easier to observe if they are in existence.
Thereby, it is evident
that the wave propagation in GPS or the intercontinental
microwave link depends on the earth’s rotation, but
is entirely independent of earth’s orbital motion around
the sun or whatever. As a consequence, the propagation
mechanism in GPS or intercontinental link can be viewed
as classical in conjunction with an ECI frame, rather than
the ECEF or any other frame, being selected as the unique
propagation frame. In other words, the wave in GPS or the
intercontinental microwave link can be viewed as propagating
via a classical medium stationary in a geocentric
inertial frame.



http://qem.ee.nthu.edu.tw/f1a.pdf (http://qem.ee.nthu.edu.tw/f1a.pdf)


Why is there no requirement for a Sagnac correction due to the earth’s orbital motion? Like the transit time in the spinning Mossbauer experiments, any such effect would be completely canceled by the orbital-velocity effect on the satellite clocks.

However, indirectly, the counteracting effects of the transit time and clock slowing induced biases indicate that an ether drift is present. This is because there is independent evidence that clocks are slowed as a result of their speed. Thus,
ether drift must exist or else the clock slowing effect would be observed.


First, the gradient of the solar gravitational effects upon clocks on the surface of the earth is such that the clocks will speed up and slow down in precisely the correct way to retain the appropriate up-wind and down-wind clock biases. Thus, the clocks must be biased or else the solar gravitational effects would become apparent.

Second, as Charles Hill has shown, clocks on the earth clearly vary their rate as
the speed of the earth around the sun varies. Earth clocks run slower when the earth’s
speed increases and the earth’s distance from the sun is decreased near perihelion. The
earth’s clocks run faster near aphelion. This variation must be counteracted via an ether
drift effect else it could be detected in GPS and VLBI experiments.


https://web.archive.org/web/20070315063351/http://egtphysics.net/Index.htm (select the Ether Drift option to access the article)

(one can also do a google search using http://ivanik3.narod.ru/GPS/Hatch/EtherDrift.pdf and then access the html/in cache format to view the document)


BY ASSUMING THAT STR IS CORRECT, MODERN ASTROPHYSICS MUST ALSO ASSUME THAT THE ORBITAL VELOCITY OF THE EARTH AROUND THE SUN, IN AN ELLIPTICAL ORBIT, MUST BE A CONSTANT.

However, upon further reflection, it became
apparent that one significant complication with respect to
the two frames was not dealt with. Specifically, GPS was
compared in the two frames assuming that the earth’s
orbital velocity was constant.

What is the significance of this interim conclusion? We
have shown that, assuming the speed of light is isotropic
in the sun’s frame, the velocity of clocks on the spinning
earth will cause them to be biased by just the amount
needed to make it appear as if the speed of light is
actually isotropic on the earth.

However, the true believer in
SRT can argue that this is simply a coincidence and that it
is still the magic of SRT which automatically causes the
speed of light to be isotropic on the earth. There is no way
to refute his argument in this simplified case where we
have assumed that the direction of the orbital velocity
vector is constant. But, when the change in the orbital
velocity direction is allowed, we get an astonishing result.

By contrast, if SRT/GRT is
correct, we would expect that the clocks on earth and in
the GPS system would require an adjustment for the
effect of the sun’s differential gravitational potential.
Since clocks on earth and in the GPS system function
properly by ignoring the effect of the sun’s gravitational
potential, we must conclude that SRT/GRT is wrong.

http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Ronald_Hatch/Hatch-Clock_Behavior_and_theSearch_for_an_Underlying_Mechanism_for_Relativistic_Phenomena_2002.pdf (http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Ronald_Hatch/Hatch-Clock_Behavior_and_theSearch_for_an_Underlying_Mechanism_for_Relativistic_Phenomena_2002.pdf)


http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Ronald_Hatch/Hatch-Relativity_and_GPS-II_1995.pdf (http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Ronald_Hatch/Hatch-Relativity_and_GPS-II_1995.pdf)


Dynamic Ether:

https://web.archive.org/web/20101128012239/http://spinbitz.net/anpheon.org/html/AnpheonIntro2003.htm (https://web.archive.org/web/20101128012239/http://spinbitz.net/anpheon.org/html/AnpheonIntro2003.htm)



Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation = Ether

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=54264.msg1337075#msg1337075 (https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=54264.msg1337075#msg1337075)


Ether and the slowing of clocks:


http://www.gsjournal.net/old/science/rickeressen.pdf (http://www.gsjournal.net/old/science/rickeressen.pdf) (Louis Essen, the greatest expert on atomic clocks of the 20th century, dismisses the Hafele-Keating experimet)

http://www.anti-relativity.com/hafelekeatingdebunk.htm (http://www.anti-relativity.com/hafelekeatingdebunk.htm) (total debunking of the failed Hafele-Keating experiment, a must read)

"M. Ruderfer stated that mathematical analysis had shown that if an ether wind were blowing across the plane of the spinning disk, one would expect that Doppler fluctuations in the frequency of the gamma radiation detected at the centre of the disk would be compensated by equal and opposite fluctuations in the emitted frequency of the gamma rays, caused by the effect of variations in the ether speed of the source.

What Ruderfer's experiment had stumbled on was that there could be a static electromagnetic medium at rest with respect to the rest of the universe. And it could be that any motion with respect to that medium affects the gamma ray source, and the central Mossbauer detector, by slowing down the rate of process of each by half the square of the ratio of each one's absolute ether speed to the absolute speed of propagation of light. If such were the case, it would follow (as a mathematical necessity) that irrespective of the direction and speed of ether drift of the lab, the central detector of the spinning disk would always observe a steady slowing of the gamma radiation frequency by half the square of the ratio of the spin speed of the source to the out-and-return speed of light, as measured by the detector in a reference frame which is non-rotating with respect to the fixed stars.


Ruderfer pointed out that the two effects (transit time and clock rate) on the source and
detector would cancel and render all such experiment incapable of detecting an ether
wind. Unfortunately, each of the experimenters ignored Ruderfer’s erratum. In spite of
the Ruderfer erratum, claims are repeatedly found in the literature that the spinning
Mossbauer experiments support the special theory. They do not. They are simply silent
as far as any direct evidence is concerned."
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 27, 2016, 02:26:53 AM
ORBITAL MOTION SAGNAC EFFECT PARADOX II


GPS technology effectively proves the fallacy of STR/GTR:

http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/illusion/


http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles/V17NO1PDF/V17N1GIF.pdf

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0708/0708.2687.pdf

http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/mas/article/viewFile/12113/9250

http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/apr/article/view/30130/17851

http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/apr/article/view/41256/22655



M. Ruderfer experiment, 1960-1961:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=66858.msg1784179#msg1784179


Experiments which invalidate STR, includes a description of the Ruderfer experiment:

http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/NPA/Doug_Marett_Presentation_NPA18.pdf


MLET (Modified Lorentz Ether Theory) is based on the Lorentz transformation (Lorentz factor/contraction), and as such, is equally invalid.

http://www.gsjournal.net/old/weuro/agathan5.pdf


The colossal mistakes committed by Lorentz and Einstein in deriving the Lorentz transformation/factor:

http://relativityunraveled.net/chapter-4-the-michelson-morley-experiment/

http://relativityunraveled.net/chapter-5-the-lorentz-transformation/

http://relativityunraveled.net/chapter-1-introduction/

Dr. Hans Zweig, Stanford University: http://wiki.naturalphilosophy.org/wiki/hans-j-zweig/



A satellite/Cosmosphere orbits above the flat plane of the Earth using the Biefeld-Brown effect, which in turn utilizes the Tesla cosmic ray device as an energy/power source.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg759935#msg759935


Einstein, 1905:

"The principle of the constancy of the velocity of light is of course contained in Maxwell's equations”

But those were not Maxwell's equations, but the Heaviside-Lorentz equations.

The original J.C. Maxwell equations are based on a variable speed of light concept:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1639521#msg1639521


http://www.gsjournal.net/old/physics/ricker2.pdf


http://lowenergytransmutations.org/documents/The_Real_Einstein_Monti_Cesarano.doc

(Ives-Stillwell experiment, MM experiment, Sagnac experiment analyzed)


http://file.scirp.org/pdf/JMP20120800006_80885197.pdf (pg. 718-720, 744)

Another observation that also clearly conflicts with the
constancy and isotropy of the velocity of light was discovered
during the implementation and calibration of
set-ups for Very Long Baseline Interferometry (VLBI)
radio astronomy observations. The resolution of optical
and radio astronomy observations can be improved by
orders of magnitude by analyzing the data recorded in
different observatories over the earth surface using interferometric
methods. The condition is that these data be
synchronous. The method consists in superposing coherently
the data recorded in different observatories with the
help of computers taking into account the instantaneous
position of the antennas etc. For the (VLBI) radio astronomy
observations clock synchronization at intercontinental
distances via the GPS achieve 0.1 ns. Nevertheless,
on testing the so synchronized clocks by confronting
them with the arrival of the wave fronts from distant
pulsars, which according to the TR may be synchronous,
it was observed that the pulsar signal reaches the foregoing
side of Earth 4.2 μs before the rear side along the
orbital motion of Earth. This discrepancy exceeds
the time resolution by more than four orders of magnitude.
Nevertheless along the transverse direction the arrival
of the pulsar signal was synchronous. This apparent
discrepancy in the GPS clock synchronization is again
raising very hot debates about the nature of space. Some
people speak of scandalous clocks that are biased
along the Earth’s orbital motion, others see in these
facts definitive prove that the velocity of light along different
directions within the solar system is not the same.


Many people believe that GR accounts for all the observed
effects caused by gravitational fields. However, in
reality GR is unable to explain an increasing number of
clear observational facts, several of them discovered recently
with the help of the GPS. For instance, GR
predicts the gravitational time dilation and the slowing of
the rate of clocks by the gravitational potential of Earth,
of the Sun, of the galaxy etc. Due to the gravitational
time dilation of the solar gravitational potential, clocks in
the GPS satellites having their orbital plane nearly parallel
to the Earth-Sun axis should undergo a 12 hour period
harmonic variation in their rate so that the difference
between the delay accumulated along the half of the orbit
closest to the Sun amounts up to about 24 ns in the time
display, which would be recovered along the half of the
orbit farthest from the Sun. Such an oscillation exceeds
the resolution of the measurements by more than two
orders of magnitude and, if present, would be very easily
observed. Nevertheless, contradicting the predictions of
GR, no sign of such oscillation is observed.
This is the
well known and so long unsolved non-midnight problem.
In fact observations show that the rate of the
atomic clocks on Earth and in the 24 GPS satellites is
ruled by only and exclusively the Earth’s gravitational
field and that effects of the solar gravitational potential
are completely absent
. Surprisingly and happily the GPS
works better than expected from the TR.


Obviously the gravitational
slowing of the atomic clocks on Earth cannot be due to
relative velocity because these clocks rest with respect to
the laboratory observer. What is immediately disturbing
here is that two completely distinct physical causes produce
identical effects, which by it alone is highly suspicious.
GR gives only a geometrical interpretation to the
gravitational time dilation. However, if motions cause
time dilation, why then does the orbital motion of Earth
suppress the time dilation caused by the solar gravitational
potential on the earthbased and GPS clocks?
Absurdly
in one case motion causes time dilation and in the
other case it suppresses it. This contradiction lets evident
that what causes the gravitational time dilation is not the
gravitational potential and that moreover this time dilation
cannot be caused by a scalar quantity. If the time dilation
shown by the atomic clocks within the earthbased
laboratories is not due to the gravitational potential and
cannot be due to relative velocity too then it is necessarily
due to some other cause. This impasse once more
puts in check the central idea of the TR, according to
which the relative velocity with respect to the observer is
the physical parameter that rules the effects of motions.
The above facts show that the parameter that rules the
effects of motions is not relative velocity but a velocity
of a more fundamental nature.


See also http://www.hrpub.org/download/20150510/UJPA2-18403649.pdf (pg. 147)


This "more fundamental nature", of course, is the effect exerted by the ether on matter.

THE MEASURING OF ETHER-DRIFT VELOCITY AND KINEMATIC ETHER VISCOSITY WITHIN OPTICAL WAVES BAND Yu.M. Galaev The Institute of Radiophysics and Electronics of NSA in Ukraine

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1722791#msg1722791


AWT (aetheric wind theory) misconceptions:

Dark matter which fills 'empty' space is otherwise known as the aether. Aether has mass, physically occupies three dimensional space and is physically displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it. Including 'particles' as large as galaxies and galaxy clusters.


Let me explain:

Aether = medium through which ETHER flows

Ether = scalar waves consisting of subquarks strings

The density of aether can vary.


RE theory requires a full void, otherwise the equations which "describe" the orbits of the planets will have to include friction terms.


KEPLER MOTION

In an appropriate coordinate system, the motion of a planet around the sun (considered as fixed) with the attractive force being proportional to the inverse square of the distance /z/ of the planet from the sun is given by the solution of the second order conservative system with the potential function -/z/^-1 for z =/0.

A mechanical system without friction can be described in the Hamiltonian formulation.


ONCE ONE MENTIONS AETHER, THE DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS WHICH DESCRIBE THE MOTION OF THE CELESTIAL SPHERES, IN THE HELIOCENTRICAL THEORY, WILL NO LONGER BE A HAMILTONIAN, THAT IS, FRICTION TERMS WILL HAVE TO BE INSERTED.


Here is another misconception:

With regard to the ether, Einstein states:

Light propagates through the sea of ether, in which the Earth is moving. In other words, the ether is moving with respect to the Earth...

http://www.ekkehard-friebe.de/dishones.htm

He did not realize that ether = friction, so therefore, the very equations of motion, thought to be Hamiltonian, must be modified to include the frictional effect of ether/aether upon the celestial bodies...
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 03, 2016, 11:18:39 PM
ISS SHUTS DOWN ITS CAMERA DURING THE MARCH 20, 2015, SOLAR ECLIPSE: THE SOLAR TRANSIT PHOTOGRAPHS

Thierry Legault ISS solar transit during the solar eclipse photograph:

http://www.astrophoto.fr/eclipse110104_solar_transit_33.jpg (can be viewed in very large format)

(http://www.astrophoto.fr/eclipse110104_solar_transit_33.jpg)

T. Legault, solar transit/eclipse video:




ISS shuts down its camera during the solar eclipse:





A commentary from one of the viewers:

What else is Suspicious is the fact this thing looks that big against the sun. When you look at comparative models of the earth's size against the size of the sun it is supposedly very very small yet this ISS pictures shows it being massive in size. I know the ISS is closer to earth thus would present as larger. However if its this huge why don't we see it then on a regular basis. According to size presentation here it is MASSIVE. We should see it present against the moon, we don't.


Here are the official figures offered by modern astronomy:

Diameter of the sun: 1.4 million kilometers

ISS-sun distance: 148,000,000 kilometers

Diameter of the moon: 3,475 kilometers

Earth-moon distance: 384,000 kilometers

Diameter of Mercury: 4,878 kilometers

ISS-Mercury distance: 77 million kilometers (average)


Transit of Mercury across the sun:

(http://static.dnaindia.com/sites/default/files/styles/half/public/2016/05/04/456871-planet-space-digital-camera-telescopic-equipment-transit-of-mercury-mercury-india-positional-astronomy-centre-earth-sun-astrology-science-getty-images.jpg?itok=diS-zS7u)

Transit of Atlantis across the sun:

http://www.twanslist.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/shuttle.jpg

Transit of Mercury across the sun:

(http://i.cbc.ca/1.3570790.1462562556!/fileImage/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/original_620/mercury-sun.jpg)

Transit of Atlantis and Hubble across the sun:

https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/0905/atlantisHSTinset_2009may13_legault.jpg

Transit of Atlantis and ISS across the sun, close-up image:

http://www.universetoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/iss_atlantis_2010_crop-580x435.jpg

Exactly the same distance/size as in the Mercury solar transit photographs.


Transit of Mercury across the sun:

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/05/09/00/00644B2200000258-0-image-a-24_1462749655102.jpg

Transit of ISS across the sun:

http://www.astrophoto.fr/iss_atlantis_2010.jpg


NO 148,000,000 KM BETWEEN THE SUN THE ISS/Atlantis (slow motion video):




SAME distance as in the following Mercury solar transit video:



Many more videos here (including the ISS lunar transit)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39728.msg994892#msg994892


Let us get back to the first photograph.


http://www.astrophoto.fr/eclipse110104_solar_transit_33.jpg (can be viewed in very large format)

(http://www.astrophoto.fr/eclipse110104_solar_transit_33.jpg)

The Black Sun appears to be a disk and not a sphere, exactly as in the Bruenjes Antarctica images:

(http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0805/antarcticeclipse_bruenjes_big.jpg)

The diameter of the ISS looks exactly the same as the diameter of Mercury (during solar transit, see photographs above), and YET we are told that the diameters of Mercury and the Moon are very similar, while the diameter of the ISS is some 100 meters.

These images and photographs show the exact size of our geocentric planetary system: much smaller than we have been led to believe.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 04, 2016, 05:38:17 AM
ISS LUNAR TRANSIT - DOUBLE TRANSIT ISS/MERCURY - HUBBLE/VENUS ACROSS THE SUN

(http://deography.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/ISS-closeup.jpg)

ISS across the Moon: no 384,000 km in between

(http://www.universetoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/iss_atlantis_2010_crop-580x435.jpg)

ISS across the Sun: certainly no 148,000,000 km in between; the distance is strikingly similar to the lunar transit of the ISS (ISS-Moon distance)


T. Legault: double transit across the sun, Mercury and the ISS

https://web.archive.org/web/20170103052301/https://www.diyphotography.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/mercury-transit-2016-50legault.jpg

A close up image:

https://web.archive.org/web/20170220105241/http://www.diyphotography.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/mercury-transit-2016-crop.jpg

Comparing this photograph with the transit during the solar eclipse we can see that the Black Sun is much larger than Mercury (since the Moon has the same diameter as that of the Black Sun, it is very much larger than Mercury also).

(http://www.astrophoto.fr/eclipse110104_solar_transit_33.jpg)

http://www.astrophoto.fr/eclipse110104_solar_transit_33.jpg (can be viewed in very large format)


SUN/BLACK SUN/MOON/SHADOW MOON/JUPITER: some 600 meters in diameter (we could choose 1000 sacred cubits, 636 meters)

MERCURY: some 30 meters in diameter

HUBBLE/VENUS DOUBLE SOLAR TRANSIT by T. Legault

http://www.universetoday.com/95709/thierry-legault-one-transit-is-not-enough/

http://www.universetoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/transit_venus_hst_33_marks-580x580.jpg

(copyright Thierry Legault)

http://www.universetoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/legault-close-up-transit.jpg (can be viewed in very large format)

(http://www.universetoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/legault-close-up-transit.jpg)

(copyright Thierry Legault)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 13, 2016, 03:34:29 AM
TESLA'S BLACK KNIGHT/ZARDOZ SATELLITE SIGNALS

(http://image.slidesharecdn.com/tesla-interstellar-141011133938-conversion-gate02/95/tesla-interstellar-47-638.jpg?cb=1413100581)

I can never forget the first sensations I experienced when it dawned upon me that I had observed something possibly of incalculable consequences to mankind. I felt as though I were present at the birth of a new knowledge or the revelation of a great truth. Even now, at times, I can vividly recall the incident, and see my apparatus as though it were actually before me. My first observations positively terrified me, as there was present in them something mysterious, not to say supernatural, and I was alone in my laboratory at night; but at that time the idea of these disturbances being intelligently controlled signals did not yet present itself to me.

The changes I noted were taking place periodically, and with such a clear suggestion of number and order that they were not traceable to any cause then known to me. I was familiar, of course, with such electrical disturbances as are produced by the sun, Aurora Borealis and earth currents, and I was as sure as I could be of any fact that these variations were due to none of these causes. The nature of my experiments precluded the possibility of the changes being produced by atmospheric disturbances, as has been rashly asserted by some. It was some time afterward when the thought flashed upon my mind that the disturbances I had observed might be due to an intelligent control. Although I could not decipher their meaning, it was impossible for me to think of them as having been entirely accidental. The feeling is constantly growing on me that I had been the first to hear the greeting of one planet to another. . . . I was not merely beholding a vision, but had caught sight of a great and profound truth.” – Nikola Tesla, from his article “Talking With Planets”

http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1901-02-09.htm

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2015/11/30/the-black-knight-satellite-whats-this-object-nikola-tesla-concluded-was-extraterrestrial/

Tesla concluded that these signals, or this strange unnatural object they originate from, was indeed extraterrestrial.

At first he assumed they were originating from Mars.
 
Later he changed that opinion and stated in one of his new conferences that the signal was coming from somewhere much closer in space.

"The signals are too strong to have traveled the great distances from Mars to Earth," wrote Tesla. "So I am forced to admit to myself that the sources must come from somewhere in nearby space or even the moon.

https://archive.org/stream/TheLostJournalsOfNikolaTesla/The%20Lost%20Journals%20Of%20Nikola%20Tesla_djvu.txt

A few years later, Guglielmo Marconi was intercepting a strange unknown artificial signal.

http://theunredacted.com/the-black-knight-satellite-sentinel-from-space/


In December 1927, Carl Stoermer, the Norwegian Professor of Mathematics at University in Olso, and explorer of echo radio was contacted by two American scientists, Leo C. Young, radio engineer and Dr. A. Hoyt Taylor, chief consultant of electronics at the naval research laboratory. During their experiments with radio waves, Young and Taylor observed unnatural signals coming from space.

By December 1928, a number of scientists were interested – Jurgen Hals of Phillips Einddhoven laboratories in Holland had discussed his findings with Professor Carl Stormer of Oslo, mentioning three-second delays he had experienced with an experimental radio transmitter. After another year, on October 28 1929, Dr Van der Pol, also of Phillips, confirmed that he had noted further odd echoes from a planned emission of impulses at the same time every morning. It was van der Pol’s analysis of the delay between emissions and the reciept of their echoes, always on the same wavelength, that effectively excluded ideas that they may have been bouncing off the Moon, or inner Van Allen belt, or that they might have been somehow stored and reflected from layers of ionised gas.


Zardoz - the 1974 classic movie, directed by John Boorman, which features the Earth covered by a dome, beyond which live superhuman beings, and who communicate with the rest of the population using a satellite (psychic remote control).


(http://i1.wp.com/locklip.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/black-knight-satellite-news-report.gif)

On May 14, 1954, several newspapers published articles centered on a statement belonging to retired Major D. E. Keyhoe. At the time, Keyhoe believed the Earth was circled by one — if not two artificial satellites. Scientists at the famous White Sands government facility in New Mexico were actively researching this possibility and trying to determine the purpose and origin of these objects.

http://locklip.com/the-myth-and-truth-about-the-13000-year-old-alien-satellite/prettyPhoto/1/


It is to be noted that I am only using references which are dated prior to 1954, including the discoveries made by Nikola Tesla in 1899.



Live images of the Zardoz satellite can be seen on youtube from a video shot in Dayton, Ohio, this spring.

Why Dayton, Ohio? That is the location where a top secret weapon payload was loaded on a US Air Force C-130 cargo plane at Wright Patterson Air Force Base.


Given the fact that the satellite was orbiting above the Earth at least in the period 1899-1928, it is clear that it was using the Biefeld-Brown effect as its source of energy, another evident proof that terrestrial gravity is not attractive at all.

The true FE map, the global Piri Reis map, has a center: it is located somewhere very near to the western coastline of Anatolia, the Garden of Eden, the place of mount Olympus/Meru (some 20-25 km in height).

It has an emissive pole (what we now call the South Pole), located over Antarctica (which is larger that we have been led to believe), which is not covered by ice, and cannot be accessed by land or by air.

It also has a receptive pole (North Pole), located over the northern part of Greenland (featured also on the North Pole Mercator map).

The Aurora Borealis and the Aurora Australis are caused by the orbiting AURORA moon/planet (one for each pole), documented in the various legends around the world. It only orbits inside this territory (perhaps with a diameter of some 1,000 km): it is the "inner sun" of the hollow earth theory believers.

It also provides light in the northern and southern pole regions during some periods of the year.

Aurora, sister of the Sun and of the Moon:

http://www.theoi.com/Titan/Eos.html


The Zardoz satellite was built by the architects of the Gizeh Pyramid, and it is used apparently to provide a view of the Earth inside the dome (dome = aether/ether barrier/shield).
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 14, 2016, 01:33:02 PM
TESLA'S BLACK KNIGHT/ZARDOZ SATELLITE SIGNALS II

In May 1929, J. Galle and G. Talon made new successful research of the LDE phenomenon:

"... In May 1929, a French expedition was in Indo-China to study an eclipse of the Sun. J B Galle and G Talon, captain of the naval vessel L'Inconstant, had orders to study the effects of the eclipse on radio propagation, particularly long delayed echoes. They used a 500 watt transmitter with a 20 meter aerial attached to an 8 meter mast, powered by the generators of the Indo-China Hydrographic Service vessel La Perouse. The two aptly named ships sailed from Saigon on May 2nd, and on May 5th they conducted test transmissions in "la baie de Penitencier", PouloCondere, and detected long delayed echoes. Weather conditions prevented work on May 6th and 7th, but on the 8th the ships were back on station and transmitted for the first ten minutes of every half hour.

On May 9th, the day of the eclipse, signals were sent for nearly six hours with one 20 minute break, and again for ten minutes in every half hour the following day. Two dots were sent every 30 seconds on 25 metres wavelength, varying in a fixed musical sequences to aid correct identification and timing of the echoes. Large numbers of echoes were heard, clearly divided into two groups: weak echoes, about 1/100 the original signal strength, and strong ones 1/3 to 1/5 the intensity of the transmitted signal, with no significant relation between strength and delay time. (These intensities are too great for natural reflection at such apparent distances, but no-one seems to have thought of that at the time.)

In their preliminary report Galle and Talon said echoes stopped altogether during the totality of the eclipse, but in fact they paused 3 1/2 minutes before the eclipse became total and began again half way through it. Delay times ranged from 1 second to 30 seconds, though two 31 second echoes and of 32 seconds were heard between 15.40 and 16.00 on the day of the eclipse. 1 and 2 second echoes might seem impossible for a probe in the Moon's orbit, but for an extraordinary circumstance.

At 14h 19m 29s on the day of the eclipse the operator "forgot" to send the required dots, but 5 and 10 second echoes were heard nonetheless. From this Galle and Talon concluded that some echoes might have 40 seconds delay or more: either their musical tone sequences let them down, or they were unable to believe evidence that the probe was anticipating their signals as it transmitted its "replies".


https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1007/1007.4054.pdf


Of course, N. Tesla's detection equipment was much more precise, in fact no other scientist has been able to duplicate it to the present time.

What Tesla was able to accomplish is to detect SCALAR SIGNALS, using his Teslascope machine: the very source for his extremely precise recording of the pulses.


G. Hodowanec was able to duplicate Tesla's detection of scalar waves using however equipment that was less precise than the Teslascope:

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/tesla/esp_tesla_11.htm

http://lamarzulli.net/April_2013%20PDF.pdf


Using the Teslascope, Tesla made this statement:

"The signals are too strong to have traveled the great distances from Mars to Earth," wrote Tesla. "So I am forced to admit to myself that the sources must come from somewhere in nearby space or even the moon.

This means that the Zardoz satellite is able to emit scalar waves.


We are getting signals from clouds one hundred miles away.

N. Tesla, 1899


The arrangement of my receiving apparatus and the character of the disturbances recorded precluded the possibility of their being of terrestrial origin, and I also eliminated the influence of the Sun, Moon, and Venus. As I announced, the signals consisted in a regular repetition of numbers.

N. Tesla, 1921




Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 29, 2016, 11:23:04 PM
SIRIUS - EARTH DISTANCE: LESS THAN 50 KILOMETERS

The acceleration of the rate of axial precession is a basic fact of science:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1776108#msg1776108

And the data is this:

Simon Newcomb included a “constant” in his precession formula to get it to match the increasing rate of precession that was observed leading up to his era.

The “constant” amount was .000222 arc seconds per year.

In 1900 the precession rate was 50.2564 (USNO).

In 2000 the precession rate was 50.290966 (AA).

This shows us the precession rate has increased over the past 100 years by .0346 for an average of .000346” per/year. Comparing this to Newcomb’s 0.000222” figure,  we can see the actual rate of change has not simply increased at a “constant” rate – it has increased at an “exponential” rate.


A TOTAL AND COMPLETE DEFIANCE OF NEWTONIAN ORBITAL MECHANICS.


The mass of the Sun/Moon/planets has not increased (we all know that the mass of the Sun is actually constantly decreasing).

The orbital distances are the same (and the Moon is constantly receding from the Earth).


Precession has nothing to do with the law of attractive gravitation.


HOW or WHY does Sirius keep up so precisely with the exponentially increasing rate of precession?

How can Sirius' proper motion stay synched up so precisely with precession, when the rate of precession itself is changing?


If any local force in here the "heliocentrical" solar system drove up the rate of precession, it would NOT also drive up the proper motion of Sirius across the sky.



In the official theory of astrophysics, Sirius is 8.6 LIGHT YEARS from Earth.

THAT IS 81 TRILLION KILOMETERS.

And yet it keeps up precisely with the exponential increase of the rate of precession.


Dr. Jad Buchwald (Caltech):

Sirius remains about the same distance from the equinoxes—and so from the solstices— throughout these many centuries, despite precession.

".... despite precession, Sirius and the solstice must remain about the same distance in time from one another during most of Egyptian history."


The distance from Sirius to Earth cannot be measured in light years, millions of kilometers, thousands of kilometers, or even in the hundreds of kilometers: both the Sun and Sirius are linked/connected by the SAME FIELD, which makes it possible for both these heavenly bodies to precisely keep up with the exponentially increasing rate of precession.

Moreover, here we have a basic proof of the existence of the second dome (shield/ether barrier): the first dome separates the Earth's atmosphere from the rotational gravitational force acting upon the Sun/Moon/Shadow Moon/Black Sun/planets/stars; the second dome encloses the aether/ether field necessary to account for the rotation of the planets/stars.


The fact that Sirius seems to maintain its position relative to the position of the sun was a surprise to most scientists (aware of precession), when it was first noticed by the French scientific community following the Egyptian discoveries of Napoleon (and the Dendera Zodiac) in the early 1800’s. Perhaps to save the lunisolar theory of precession, or at least to make sense of physics as then taught, physicist, astronomer, mathematician Jean-Baptiste Biot (21 April 1774 – 3 February 1862) proclaimed that this phenomenon was an oddity of the latitude and horizon around Dendera, meaning it just seemed as if Sirius was immune to the effects of precession. And to this day this is the assumption of many astronomers and astrophysicists.   Physicist Jed Z. Buchwald, professor of history and science and technology (Caltech and MIT) commented on this topic in his article Egyptian Stars Under Paris Skies, when he noted:

"The rising of Sirius, the brightest star in the heavens and important to Egyptians as the signal for the annual flooding of the Nile, was assumed by the French physicists to move with relation to the sun as do the constellations of the zodiac. It does not, however, as we see here."

(http://www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/srg/Explanation%20of%20Heliacal%20Rising%20of%20Sirius%20by%20Physicist%20Jed%20Z.%20Buchwald.jpg)

The curved line dividing the lit from the dark regions represents the horizon near Dendera. The blue lines show the locations of the ecliptic with respect to the horizon at five helical risings separated by hundreds of years. The vernal points mark the equinoxes at these times, and the circled numbers on the lower right indicate the corresponding positions of Sirius. Sirius remains about the same distance from the equinoxes—and so from the solstices— throughout these many centuries, despite precession.

However, wishing to deduce an establishment of a Sothic year of 365.25 days based on the flooding of the Nile in relation to the remarkable astronomical phenomenon of the helical rising of Sirius is in the words of the Egyptologist R.A. Schwaller de Lubicz, "a feat of skill which would dignify clairvoyance rather than ratiocination."

R.A. Schwaller de Lubicz, “Sacred Science”, Inner Traditions (1982)

At this point it would be interesting to mention that Otto Neugebauer, who wrote extensively about Babylonian astronomy, also discussed the so-called Solstice-Equinox-Sirius texts, which formed part of the “Astronomical Diaries”. These texts list equinoxes, solstices, heliacal risings and settings of Sirius from the period of around 600 BCE and around 330 BCE. Apparently, the position of Sirius relative to the solstices and equinoxes did not change over time with precession.

http://saturniancosmology.org/files/calendar/precession.txt


It is recognized that from the beginning of the empire and during the entire dynastic period the rising of Sirius with the Sun always occurred around the time of the Summer solstice.

The implication of this astronomical fact is best explained by Jed Z. Buchwald, a distinguished Professor of History and Science, in his paper “Egyptian Stars under Paris Skies” (Caltech, Engineering & Science No. 4, 2003), where he discusses the meaning of the Zodiac that has been engraved in the ceiling of the temple of Dendera in Egypt:

“The solstice is, after all, extraordinarily hard to pin-point by observation, and in any case it was known from Greek texts that the Egyptians were particularly concerned with the heliacal rising of the brightest star in the sky, Sirius—that is, with the night when Sirius first appears, just before dawn. In Egyptian prehistory this event certainly preceded the annual flooding of the Nile, which was of obvious agricultural importance. Would not precession have moved Sirius along with the zodiacal stars, eventually decoupling its heliacal rising from the solstice, and so from the annual inundation? We know today that the inundation occurs after the June beginning of the rainy season in Ethiopia, where the Blue Nile rises. And yet Sirius’ heliacal rising remained a central marker of the year throughout Egyptian history.” (p 25)

".... despite precession, Sirius and the solstice must remain about the same distance in time from one another during most of Egyptian history. Indeed they do, though it’s doubtful that Burckhardt and Coraboeuf had thought it through. Because of Sirius’ position, and the latitudes at which the Egyptians observed the sky, both Sirius’ heliacal rising and the summer solstice remained nearly the same number of days apart throughout Egyptian history even though the zodiac moves slowly around the ecliptic." (pp 29)

Buchwald, who produced a revealing diagram on the ‘Heliacal Risings of Sirius’ in relation to the vernal points (for the period of 2900 BCE to 2941 CE at intervals of 1460 years) using TheSky software, makes it very clear that "Sirius remains about the same distance from the equinoxes - and so from the solstices - throughout these many centuries, despite precession".


According to the current theory of lunisolar precession the pole, and therefore the equator of the Earth is supposed to “wobble” over a period of roughly 25800 years relative to the position of the fixed stars and the Sun. In other words, if we were to imagine the Earth ‘fixed’ in its revolution around the Sun at the time when Sirius is in conjunction with the Sun (e.g. during the Summer solstice), an observer would not only notice changes in the declination of Sirius and the other stars, but simultaneously equal changes in the declination of the Sun. In practice, however, Sirius does not show any significant variations in its position relative to the Summer solstice.

In order to account for the unusual motion of Sirius, which is minimal relative to the Summer solstice and exceptionally high with respect to the stars of the Zodiac, Karine Gadré,  the Associate Researcher at the Department of Astrophysics of the MidiPyrenees Observatory in Toulouse, France offers the following explanation:

“The low change in the celestial coordinates of Sirius comes from its high proper movement, which partly compensated the effects of precession under the Dynastic Period. […] In order to better understand how the proper movement of Sirius can partly compensate the effects of precession, do not only take into account the numerical values of the speed vector. Take also into account the position of Sirius on the celestial vault at a given instant and the direction of the speed vector.

Now we know that the proper motion of Sirius (i.e. of the Sirius system) over a period of some 5400 years is less than 2°:

"For a long time astronomers had been noticing anomalies in Sirius' proper motion; this motion, well known since Halley's time is equal to 0.0375" in RA (Right Ascension) and to 1.207" in D, (Declination), which gives a yearly resultant motion of 1.32" in the direction of 204°, which is noticeably to the south. In 1834, Bessel showed that the anomalies consisted mainly of deviations between the star's theoretical position and its actual position; these distinctly periodic differences, especially in right ascension, may be as great as 0.321", which is a considerable amount with regard to meridian observations. Overall, instead of moving through space in a straight line, Sirius appears to display a wavy trajectory."

Dr. P. Blaize, Le Compagnon de Sirius, Bull. de la Société astronomique de France (1931)


(https://image.ibb.co/j6pd0y/sothic.jpg)

An Egypto-Julian calendar reveals that New Year Day (beginnings of Sothic Cycles) of the Egyptian calendar synchronized with the following tetraeterises:

Heliopolis, Egypt:
4225 BC July 15
2767 BC July 16
1311 BC July 17
145 AD July 18


This proves that Sirius is not precessing like other stars, since in this 4,370 years time period, the calendar dates have only changed by 3 calendar days!

Moreover, the heliacal rising of Sirius appears to keep up with the calendar.

This heliacal rise of Sirius also appears to be a fixed date according to the Julian calendar for over 4,000 years.


HOW or WHY does Sirius keep up so precisely with the exponentially increasing rate of precession?

How can Sirius' proper motion stay synched up so precisely with precession, when the rate of precession itself is changing?


If any local force here in "heliocentrical" solar system drove up the rate of precession, it would NOT also drive up the proper motion of Sirius across the sky.

(https://i113.photobucket.com/albums/n206/dharanis1/sothic_zpsi17dqlp4.jpg)

An Egypto-Julian calendar reveals that New Year Day (beginnings of Sothic Cycles) of the Egyptian calendar synchronized with the following tetraeterises:

Heliopolis, Egypt:
4225 BC July 15
2767 BC July 16
1311 BC July 17
145 AD July 18


This proves that Sirius is not precessing like other stars, since in this 4,370 years time period, the calendar dates have only changed by 3 calendar days!

Moreover, the heliacal rising of Sirius appears to keep up with the calendar.

This heliacal rise of Sirius also appears to be a fixed date according to the Julian calendar for over 4,000 years.


HOW or WHY does Sirius keep up so precisely with the exponentially increasing rate of precession?

How can Sirius' proper motion stay synched up so precisely with precession, when the rate of precession itself is changing?


If any local force here the "heliocentrical" solar system drove up the rate of precession, it would NOT also drive up the proper motion of Sirius across the sky.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 20, 2016, 11:55:16 PM
QUETZALCOATL AIRSHIPS

The colossal monuments/pyramids at Teotihuacan, Cholula, Monte Alban, Palenque, Copan, Tikal, Chichen Itza, Tiahuanaco, Cuzco-Sacsayhuaman were built by Akhenaton's father who received several names, Xelhua, Quetzalcoatl, Kukulcan, Viracocha, using ball lightning technology (levitation of huge blocks of stones, landscape arhitecture on a grand scale).

The same race of people, known as the Olmecs in the official chronology of history, also constructed the Baalbek temple, where blocks of granite weighing more than 2,000 tons were used.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1388219#msg1388219

There were no Mayans or Aztecs civilizations: that is why the official chronology of history invented an unbelievable story where the Mayans simply vanish from history with no traces to be found.

Visitors from Egypt (descendants of Khem), who themselves originated from Southern Europe, came to Central and South America in two succeeding waves, in the period 1740-1770 AD: first the Olmecs then the Osirians who added the so-called mayan calendar stelae.

These are the same people who also built the temples at Karnac and Luxor.

After his exodus from Egypt, Akhenaton arrived in present day England, and founded the British Empire (the Templar cross is an Aten symbol), and later visited the islands of Hyperboreea.

Quetzalcoatl is depicted as having arrived in a flying boat, which could also sail on the oceans.

Now, the Olmecs and the Osirians did not have at their disposal the mercury gyro laevorotatory subquarks generated UFOs, nor did they use the Biefeld-Brown effect for disk shaped flying objects.

Yet, they were able to fly huge distances, with no problems at all, having visited even Hyperboreea:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/92/1606_Mercator_Hondius_Map_of_the_Arctic_(First_Map_of_the_North_Pole)_-_Geographicus_-_NorthPole-mercator-1606.jpg

It is obvious that the air ships/flying boats used to travel around the world (they did have the complete Piri Reis world maps at their disposal) looked like this:

(http://www.ulrichzeidler.com/project03/full/03.jpg)

(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6117/6323006477_aca7df75e1.jpg)

(http://www.ulrichzeidler.com/project03/full/01.jpg)



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 21, 2016, 02:00:06 AM
ANDROMEDA GALAXY FAKE PICTURES/IMAGES


https://web.archive.org/web/20140417144012/http://lakefx.net/3/post/2010/10/andromeda-and-introduction-to-processing.html

(http://lakefx.net/uploads/2/8/2/4/2824557/680842.jpg?434)

The first photograph on the left IS THE ONLY REAL IMAGE: easily explained in the context of FE cosmology.

This is an example of how image processing works. A recent spat about NASA photo-shopping their images drove me to type up some thoughts on how this actually works and why it has to be done. This is how Amateurs, Professionals, Astronomers and NASA scientists would do this. The tasks are the same, but the tools are different. I don't for example have a 30 foot curved mirror and a camera with a sensor the size of a cyndar block. What I am using is basically a large telephoto lens and specially-modified Canon DSLR camera. The first image is one single 'Sub Exposure' The second image is the result of stacking several hundred 'sub exposures' to create a single image with the combined signal and then 'balancing' the colors. There's too much red for example because of light pollution and because the red channel of the camera is more sensitive than the green and blue channels. Your camera fixes this automatically using something called 'white balance.' Yes, your camera 'Photoshops' the image for you so it doesn't look like crap! The first image is what a 'raw' image truly looks like before that happens! The last image represents the same image after it has been stretched and enhanced with Photoshop to bring out fainter details and make the image more pleasing to the eye.

HERE IS THE FINAL, FAKE, PHOTOSHOPPED "PHOTOGRAPH":

http://lakefx.net/uploads/2/8/2/4/2824557/9423099.jpg?630

This is how each and every amateur astrophotographer gets to MODIFY the real image (first photograph on the left) and turn it into a fake, unreal, photoshopped photograph.

Here is a more realistic image of "Andromeda":

https://twitter.com/aneyeofsky/status/427151575254302720/photo/1

It shows exactly what is being very well described by the correct version of FET: the stars are much smaller and orbit much closer to the surface of the Earth.


Here is another realistic image of Andromeda:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/geekyrocketguy/12026618046/


Now, here is a fake image of Andromeda:

https://twitter.com/kevinrns/status/427581559571374080/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw (false colour astrophotography)


GAS CLOUD FORMATION PARADOXES:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=55861.0#.VrnNcRh961s (it includes the helium flash/triple alpha process paradox)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 22, 2016, 05:22:42 AM
GALACTIC ORBIT PARADOX: KEPLER'S HELICAL PLANETARY ORBITS

(https://s15.postimg.org/d1kflnyiz/safari.jpg)

(http://biocab.org/Motions_of_the_Solar_System.jpg)

(http://www.djsadhu.com/files/frontshot.jpg)

A solar system in motion with respect to the Vega star would be wholly incompatible with Kepler's first law, since, within that frame of reference, this motion (the circular helices on a right cylinder) must change the eccentricities of some of the planetary orbits to an extent which far exceeds the observed values.

Therefore, Kepler's first law contradicts the accepted fact of current astronomy that the entire solar system moves toward the star Vega on a helical path.

The tridimensional orbits of the Sun/Planets, would be circular helices on a right cylinder, which completely contradicts the planar elliptical orbits of the planets, in the heliocentric theory. A planar elliptical orbit would be possible if and only if the whole system is at rest (with respect to the rest of the Galaxy, in the round earth theory), and not moving toward Vega with 20 km/s.

Both Kepler's first law and the fact that the geometrical shape of the movement of the solar system towards the star Vega must a be a helix, cannot be true at the same time.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 22, 2016, 07:47:16 AM
DON JUAN MATUS' DEXTROROTATORY ETHER WAVES

After a moment’s pause he added that for purposes of seeing the cocoon of man, one has to gaze at people from behind, as they walk away. It is useless to gaze at people face to face, because the front of the egglike cocoon of man has a protective shield, which seers call the front plate, it is an almost impregnable, unyielding shield that protects us throughout our lives against the onslaught of a peculiar force that stems from the emanations themselves.

I could hear don Juan talking to me and I could follow every one of his statements as if I were awake, yet I could not move my body at all.

When I saw each luminous creature in profile, from the point of view of its body, its egglike shape was like a gigantic asymmetrical yoyo that was standing edgewise, or like an almost round pot that was resting on its side with its lid on. The part that looked like a lid was the front plate; it was perhaps one fifth the thickness of the total cocoon.

I would have gone on seeing those creatures, but don Juan said that I should now gaze at people face to face and sustain my gaze until I had broken the barrier and I was seeing the emanations. I followed his command. Almost instantaneously, I saw a most brilliant array of live, compelling fibers of light. It was a dazzling sight that immediately shattered my balance. I fell down on the cement walk on my side. From there, I saw the compelling fibers of light multiply themselves. They burst open and myriads of other fibers came out of them. But the fibers, compelling as they were, somehow did not interfere with my ordinary view. There were scores of people going into church. I was no longer seeing them. There were quite a few women and men just around the bench. I wanted to focus my eyes on them, but instead I noticed how one of those fibers of light bulged suddenly. It became like a ball of fire that was perhaps seven feet in diameter, it rolled on me. My first impulse was to roll out of its way. Before I could even move a muscle the ball had hit me. I felt it as clearly as if someone had punched me gently in the stomach. An instant later another ball of fire hit me, this time with considerably more strength, and then don Juan whacked me really hard on the cheek with his open hand. I jumped up involuntarily and lost sight of the fibers of light and the balloons that were hitting me.

Don Juan said that the balls that had hit me were called the rolling force, or the tumbler.

He replied, „No sooner had you begun to see than the tumbler stopped you. If you had remained a moment longer it would have blasted you.”

„What exactly is the tumbler?” I asked.

„It is a force from the Eagle’s emanations,” he said. „A ceaseless force that strikes us every instant of our lives, it is lethal when seen, but otherwise we are oblivious to it, in our ordinary lives, because we have protective shields. We have consuming interests that engage all our awareness. We are permanently worried about our station, our possessions. These shields, however, do not keep the tumbler away, they simply keep us from seeing it directly, protecting us in this way from getting hurt by the fright of seeing the balls of fire hitting us. Shields are a great help and a great hindrance to us. They pacify us and at the same time fool us. They give us a false sense of security.”

He said that seers describe it as an eternal line of iridescent rings, or balls of fire, that roll onto living beings ceaselessly.  A situation that is extremely dangerous, however, is an involuntary shift of the assemblage point owing, perhaps, to physical fatigue, emotional exhaustion, disease, or simply a minor emotional or physical crisis, such as being frightened or being drunk.

„When the assemblage point shifts involuntarily, the rolling force cracks the cocoon,” he went on. „I’ve talked many times about a gap that man has below his navel. It’s not really below the navel itself, but in the cocoon, at the height of the navel. The gap is more like a dent, a natural flaw in the otherwise smooth cocoon. It is there where the tumbler hits us ceaselessly and where the cocoon cracks.”

He went on to explain that if it is a minor shift of the assemblage point, the crack is very small, the cocoon quickly repairs itself, and people experience what everybody has at one time or another: blotches of color and contorted shapes, which remain even if the eyes are closed. If the shift is considerable, the crack also is extensive and it takes time for the cocoon to repair itself, as in the case of warriors who purposely use power plants to elicit that shift or people who take drugs and unwittingly do the same. In these cases men feel numb and cold; they have difficulty talking or even thinking; it is as if they have been frozen from inside.

„The reason it’s called the circular force is that it comes in rings, threadlike hoops of iridescence, a very delicate affair indeed. And just like the tumbling force, it strikes all living beings ceaselessly, but for a different purpose. It strikes them to give them strength, direction, awareness; to give them life.

„What the new seers discovered is that the balance of the two forces in every living being is a very delicate one,” he continued, „if at any given time an individual feels that the tumbling force strikes harder than the circular one, that means the balance is upset; the tumbling force strikes harder and harder from then on, until it cracks the living being’s gap."

(The Fire From Within, C. Castaneda)


Rolling force = terrestrial gravity/dextrorotatory ether waves

Circular force = antigravitational force/laevorotatory ether waves

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488624#msg1488624
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 28, 2016, 09:19:40 AM
DOMENICO CASSINI'S FALSIFIED BIOGRAPHY

D. Cassini, Ephemerides nouisssimae motuum coelestium:

http://amshistorica.unibo.it/25 (pg. 28, 29, 34, 35)

The registered date for the total solar eclipse which occurred in early 1662, March 20 (right on the vernal equinox) cannot be true.

Furthermore, there are no other astronomical/historical records for this total solar eclipse (other than the brief mention by Cassini), by far what should have been the most important astronomical event of the millenium, a chance to settle once and for all the Gregorian calendar reform controversy.

The Jesuits in India/China, F. Verbiest, J. Schall von Bell,  even the young N. Flamsteed fail to notice/record this most important of all the total solar eclipses.


The falsification of the Gregorian calendar reform:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1638725#msg1638725

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1638504#msg1638504


In the year 325 AD, the spring equinox could not and did not fall on March 21.

Dr. G. Nosovsky:

It is indeed amazing that Matthew Vlastar’s Collection of Rules Devised by Holy Fathers – the book that every Paschalia researcher refers to – contains an explicit dating of the time the Easter Book was compiled. It is even more amazing that none of the numerous researchers of Vlastar’s text appeared to have noticed it (?!), despite the fact that the date is given directly after the oft-quoted place of Vlastar’s book, about the rules of calculating the Easter date. Moreover, all quoting stops abruptly immediately before the point where Vlastar gives this explicit date.


What could possibly be the matter? Why don’t modern commentators find themselves capable of quoting the rest of Vlastar’s text? We are of the opinion that they attempt to conceal from the reader the fragments of ancient texts that explode the entire edifice of Scaliger’s chronology. We shall quote this part completely:

“There are four rules concerning the Easter. The first two are the apostolic rules, and the other two are known from tradition. The first rule is that the Easter should be celebrated after the spring equinox. The second is that is should not be celebrated together with the Judeans. The third: not just after the equinox, but also after the first full moon following the equinox. And the fourth: not just after the full moon, but the first Sunday following the full moon… The current Paschalia was compiled and given to the church by our fathers in full faith that it does not contradict any of the quoted postulates. (This is the place the quoting usually stops, as we have already mentioned – Auth.). They created it the following way: 19 consecutive years were taken starting with the year 6233 since Genesis (= 725 AD – Auth.) and up until the year 6251 (= 743 AD – Auth.), and the date of the first full moon after the spring equinox was looked up for each one of them. The Paschalia makes it obvious that when the Elders were doing it; the equinox fell on the 21st of March” ([518]).



Thus, the Circle for Moon – the foundation of the Paschalia – was devised according to the observations from the years 725-743 AD; hence, the Paschalia couldn’t possibly have been compiled, let alone canonized, before that.



Matthew Vlastar, who lived in the XIV century, hadn’t had any doubts about the Elders having devised the Paschalian cycle of 19 years after 743 AD. He already knew that the astronomical full moons migrated to earlier dates in the Julian calendar at the ratio of 24 hours per about 304 years, and wrote the following:



“If we consider the cycle of 19 years, 304 after the Elders who had devised it – it shall be the 17th, one that started in the year 6537 (=1029 AD – Auth.) – we shall see that the first vernal full moons precede the full moons of the first 19-year cycle by a day… If we consider the other 19-year circle in a similar manner, the one that starts in the year 6842 (=1333 AD), we shall discover that the full moons it gives predate the real ones by yet another day… This is why these two days are added to the Lawful Easter (Passover – Auth.)” ([518]).

A complete debunking of the OFFICIAL hypothesis, which is absolutely necessary for the RE to show the historical existence of the Earth's axial precession, that the spring equinox fell on March 21, in the year 325 AD.

There are no historical/astronomical records that there was ever an axial shift (precession) of the Earth.


Papal Bull, Gregory XIII, 1582:

Therefore we took care not only that the vernal equinox returns on its former date, of which it has already deviated approximately ten days since the Nicene Council, and so that the fourteenth day of the Paschal moon is given its rightful place, from which it is now distant four days and more, but also that there is founded a methodical and rational system which ensures, in the future, that the equinox and the fourteenth day of the moon do not move from their appropriate positions.


According to the official chronology and astronomy, the direction of Earth's rotation axis executes a slow precession with a period of approximately 26,000 years.

Therefore, in the year 325 e.n., official date for the Council of Nicaea, the winter solstice MUST HAVE FALLEN on December 21 or December 22; in the year 968 e.n., on December 16; and in the year 1582, on December 11.

We are told that the motivation for the Gregorian reform was that the Julian calendar assumes that the time between vernal equinoxes is 365.25 days, when in fact it is about 11 minutes less. The accumulated error between these values was about 10 days (starting from the Council of Nicaea) when the reform was made, resulting in the equinox occurring on March 11 and moving steadily earlier in the calendar, also by the 16th century AD the winter solstice fell around December 11.


But, in fact, as we see from the superb work The Easter Issue, the Council of Nicaea could not have taken place any earlier than the year 876-877 e.n., which means that the winter solstice in the year 968 e.n., for example must have fallen on December 21.

And, of course, in the year 1582, the winter solstice would have arrived on December 16, not at all on December 11.


Here is another proof:

Byzantine historian Leo Diaconus (ca. 950-994), as he observed the total eclipse of 22 December 968 from Constantinople (now Istanbul, Turkey). His observation is preserved in the Annales Sangallenses, and reads:

"...at the fourth hour of the day ... darkness covered the earth and all the brightest stars shone forth. And is was possible to see the disk of the Sun, dull and unlit, and a dim and feeble glow like a narrow band shining in a circle around the edge of the disk".

NOW READ THIS CAREFULLY:

"When the Emperor was waging war in Syria, at the winter solstice there was an eclipse of the Sun such as has never happened apart from that which was brought on the Earth at the Passion of our Lord on account of the folly of the Jews. . . The eclipse was such a spectacle. It occurred on the 22nd day of December, at the 4th hour of the day, the air being calm. Darkness fell upon the Earth and all the brighter stars revealed themselves. Everyone could see the disc of the Sun without brightness, deprived of light, and a certain dull and feeble glow, like a narrow headband, shining round the extreme parts of the edge of the disc. However, the Sun gradually going past the Moon (for this appeared covering it directly) sent out its original rays, and light filled the Earth again."

Refers to a total solar eclipse in Constantinople of 22 December AD 968.
From: Leo the Deacon, Historiae, Byzantine.

http://www.mreclipse.com/Special/quotes2.html


However, the winter solstice in the year 968 MUST HAVE FALLEN on December 16, given the 10 day correction instituted by Gregory XIII, as we are told (a very simple calculation - 11 minutes in the length of a solar year amount to a full day for each 134 years), according to the official chronology.

Let us imagine the protests which would have followed if the Vatican would have dared to say that the winter solstice in 1581-1582 occurred on December 11, given the precise fact that IT MUST HAVE TAKEN PLACE ON DECEMBER 16. This means, of course, that the Papal Bull, dated 1582, was created much later in time, in fact at least after 1700 e.n., to give the impression of a "historical proof" of the axial precession hypothesis.

There is no other way around it: the most precise proofs that the Council of Nicaea could not have taken place any earlier than the year 876-877 e.n., which means that the entire medieval and even ancient chronology was invented by both Scaliger and Petavius some centuries later.


Therefore, the recorded date of March 20, 1662 by Cassini, taking into account the supposed Gregorian calendar reform must be false: the five day difference could not but have been noticed by Cassini, Kepler, Galilei and all the other famed astronomers of the day.

It is obvious that the works attributed to Cassini were forged later in time, at least after 1780 AD.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 28, 2016, 11:14:50 PM
OLE ROMER'S FALSIFIED BIOGRAPHY

OFFICIAL BIOGRAPHY OF OLE ROMER:

Danish astronomer (1644–1710)

Römer was professor of astronomy at the University of Copenhagen when Jean Picard visited Denmark to inspect Tycho Brahe's observatory at Uraniborg. Picard recruited him and Römer joined the Paris Observatory in 1671.

He left France at a propitious time, since four years after his departure Louis XIV revoked the Edict of Nantes, and as a Protestant Römer would surely have been forced to leave the country, as was Christiaan Huygens.



Jean-Felix Picard (July 21, 1620 – July 12, 1682) was a French astronomer and priest born in La Flèche, where he studied at the Jesuit Collège Royal Henry-Le-Grand.


Therefore, in the official chronology, protestantism, priesthood and Jesuit colleges were a common thing at the beginning of the 17th century.



( http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm )

http://web.archive.org/web/20150215210041/http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm

THE PAULINE EPISTLES BY THE BRITISH HISTORIAN EDWIN JOHNSON:

This 100-page book from 1894 shows that:

·         The Paul figure was a literary invention from the 1500's

·         The purportedly early Church Father writings were literary inventions of the 1500's

·         Eusebius' Church History was written in the 1500's.

·         The Gospels were written in the 1500's.

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459891

Direct quote from the works of Polydore Vergil, the greatest historian of the Renaissance (in the official chronology) which proves that biblical knowledge (especially about the epistles attributed to Paul) was unknown in Western Europe prior to 1520 AD.


http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459900

How the Pauline Epistles WERE COPIED from Historia Ecclesiastica by Eusebius, a work written some 250 years later in time.

It also shows how Historia Ecclesiastica itself was invented at least after 1500 AD.


http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459924

The artificial structure of the Pauline Epistles.


http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459974

Take the richest theological Epistle ascribed to Paul: that to the Romans. Positively these so-called post-Apostolic men do not know it. They have merely some faint echoes of its contents; which is a very different thing.

I must distinctly warn my readers against this fallacy of the handbooks and introductions to the New Testament, the only thorough cure for which is to read these "post-Apostolic" men for themselves. They will then discover that these writers, assumed to be following in the steps of their forerunners, and to be diligently perusing their writings as we have them, are doing nothing of the kind. They are dreaming, rambling, and raving; but they do not know that romantic figure of Paul that is known to us, nor yet his alleged writings as we have them. `


http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459991

Proof that Bede, Gildas were a late invention of the 16th century; the Canterbury Tales written in the 16th century.


http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54459997

Extraordinary proofs that the Vulgate (Latin Bible) was not known in Europe at least until 1594 (Sixtine edition). Johnson does show that the Council of Trent (1546) is a fable, with no scientific base whatsoever.


http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm#_Toc54460011

Luther and Paul, biblical knowledge just beginning to spread in the 16th century.


Furthermore, from "Romer's" data, the speed of light could be estimated to be in the range of 193,120 Km/s up to 327,000 Km/s.



In the 1690s, Ole Rømer used his influence to bring about a uniform adoption of the Gregorian calendar in Protestant countries, though that could not be achieved in practice.


No European country could have possibly adopted the Gregorian calendar reformation in the period 1582-1800, given the absolute fact that the winter solstice must have falled on December 16 in the year 1582 AD, and not at all on December 11 (official chronology), see the previous message.


The writings attributed to O. Romer MUST have been fabricated during the second half of the 18th century (official chronology calendar).


Of course, in the official chronology of history, the duo consisting of Domenico Cassini and Jean Picard purportedly estimated the distance between Earth and Mars using parallax.

But they could have done no such thing (notwithstanding the fact proven above that their biographies have been forged at the end of the 18th century).


http://web.archive.org/web/20150321094726/http://www.realityreviewed.com/Negative%20parallax.htm

http://www.geocentricity.com/ba1/no115/par-ab-rev.pdf

http://www.freelists.org/post/geocentrism/Stellar-Parallax

http://www.paradox-paradigm.nl/?page_id=38

On the angular size of Mars:

http://www.freelists.org/post/geocentrism/The-resolution-of-Mars,4
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: wise on September 28, 2016, 11:28:41 PM
Did you calculate a formula for acceleration of free falling objects? If you did, should i see it. Thanks.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 29, 2016, 02:09:05 AM
This issue has already been addressed in this thread.

http://keelynet.com/gravity/grav7.txt (Craig Gunnufson on the ether law of acceleration)


Charles Brush experiments of 1922: weight depends on the atomic structure of the substance -

http://www.rexresearch.com/brush/brush.htm

Charles F. Brush, in a series of reports in the PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY around 1922 found, in some well-thought-out experiments, that weight was not only proportional to mass, but was affected by the atomic structure of the substances. For example, he found that for a given unit of mass and shape, BISMUTH falls faster than zinc or aluminum.


John W. Keely has added the acoustic cavity resonator theory, which is more complex, and should be investigated further:

http://www.svpvril.com/fortylaw.html


None other than Lord Rayleigh and Sir Oliver Lodge have offered their thoughts on the subject:

When a steel spring is bent or distorted, what is it that is really strained? Not the atoms-the atoms are only displaced; it is the connecting links that are strained-the connecting medium-the ether. Distortion of a spring is really distortion of the ether. All stress exists in the ether.

Matter can only be moved. Contact does not exist between the atoms of matter as we know them; it is doubtful if a piece of matter ever touches another piece, any more than a comet touches the sun when it appears to rebound from it; but the atoms are connected, as the comet and the sun are connected by a continuous plenum without break or discontinuity of any kind.

Matter acts on matter only through the ether. But whether matter is a thing utterly distinct and separate from the ether, or whether it is a specifically modified portion of it-modified in such a way as to be susceptible of locomotion, and yet continuous with all the rest of the ether, which can be said to extend everywhere-far beyond the bounds of the modified and tangible portion-are questions demanding, and I may say in process of receiving, answers. Every such answer involves some view of the universal and possibly infinite uniform omnipresent connecting medium, the Ether of space.

First of all, Newton recognised the need of a medium for explaining gravitation. In his "Optical Queries" he shows that if the pressure of this medium is less in the neighbourhood of dense bodies than at great distances from them, dense bodies will be driven towards each other; and that if the diminution of pressure is inversely as the distance from the dense body, the law will be that of gravitation.

Indeed, the statue in your entrance hall may be considered as the statue of the discoverer of the electric and magnetic properties of the Ether of space. Faraday conjectured that the same medium which is concerned in the propagation of light might also be the agent in electromagnetic phenomena. He says:

"For my own part, considering the relation of a vacuum to the magnetic force, and the general character of magnetic phenomena external to the magnet, I am much more inclined to the notion that in the transmission of the force there is such an action, external to the magnet, than that the effects are merely attraction and repulsion at a distance. Such an action may be a function of the aether; for it is not unlikely that, if there be an aether, it should have other uses than simply the conveyance of radiation."
This conjecture has been amply strengthened by subsequent investigations. One more function is now being discovered; the ether is being found to constitute matter-an immensely interesting topic, on which there are many active workers at the present time.

I will make a brief quotation from your present Professor of Natural Philosophy (J. J. Thomson), where he summarises the conclusion which we all see looming before us, though it has not yet been completely attained, and would not by all be similarly expressed:

"The whole mass of any body is just the mass of ether surrounding the body which is carried along by the Faraday tubes associated with the atoms of the body. In fact, all mass is mass of the ether; all momentum, momentum of the ether; and all kinetic energy, kinetic energy of the ether. This view, it should be said, requires the density of the ether to be immensely greater than that of any known substance."

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: wise on September 29, 2016, 10:56:14 PM
Sorry this is an answer for something but isn't an answer of my question. They think they are in line with Newton. I need somebody thinking oppositely to Newton, and a result formula. Thank you in advance.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 30, 2016, 01:28:21 AM
CNO CYCLE DEFIES THE SOLAR NUCLEAR FURNACE HYPOTHESIS

An extraordinary look at the CNO cycle:

Observational Confirmation of the Sun's CNO Cycle

https://arxiv.org/ftp/astro-ph/papers/0512/0512633.pdf (a must read)

This paper provides the latest proofs which show the following:

Measurements on gamma-rays from a solar flare in Active Region 10039 on 23 July 2002 with the RHESSI spacecraft spectrometer indicate that the CNO cycle occurs at the solar surface, in electrical discharges along closed magnetic loops.

"But the nuclear furnace theory assumes that these nuclear events are separated from surface events by hundreds of thousands of years as the heat from the core slowly percolates through the Sun’s hypothetical “radiative zone”."

A clear debunking of the currently accepted solar model.

"To confirm these surface events Iron Sun proponents point to the telltale signatures of the “CNO cycle” first set forth in the work of Hans Bethe. In 1939 Bethe proposed that the stable mass-12 isotope of Carbon catalyzes a series of atomic reactions in the core of the Sun, resulting in the fusion of hydrogen into helium. This nucleosynthesis, according to Bethe, occurs through a “Carbon-Nitrogen-Oxygen (CNO) cycle,” as helium is constructed from the nuclei of hydrogen atoms—protons—at temperatures ranging from 14 million K to 20 million K.

For some time now, solar scientists have observed the products expected from the CNO cycle, but now they see a relationship of these products’ abundances to sunspot activity. This finding is crucial because the nuclear events that standard theory envisions are separated from surface events by hundreds of thousands of years as the heat from the core slowly percolates through the Sun’s hypothetical “radiative zone”. From this vantage point, a connection between the hidden nuclear furnace and sunspot activity is inconceivable."

Proponents of the Iron Sun, therefore, have posed an issue that could be fatal to the standard model.


http://www.omatumr.com/abstracts2005/The_Suns_Origin.pdf

https://web.archive.org/web/20080509075056/http://www.omatumr.com/papers.html

http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch06/060124solar3.htm

https://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch06/060120solar1.htm


In his autobiography, “Home Is Where the Wind Blows,” Sir Fred Hoyle documents the abrupt, and seemingly inexplicable U-Turn in astronomy, astrophysics, solar physics immediately after “nuclear fires” ended the Second World War:

[Referring to Hoyle’s meeting with Sir Arthur Eddington one spring day in 1940]: “We both believed that the Sun was made mostly of iron, two parts iron to one part of hydrogen, more or less. The spectrum of sunlight, chock-a-block with lines of iron, had made this belief seem natural to astronomers for more than fifty years.” . . . (page 153)

“The high-iron solution continued to reign supreme in the interim (at any rate, in the astronomical circles to which I was privy) until after the Second World War,” . . .

“when I was able to show, to my surprise, that the high-hydrogen, low iron solution was to be preferred for the interiors as well as for the atmospheres.” (page 153-154)

“My paper on the matter confounded a doctrine of (Raymond) Lyttleton, who used to say there are three stages in the acceptance by the world of a new idea.

1. The idea is nonsense.

2. Somebody thought of it before you did.

3. We believed it all the time.
This matter of the high-hydrogen solution was the only occasion, in my experience, when the first and second of these stages were missing.“ (page 154)

Two other recent papers confirm that the Sun’s energy spectrum varies in the manner expected from a pulsar core that is shielded by turbulent layers of ordinary atomic matter:

_ a.) Judith L. Lean and Matthew T. DeLand, “How Does the Sun’s Spectrum Vary?” Journal of Climate, 25, 2555–2560 (April 2012)


_ b.) C. Martin-Puertas, K. Matthes, A. Brauer, R. Muscheler, F. Hansen, C. Petrick, A. Aldahan, G. Possnert, B. Van Geel, “Regional atmospheric circulation shifts induced by a grand solar minimum,” Nature Geoscience 5 , 397-401 (June 2012)


SOLID SURFACE OF THE SUN paradox.

http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/index.html

http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/model.htm

http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/sunquakes.htm

http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/moss.htm

http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/tsunami.htm?

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 06, 2016, 03:28:30 AM
COSMIC ETHER BACKGROUND

http://galileowaswrong.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/WILLTH1.pdf

Certain features of the Cosmic Microwave Background [CMB] radiation – specifically features known as the dipole, quadrupole and octopole – and the Earth’s ecliptic plane and the equinoxes cannot be explained by the heliocentrists.

We have stated many times that the CMB vectors demonstrate a preferred direction in
space, something that was neither predicted nor fits with the current Big Bang cosmology to which MacAndrew and Palm ascribe. This preferred direction means that there is an up and down and a left and right in the universe – something totally at odds with the Big Bang. It further means that the universe was designed as such, since the odds of such an absolute direction happening by chance is, according to a paper by the world’s experts on this topic (namely, Copi, Huterer, Schwarz and Starkman), 1 in 10,000.

That the universe’s largest structure, the Cosmic Microwave Radiation (CMB), which extends from one side of the universe all the way to the other side, can be dissected into three distinct yet related structures (dipole, quadrupole, and octopole) that all lie, as we will see, within a narrow margin of 10° Right Ascension and 15° declination with our tiny Sun-Earth regions of the universe, is one of the greatest discoveries, if not the greatest discovery, of modern science. It shows that modern science has been on the wrong track for centuries.

If the universe is, as claimed, 93 billion light years in diameter and the CMB stretches from one end of that diameter to the other, yet our Sun-Earth region is only 93 million miles and the CMB is aligned with it, is like saying that the whole Milky Way is aligned with the diameter of a pea!
In short the CMB makes our Sun-Earth region the most significant place in the entire universe.

We have described the CMB alignments with Earth similarly to how expert scientists have described them, namely, that the CMB is aligned with the Earth’s equinoxes (equator) and the Sun-Earth ecliptic. Below is a small sample of the literature to prove our point:

“The large-angle correlations of the cosmic microwave background exhibit several statistically significant anomalies compared to the standard inflationary cosmology…the quadrupole octopole correlation is excluded from being a chance occurrence in a gaussian random statistically isotropic sky at >99.87%….The correlation of the normals [perpendicular vectors] with the ecliptic poles suggest an unknown source or sink of CMB radiation or an unrecognized systematic. If it is a physical source or sink in the inner solar system it would cause an annual modulation in the time-ordered data…. Physical correlation of the CMB with the equinoxes is difficult to imagine, since the WMAP satellite has no knowledge of the inclination of the Earth’s spin axis.

Dominik J. Schwarz, Glenn D. Starkman, Dragan Huterer and Craig J. Copi, “Is the Low-l Microwave Background Cosmic?” Physical Review Letters, November 26, 2004

The same phenomenon is reiterated in both their 2005 and 2010 papers, which begin with an obvious reaffirmation that all data will be interpreted through the grid of the “Copernican Principle…that the Earth does not occupy a special place in the universe…” (p. 1), but at the same time admit:

“These  apparent  correlations  with  the  solar  system  geometry are  puzzling  and  currently unexplained...the  quadrupole  and  octopole  are  orthogonal  to  the  ecliptic at  the  95.9%  CL [confidence  level]...a  systematic that is indeed  correlated  with  the  ecliptic  plane ...the  normals  to  these  four planes are aligned with the direction of the  cosmological dipole (and with the equinoxes)at a level inconsistent with Gaussian random, statistically isotropic skies at 99% CL”  (p. 5).

“Particularly puzzling are the alignments with solar system features.  CMB anisotropy  should  clearly not be correlated with our local habitat.  While the observed correlations seem to hint that there is contamination by a foreground or perhaps by the scanning  strategy of the telescope, closer  inspection reveals that there is no obvious way to  explain the observed correlations.

Moreover, if their explanation is that they are a foreground, then that will likely  exacerbate other anomalies that we will discuss in section IVB below.  Our studies  indicate that the observed alignments are with the ecliptic plane, with the equinox or with the CMB dipole, and not  with  the  Galactic  plane: the alignments of the quadrupole and octopole planes with the equinox/ecliptic/dipole directions are much  more significant than those for the Galactic plane.  Moreover, it is remarkably curious that it is precisely the ecliptic alignment that has been found on somewhat smaller scales using the power spectrum analyses of statistical isotropy."

(many more examples and quotes on page 6 of the paper)


John  Ralston  points  out  that  in  claiming  that the  dipole  is  cause  by  solar  motion,  the  claimants  are  “forgetting  there  is  an  unknown  cosmological  piece....By  an  apparently  random  accident  the  dipole  happens  to  lie  in  the  plane  of  the  ecliptic,  and  point  along  Virgo.  This is accepted with very little discussion, and nobody disbelieves the dipole.”

In  other  words,  attributing  the  dipole  to  a  movement  of  the  Earth  through  the  CMB  is  convenient enough, but it becomes a little too convenient when that movement is pointing to  Virgo,  which  just  happens  to  be  in  the  same  direction  as  the  “Axis  of  Evil.”  In  other  words, how can one set of multipoles (the quadrupole and octopole) be intrinsic, and yet the other multipole, the dipole, be extrinsic, when, in fact, both are pointing in the same direction?

Let’s  look  at  the  above  problem  in  another  way.  Big  Bang  cosmology  claims  that  the  dipole axis is created by the sun-earth system moving through the CMB, which creates a Doppler    blue    shift.    But    how    does    Big    Bang    cosmology    then    explain    the    quadrupole/octupole axis, which is very near to the dipole axis? It cannot be created by a movement  of  the  sun-earth  system  through  the  CMB  since,  obviously,  the  sun-earth  system cannot be going in one direction to create the dipole and, at the same time, going in another direction to create the quadrupole and octupole.


The  November  2013  paper  by  Copi,  Huterer,  Schwarz  and  Starkman  admits  that  “...the  Doppler  dipole  is  about  two  orders  of  magnitude  larger  than  the  expected  cosmological  CMB dipole.” In other words, the evidence shows that the dipole is not caused by solar motion.


(many more proofs on pgs. 24, 25, 26 of the same paper)


More details here:

http://www.debunkingdavidpalm.com/ddp/docs/Debunking%20Palm%20and%20MacAndrew%20on%20the%20CMB%20Evidence.pdf


The origin of the 3 K radiation:

http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/cosmic/index.html

http://www.spaceandmotion.com/cosmic-microwave-background-radiation.htm


Cosmic Wave Background: the best proof for the aether

http://www.aetherometry.com/Electronic_Publications/Science/abs-AS2v2B.php

The cosmic background microwave radiation as evidence
for cosmological creation of electrons with minimum kinetic energy
and for a minimum of cosmic ambipolar massfree energy

Correa PN, Correa AN
Exp Aetherom, Series 2, Vol. 2B, 17C:1-61 (April 2002)

The authors examine the microwave cosmic background radiation (CBR) - composed exclusively of LFOT photons - with aetherometric tools developed in the preceding reports, and the results demonstrate that, unlike what is held by the accepted neo-relativist interpretations of the CBR, its true mode lies - not at 7.35 cm and a frequency of 4.08GHz, but at 7.76 cm and a frequency of 3.861GHz. Still more disturbing is the fact that the conventionally accepted temperature distribution of the CBR blackbody is off by more than an order of magnitude with respect to the real and aetherometric temperature scale that is demanded by a Planckian quantization of the spectrum. The CBR temperature mode is found to lie between 0.1863 and 0.1853 degrees Kelvin. This fact alone is sufficient to dismantle any pretensions of (neo-)Relativity to actually and adequately understand the physical significance of the CBR and grasp the physical processes of its production - thus putting into serious doubt the validity of the so-called Big-Bang hypothesis.

But the results of the aetherometric analysis of the CBR blackbody cut still deeper into the Princeton Gnosis and its interpretation of the microwave CBR: a discrete set of LFOT photon bands is found to co-inhabit the near-smooth CBR distribution, and a microfunctional model is proposed for their manifestation as being indicative of the successive phase states of aether energy, as if these bands underlay the very changes in, and characteristics of, the known chemical phases of Matter. In accordance to this aetherometric model, the CBR photon mode is an indicator that most of the aether energy of the universe has a fluid lattice structure. Likewise, the limit discrete band of the CBR blackbody would suggest the existence of a limiting solid-state phase for the Aether lattice, below which all photon production would result simply from the harmonic decay of the kinetic energy of cosmological electrons. Moreover, our aetherometric analysis indicates that the near-smooth CBR distribution appears to be bimodal, with the main peak (the ordinary mode) lying at 16eV (at 3.861GHz), and the secondary peak at a higher energy of 26.5eV (at 6.4GHz), corresponding to the critical-state aetherometric microenergy constant c2T/NA.


The missing orbital Sagnac effect also proves that there are no galactic or orbital motions of the Earth:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1782182#msg1782182

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1784780#msg1784780


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 14, 2016, 09:49:50 AM
CHRISTOPH PFISTER ARCHIVE II

Christoph Pfister, one of the best researchers of the new radical chronology, discovered that there were NO HUMAN SETTLEMENTS PRIOR TO 1700 AD IN SWITZERLAND, and that all major gothic buildings (including the Bern cathedral) were built after 1730, and that all "medieval" documents kept at the Abbey Library were in fact forgeries belonging to the 18th century.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg998158#msg998158 (translation of each page from german to english is available with the help of google translate)


Here is Dr. Pfister's latest work, an extraordinary look at the history of the past four hundred years from a very different point of view (article is in English):

http://dillum.ch/html/manifesto_historical_criticism_ch.pfister_2016.htm


Another noted author, who is neither a flat earth believer, nor a new radical chronologist, has written about the impossible/fake details of Napoleon's biography:

"We are told Napoleon didn't attack England more directly because he didn't like water or something, but that is such a dodge. Napoleon went all the way to Russia through the snows. He sailed all the way to Egypt. Getting across the channel would have been child's
play next to that. If you want to read ridiculous misdirection sold as serious history, I recommend you read the Wikipedia page on Napoleon's planned invasion of England.

There we find this:

However, when Napoleon ordered a large-scale test of the invasion craft despite choppy weather and against the advice of his naval commanders such as Charles René Magon de Médine (commander of the flotilla's right wing), they were shown up as ill-designed for their task and, though Napoleon led rescue efforts in person, many men were lost.
If we are to believe this account by tenured historians, the French in the year 1800 did not know how to build boats capable of crossing the English Channel. But that contradicts other parts of the story, as when Napoleon went to Egypt in 1798. That section at Wikipedia begins:

After two months of planning, Bonaparte decided that France's naval power was not yet strong enough to confront the Royal Navy. He decided on a military expedition to seize Egypt and thereby undermine Britain's access to its trade interests in India.
So apparently France did have a navy, even in 1798. They did know how to build boats. When you see misdirection this pathetic, you know you are being pushed away from something big.

Napoleon was the first Corsican to graduate from the École Militaire in Paris. See, they admit he was a Corsican, not a Frenchman. However, we are being lied to as usual, since we are told he completed two years in the Academy in one year. With almost all the famous people we have studied, we have found similar claims. We have found lawyers who never graduated law school (Clarence Darrow), and prominent clergymen who never graduated or even went to divinity school (Samuel Parris). I should think it would be impossible to graduate from a prominent 2-year military academy in one year, since
the courses are set and are strenuous as they are. It would be like graduating from West Point in two years. I am not aware that anyone has ever done that.

In 1785 Napoleon was commissioned as a second lieutenant. In the four years from 1785 to 1789, Napoleon had two years leave. Really? Is that how a commission works? No. For instance, if you graduate from West Point, you are commissioned for five years, with no extended leave. Any leave you are granted will be for a matter of days.

The next stupid story is the Siege of Toulon, where Napoleon was promoted from Captain to Brigadier General at the age of 24. This reminds us of the made-up bio of George Armstrong Custer, which I pulled apart recently. They keep recycling these asinine stories, since they found most people would believe them.

For example, although Napoleon had allegedly been demoted from his rank of general for refusing to fight in the Vendée, after the Vendémiaire he was promoted to Commander of the Interior and was General of the entire Army of Italy. Neither the former nor the latter makes any sense. Generals do not refuse a major assignment without a court martial. Napoleon wouldn't have just “had his name removed from a list of generals”, he would have been kicked out the army and probably jailed. Instead, we are told he was allowed to ride into Paris like a cowboy, overriding the commands of all generals present. When Napoleon arrived, the Republicans were allegedly outnumbered 30,000 to 5,000, and the generals Menou, Despierres, and Verdiere had all balked, refusing orders from the Convention to fight. Napoleon allegedly saved the day by bringing in 40 cannons which Menou told him were nearby in Port Neuilly. That makes no sense, since Menou could have brought them in just as easily as Napoleon. What were 40 cannons doing parked in the fields west of Paris, when 30,000 men were coming in from the south? Are we supposed to believe that Napoleon was the only one who thought they might be useful, or thought to grab them before the enemy did? Yes, it took great genius to figure
that out. It looks to me like this skirmish was either made up from whole cloth, or—if it happened— Napoleon was inserted into it later, with numbers and details being made up to increase his heroics.

But to return to Napoleon, I now find it useful to remember his quote from later in life:

I have fought sixty battles and I have learned nothing which I did not know at the beginning.

Look at Caesar; he fought the first like the last. I always thought it strange that a man could live his whole life and learn nothing about his field of work. As for Caesar fighting his last battle like the first, I have my doubts. I am pretty sure I could pull something from De Bello Gallico contradicting that, but it is hardly worth my time. Given what we are discovering about Napoleon, the quote becomes easier to believe. If all his battles were staged or faked, he wouldn't learn much about the art of war from them, would he?

For instance, in Napoleon's Italian campaign, the main goal seems to have been looting. He didn't need to defeat Austria to do that. In fact, France was outnumbered 4 to 3 by Allied troops. Despite that, and despite the fact that France had been at war with Piedmont for over three years, we are told Napoleon defeated Piedmont in two weeks. We are told Allied losses numbered 25,000. In two weeks? You have to be kidding me! The only way Napoleon could have killed 25,000 in two weeks is if he had been armed with nuclear weapons. Plus, that number is supposed to be half the Allied total troops. The
paragraph before, we are told Napoleon had 37,000 troops and his enemy 50,000. So the Allies lost half that in two weeks!

We are told Napoleon lost 6,000 in this exchange, so that takes the French army down to about 31,000. But after fighting the major battle of Lodi, Napoleon suddenly has 50,000 men. Where did the reinforcements come from? We were just told the paragraph before that Bonaparte had no chance of gaining reinforcements as the Republican war effort was being concentrated on the massive offensives planned on the Rhine. Nonetheless, with this swelled army, he moved south, besieging Mantua and then occupying and looting Tuscany and the Papal States. Next, he turned back north and with 20,000 men defeated 50,000 Austrians under Field Marshall Wurmser.

But wait. When Napoleon headed south, he had 50,000. He suffered no defeats and returned north with only 20,000? Where did the other 30,000 disappear to? Were they vacationing in Sicily? And we have the same problem with the Austrian numbers. I thought they had just lost 25,000, half their total force. Where did they find another 25,000 so fast? And after the battle, the bad math continues, as Wurmser is defeated, but in defeat leaves with more men than he came in with. The Austrians were
defeated, but nonetheless moved forward to Mantua, to relieve the siege there. We are told they left 45,000 behind to defend the Alps while taking the main body of the army to Mantua. Hold on. So the main body of the Austrian army must be greater than 45,000, otherwise they wouldn't call it the main body. Which means the Austrians have suddenly swelled to about 100,000, after months of losses.

Napoleon then devastated the Austrians again at Rovereto and Bassano, reducing that army to 12,000. But since they must have entered the battles with about 50,000, we are being told they just lost 38,000 in those two battles. A couple of months later, Napoleon inflicted another 14,000 casualties at the battle of Rivoli. Which should have reduced the Austrian army to -2,000. But somehow the Austrians just kept inventing soldiers.

We are told Napoleon captured 150,000 prisoners during his Italian campaign.
Right. And where did he house all these people while he was moving north and south through Italy? How did he feed them? And more to the point, where did they all come from? Remember, at the beginning of the campaign, the Allied forces numbered 50,000. So we are supposed to believe he captured this entire army three times over?

Apparently, soldiers just spring up out of the earth in Italy, ready to be captured, killed, and then miraculously returned to life. In support of my theory that France and Austria agreed to divide Italy between them, we find more impossibilities in the campaign of 1797. In that campaign, we are told Napoleon advanced deep into Austrian territory after winning the battle of Tarvis in March. “Charles retreated to Vienna when he heard Napoleon was coming.” Really, does that sound logical? The Austrians fought like dogs in Italy, when nothing was at stake, but turned tail and ran when Napoleon advanced on their homeland? Plus, if Napoleon was winning with such ease, why would he accept a treaty for peace? Why not continue on in to Vienna and capture it? Why not loot it?
Instead, we are told Napoleon advanced to within 100 km of Vienna and the Austrians sued for peace.

But we have an even greater problem here, one no one has seemed to notice. The battle of Tarvis was allegedly in March. Napoleon needed to cross the Alps to get there, which means we are supposed to believe he took his entire army over the Alps in February. But the passes aren't open in February.

Next, we must analyze the expedition to Egypt. In preparation, we are told Napoleon was elected a member of the French Academy of Sciences. Based on what? He had spent one year at a military academy and the rest of his life fighting fake wars. What did he know about science? He was 29 and probably didn't know the first thing about science.

Of course Napoleon took Alexandria with almost no loss. Despite the French not knowing how to build boats capable of crossing the English channel, Napoleon somehow sailed 50,000 men across the entire Mediterranean, “eluding the British Navy”. Rumors became rife as 40,000 soldiers and 10,000 sailors were gathered in French Mediterranean
ports. A large fleet was assembled at Toulon: 13 ships of the line, 14 frigates, and 400 transports. To avoid interception by the British fleet under Nelson, the expedition's target was kept secret.

Really? Do you think you can keep something like that secret? You think the British didn't have spies? Besides, keeping the target secret would have been meaningless. The British wouldn't need to know where they were going, just where they were.
Napoleon evaded the British fleet all the way across the Mediterranean, despite stopping to conquer Malta. He then landed them all simultaneously in Egyptian port, and immediately destroyed the Egyptian army. The Egyptians lost 2,000 while the French lost 29. Although they admit that Nelson destroyed the French fleet a month later in the Battle of the Nile, Napoleon allegedly remained in the East and led an army of 13,000 against Damascus. Which brings up the question, “How did they get there?” Are these 13,000 supposed to be the remnants of the 50,000 in Egypt? If so, Napoleon must have been an idiot. Despite losing 37,000 men, he continued on undeterred. And if so, why did the English allow them to march up the coast and raid these coastal towns? The English would not have wanted the French moving in that area and could easily have destroyed them, as was proved just a few months earlier. That is why the French hadn't tried this before: they were afraid of getting trapped in Middle East with no way out. Even more to the point, why did the Sultan allow them to do so? Selim III was an ally of the French at the time, and had to be since he was already threatened by Austria,
England, and Russia. We are told he declared war on France after this attack by Napoleon, but if Napoleon had really landed 50,000 men in Egypt a few months earlier, the Sultan would have been aware of that immediately and would have moved troops into Palestine. There is no way Napoleon would have been allowed to march uncontested up that coast.

In fact, the historians admit the Sultan moved against Cairo even before Napoleon moved north. We are told the Sultan had 38,000 men in two armies marching south. There were an additional 42,000 Arabs coming from surrounding areas to back him up. Nonetheless, Napoleon somehow ignored this combined force of 80,000 and moved north with only 13,000. To explain this, we are supposed to believe Napoleon simply avoided the Sultan's 80,000, moving around them to reach Syria.

At no point does the French campaign start making sense, and I now assume it is all fiction. Such a campaign would have been suicide for any involved, so we must assume it never happened. We see this again in the return of Napoleon to France afterwards. We are told he returned on the frigate Muiron, with three other ships as escort. What is not explained is how these four ships survived many months in port in Egypt, with tens of thousands of enemies abroad, British and Arab. We are told Napoleon must have bribed the British fleet to leave him alone, but even that assumption ignores all the more important questions, the first being what happened to his 50,000 troops? How did they get back? Swim? Walk? We are told he left them in Cairo with General Kléber, but the story ends there. What of the 80,000 Turks and other Arabs descending upon Egypt? Did they just evaporate?

Actually, the historians have manufactured an answer to that as well. Kléber allegedly attacked 60,000 Turks with a force of 10,000 at the Battle of Heliopolis, utterly defeating them and retaking Cairo. Right. Being a prominent freemason, Kléber then opened a Masonic Temple in Cairo, serving as first master of the Isis Lodge. Soon after (1800), Kléber was allegedly stabbed to death by a Syrian student posing as a beggar. That is certainly faked to give Kléber an exit, but in any case it begs the question, “and what then?” Well, we are told the French were defeated by the British and the French soldiers
were taken back to France on British ships. If you believe that you will believe anything.

The manufactured wars after the coup also continued, with Napoleon going back to Italy to pretend to fight the Austrians again. And again, the numbers are absurd. At the battle of Marengo on June 14, 1800, the Austrians—after winning the morning and afternoon battles—suddenly got routed after 5pm in mysterious circumstances, losing half of their 30,000 men in a matter of hours. That's right, initial numbers were around 30,000, and the Austrians reported 14,000 casualties. So Napoleon either had nuclear weapons or this is all just fiction. As Chandler points out, Napoleon spent almost a year getting the Austrians out of Italy in his first campaign; in 1800, it took him only a month to achieve the same goal. Yes, and no one found that suspicious? Actually, as we see, it took him about six hours. And again, his crossing of the Alps is equally suspicious, since he is said to have crossed in the early spring. At the time, the passes of the Alps were commonly closed until June. Even now, the major highways over the Alps can be closed well into June; but in 1800 they were in the middle of what is called the Little Ice Age. In some years, the Alps were impassable all summer. Whoever composed these stories knew
very little about most things, including warfare, weather, and everything else.

The next leg of the war is equally risible. Napoleon attacked Austria with 210,000 men, but England despite being a main part of the coalition against France—did nothing. With the entire army of France marching through Germany, England and Sweden could have come down and captured Paris with no effort. Remember, this war was basically France against everyone—except maybe Spain. But England politely left France alone as Napoleon marched every available soldier east. Beyond that, Austria also politely split its army three ways, sending 95,000 under Archduke Charles to Italy—although nothing
was going on in Italy. To answer this, we are told Masséna led 50,000 to Italy, while 30,000 were left at Boulogne to prevent an English attack. Another 20,000 were sent to Naples, as a feint. But that makes the French army 310,000. Even if that is true, it only leaves 30,000 to guard France from the north, west, and south. In a war of France against everyone, it would be the height of foolishness for Napoleon to have moved 210,000 men into Germany.

You will tell me England did not leave France alone: Nelson destroyed the French fleet at Trafalgar while Napoleon was marching. Yes, but England did nothing to follow that up. Remember, Napoleon had been trying to draw Nelson off so that he could invade England. But we are supposed to believe Nelson not only drew the French fleet off, he utterly destroyed it. That should have left France open for invasion, right? So why no invasion by England and Sweden? I suggest to you it because Nelson's attack was scripted. They couldn't have France left completely alone while Napoleon was off in
Austria, so they manufactured this sea battle. That made it appear England wasn't completely sitting on its hands. However, the question remains, “Why a great sea battle like this and then leave France alone? Why not an invasion?”

In southern Germany, we are told Napoleon moved his huge army of 210,000 so fast it was able to outflank an army 1/10th its size on its own ground. Not believable. Even in Germany, Austria split its force, having 70,000 to work with but splitting into a smaller army of 23,000, which Napoleon surrounded. Ask yourself this: if you are an Austrian general, would you go out to meet an army of 210,000 with an army of 70,000, much less 23,000? No, since you know the Russians are coming to reinforce you, you would back up to meet them. Vienna being your home base, you would back up all the way to Vienna and wait for them. Instead, we are told these idiotic Austrians split their forces and moved forward all the way to Ulm, where they were almost guaranteed to get cut off and surrounded.

The story makes no sense on Napoleon's side, either. We are told that on his way to Ulm, he captured 60,000 Austrian troops. Why would he do that? Capturing enemy troops just slows you down, since you have to do something with them. You can't just put them in a bag. And yet while he is capturing all these people, we are told he is also racing across the countryside so fast the Austrians can't even keep up with him. The two claims are contradictory. You can't race a huge army across foreign territory and capture 60,000 prisoners at the same time."



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 14, 2016, 12:24:23 PM
NUCLEAR ENERGY FILE

From one of the most prestigious physicists of the second half of the 20th century, Harold Puthoff:

Classical physics tells us that if we think of an atom as a miniature solar system with electronic planets orbiting a nuclear sun, then it should not exist. The circling electrons SHOULD RADIATE AWAY their energy like microscopic radio antennas and spiral into the nucleus. To resolve this problem, physicists had to introduce a set of mathematical rules, called quantum mechanics, to describe what happens. Quantum theory endows matter and energy with both wave and particle-like characteristics. It also restrains electrons to particular orbits, or energy levels, so they cannot radiate energy unless they jump from one orbit to another.
Measuring the spectral lines of atoms verifies that quantum theory is correct. Atoms appear to emit or absorb packets of light, or photons, with a wavelength that exactly coincides with the difference between its energy levels as predicted by quantum theory. As a result, the majority of physicists are content simply to use quantum rules that describe so accurately what happens in their experiments.

Nevertheless, when we repeat the question: "But why doesn't the electron radiate away its energy?", the answer is: "Well, in quantum theory it JUST DOESN'T". It is at this point that not only the layman but also some physicists begin to feel that someone is not playing fair. Indeed, much of modern physics is based on theories couched in a form that works but they do not answer the fundamental questions of what gravity is, why the Universe is the way it is, or how it got started anyway.

Bohr had no right to propose a postulate WHICH DID NOT INCLUDE THE SOURCE OF THE ENERGY REQUIRED FOR THE ELECTRONS TO CONTINUE TO ORBIT AROUND THE NUCLEUS. The assumptions made by both Rutherford and Bohr are dealt with in the Case against the Nuclear Atom by Dr. Dewey Larson, and are shown to be dead wrong.

http://www.reciprocalsystem.com/cana/index.htm (http://www.reciprocalsystem.com/cana/index.htm)
http://www.reciprocalsystem.com/cana/cana02.htm (http://www.reciprocalsystem.com/cana/cana02.htm)
http://www.reciprocalsystem.com/cana/cana03.htm (http://www.reciprocalsystem.com/cana/cana03.htm)
http://www.reciprocalsystem.com/cana/cana04.htm (http://www.reciprocalsystem.com/cana/cana04.htm)
http://www.reciprocalsystem.com/cana/cana05.htm (http://www.reciprocalsystem.com/cana/cana05.htm)
http://www.reciprocalsystem.com/cana/cana01.htm (http://www.reciprocalsystem.com/cana/cana01.htm)

W. Pauli introduced the notion of the neutrino, BASED TOTALLY ON THE ORBITING ELECTRON MODEL OF BOHR; here are some comments:

THE ELUSIVE NEUTRINO: In my opinion the neutrino concept is the work of a relativistic accountant who tries to balance his books by making a fictitious entry. He does not recognize the existence of the aether and so, when accounting for something where an energy transaction involves an energy transfer to or from the aether, he incorporates an entry under the heading 'neutrinos'.



Since the 1980s technological advances such as the the scanning tunneling microscope (STM) have made it possible to view, and even manipulate, the individual atoms on the surfaces of solid matter. Such images are widely available, but each one takes a considerable amount of time to produce by moving the tip of the probe slowly back and forth across the target, and in every case the atoms depicted are clearly defined, as in the image below, which is a representation of the image of atoms at the surface of a sample of solid matter.

(http://www.romunpress.co.nz/images/ElectronMicroscopeFig1.jpg)

Such images, when first produced, finally confirmed beyond all doubt the existence of atoms as individual, spherical structures, which in solids are in close proximity to others and arranged in the rows or patterns that could be expected to form for a conglomeration of larger spherical objects such a balls or oranges. But the most striking result is that there is no evidence of discontinuity in these images, and even more significantly there is no evidence of the assumed independent motion or oscillation of atoms in this state.

If as kinetic theory suggests, each of the atoms of a solid are oscillating eternally within a set volume of empty space separating it from adjacent atoms, then instead of the clearly defined images of rows of spherical atoms, the images of the atoms would be indistinct and blurred.

Any independent observer would accordingly conclude that in this state of matter atoms do not have any characteristic of independent motion and that no empty space or vacuum exists, between them, eminent physicists however, instead of accepting these visual images as representing the reality of atomic interactions in solids, cling to current scientific dogma and reject these clear results, inventing vague and patently unsatisfactory reasons as to why these empirical results do not contradict the hypothetical concepts of kinetic motion and discontinuity.



http://web.archive.org/web/20050206091142/http://luloxbooks.co.uk/findings1.htm (http://web.archive.org/web/20050206091142/http://luloxbooks.co.uk/findings1.htm)

A fascinating look at the fact that J. Chadwick discovered ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in 1932, NO PARTICLE CALLED THE NEUTRON.



No atoms had even remotely been seen visually until 1985, when IBM Research Almaden Labs was the first to use an electron tunneling microscope to actually photograph the organization of molecules of germanium in an ink-blot. Here what we see from this experiment are indistinct, fuzzy spherical objects that appear to have some non-spherical geometric qualities to their shape and are in an extremely geometric pattern of organization, which was definitely a surprise for conventional science. How could the random nature of atoms described by the Heisenberg principle, ever result in such an ordered pattern? Perhaps the probability distributions are not 'distributions' at all.

(http://www.blazelabs.com/pics/atomsibm.jpg)

Furthermore, when quantum physicists have studied the electrons of the atom, they have observed that they are not actually points at all, not particulate in nature, but rather form smooth, teardrop-shaped clouds where the narrowest ends of the drops converge upon a very tiny point in the center.

There are no Electron Orbits! Bohr's model, which started the notion of electrons traveling around the nucleus like planets has misled a lot of people and scientists. If you have learned such an idea, forget about it immediately. Instead, all calculations and all experiments show that no satellite-like orbital motion exists in the normal atom. Instead, there are standing wave patterns, very similar indeed to the polar plots of antenna radiation patterns.



http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=36931.msg919169#msg919169 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=36931.msg919169#msg919169) (the tremendous mistakes committed by both Rutherford and Bohr)

The Rydberg formula for the spectral emission lines of atomic hydrogen is an effect of the aether vortex theory of atoms, and cannot be linked with an impossible hypothesis created by N. Bohr, who NEVER demonstrated the energy source for the orbiting electrons.

In point, Bohr suggested a means preventing the atom exploding when charges neutralise. Although the concept of a central positively charged nucleus surrounded by orbiting negatively charged electrons seemed to remove the acceptance problems in Thomson's model, explaining the theory of octaves by deception, it won some academic acceptance. Many found the model very difficult to use, having inherent real world animation problems. By 1912, Rutherford's education, his acceptance of the Bohr construct and his subsequent experiments on thin metal foils, led him to introduce this construct as his revolutionary atomic model; where the negative electrons orbit the positive nucleus. On paper, the static atomic model seems to satisfy the chemist's bonding requirements, placing the bonding electrons in the atom's outer orbital shell. Unfortunately, as Chemical theory promoted the fact of an indivisible atom, Rutherford's atomic model won popular appeal through default, due to the fact that the daily news carried various headlines stating in bold type, 'Rutherford splits the atom.' Because Chemistry got it so wrong, gullible people assumed that Rutherford's other claims must be right, and therefore, electrons do orbit the nucleus. Enthusiastically, the youth of the day accepted the assumption as an assertion of fact, and with these preconditioned beliefs, many knowledge viruses spread and mutated.


HIROSHIMA: BEFORE AND AFTER

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1303231#msg1303231 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1303231#msg1303231)

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1303232#msg1303232 (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1303232#msg1303232) (PART 2)


NUCLEAR POWER STATION SOURCE OF ENERGY: DEXTROROTATORY ETHER

The Oranur experiment of W. Reich showed what the source of the radiation is: the ether.

Reich moved from New York to an area just outside the town of Rangeley in rural southern Maine in the early nineteen fifties. Here he built a new home and laboratory personally designed to integrate home and laboratory into a single, brilliantly practical building, now the home of the Wilhelm Reich Museum. Another laboratory was added soon after for students. This structure was the setting for the so-called Oranur Experiment, a chilling example of the accumulator’s undeniable ability to concentrate energy. The experiment called for the placing of a very small amount of radium in an accumulator, the unexpected result of which was to toxify a surprisingly large area of southern Maine surrounding his home and laboratory, one that took several months to dissipate.

A nuclear reactor is nothing more than a gigantic Reich/Tesla ether box; see the message posted here about telluric currents: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1255899#msg1255899 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1255899#msg1255899) (the actual cause of "global warming"; the intensity of the dextrorotatory currents has increased greatly, the ice sheets are NOT melting faster, they are disintegrating more swiftly).


Dr. Gustav Le Bon and his work on telluric currents/radiation:

Another researcher, a contemporary of Tesla, succeeded in advancing the "external bombardment" theory of radioactivity with new experimental proofs. Dr. Gustav Le Bon, a Belgian physicist, examined and compared ultraviolet rays and radioactive energies with great fascination. Concluding from experiments that energetic bombardments were directly responsible for radioactivity, he was able to perform manipulations of the same. He succeeded in diminishing the radioactive output of certain materials by simple physical treatments. Heating measurably slowed the radioactive decay of radium chloride, a thing considered implausible by physicists.


In each case, Le Bon raised the radium temperature until it glowed red-hot. The same retardation of emanations were observed. He found it possible to isolate the agent, which was actually radioactive in the radium lattice, a glowing gaseous "emanation" which could be condensed in liquid air. Radium was thereafter itself de-natured. Being exposed to the external influence of bombarding rays, the radium again became active. The apparent reactivation of radium after heating required twenty days before reaching its maximum value.

Le Bon stated that the reason why all matter was spontaneously emanating rays was not because they were contaminated with heavy radioactive elements. Ordinary matter was disintegrating into rays because it was being bombarded by external rays of a peculiar variety.

Le Bon disagreed when physicists began isolating the heavy metals as "the only radioactive elements. He had already distinctly demonstrated for them that "all matter was to a degree radioactive". He was first to write books on the conversion of ordinary matter into rays, an activity he claimed was constant. He showed that this flux from ordinary matter could be measured. Le Bon stated that the reason why all matter was spontaneously emanating rays was not because they were contaminated with heavy radioactive elements. Ordinary matter was disintegrating.


The external rays which disintegrate matter are telluric currents of dextrorotatory spin.

Tesla stated that if any radioactive element were to be shielded from these rays, the material would cease to be radioactive.

Radioactive materials are the dense targets of external energetic streams.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 15, 2016, 11:24:34 AM
IMPLOSION OF THE ATOM

(http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/bbss3.jpg)

Few scientists understand and know that there are plenty of elements to be found before Hydrogen.

HYDROGEN ATOM: 18 SUBQUARKS - 9 LAEVOROTATORY AND 9 DEXTROROTATORY subquarks

A proton is made up of NINE laevorotatory subquarks - an electron is actually comprised of NINE dextrorotatory subquarks (called now preons).

However, modern science has mistakenly named a SINGLE dextrorotatory subquark as an electron and has ascribed THE TOTAL charge of the NINE corresponding subquarks as the total negative charge of a single electron, thus confusing the whole matter.

This constitutes the ordinary state of matter: protons.

However, we can tap into the tremendous power of the atom, by accessing the etheric states of matter: baryons, mesons, quarks and subquarks (bosons are astral particles).

This can be achieved as follows: by sound and double torsion.

IMPLOSION OF THE ATOM = going from the ordinary state of matter to that of etheric state of matter (from protons to baryons and beyond)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1401101#msg1401101

One of Tesla's best friends, Walter Russell, tried to systematize the various elements made up of baryons, mesons, and quarks, and even named them.

Here is Walter Russell's ether-matter periodic table:

http://www.meta-synthesis.com/webbook/35_pt/russell_1.gif

http://www.meta-synthesis.com/webbook/35_pt/russell_2.gif

These elements are as real as all the others.

As an example from alchemy, we can say that the M-state or Ormus level of metals is reached when a normal atom (the groups of 18 tachyons/subquarks) is imploded into two groups of 9 tachyons, that is, we would reach the baryon level.


Even fewer scientists and researchers into the UFO phenomenon understand that an UFO can only fly/travel on a stationary (above the flat surface of the Earth) Earth.

Either by employing double torsion gyros (implosion of the mercury atom), method used by the Vril society, or simply utilizing the Biefeld-Brown effect (on board dextrorotatory reactor supplying the necessary power), an UFO will be shielded from terrestrial gravity (especially in the case of using double torsion mercury gyros).

Given the supposed 29 km/s orbital speed of the Earth, an UFO would disappear instantly from view, and would never be able to reach Earth again; that is, no UFOs would be able to fly in the heliocentrical scenario.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1433567#msg1433567



Title: Re: Alternative Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 19, 2016, 12:12:47 AM

I predict, therefore, that there is a narrow passage from the top of the djed apex all to the way to the top of the pyramid. The “secret” passage from the top of the pyramid which leads to the queen chamber has already been discovered a few years ago.

Two more secret passages will be discovered: leading from the queen’s chamber to the djed apex, and the other one descending from the djed apex to the base.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-news/two-mysterious-secret-chambers-discovered-9064891

http://www.iflscience.com/editors-blog/scans-reveal-two-new-hidden-rooms-in-the-great-pyramid-of-giza/

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 20, 2016, 04:09:08 AM
NUCLEAR FUSION TOKAMAK: POSITRON-PREON ETHER STRINGS

(https://www.psfc.mit.edu/files/psfc/styles/researchtopicimage/public/imce/research/topics/alcator_c-mod_1000x450.jpg?itok=gNPMdhVj)

Tokamak = fusion reactor using magnetic confinement devices, in the shape of a torus, which contains plasma at very high temperatures (running in the millions of degrees)

http://www.emc2-explained.info/Emc2/Fusion.htm (explains the chemistry/quantum physics behind fusion)

https://www.britannica.com/technology/fusion-reactor

http://www.computerworld.com/article/3132208/emerging-technology/mit-reactor-sets-nuclear-fusion-record-on-the-day-its-closed-down.html

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nucene/fusion.html


A proton is made up of three quarks: two of them are laevorotatory, the other dextrorotatory.

A neutron consists of three quarks: two of them are dextrorotatory, the other laevorotatory.


Ether hydrogen group, subquark classification:

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr02.htm


Quantum ether physics of subquarks:

https://web.archive.org/web/20120128042636/http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_09_4_phillips.pdf (Dr. Stephen Phillips, UCLA, Cambridge)


As we have seen already, a nuclear reactor is nothing more than a dextrorotatory telluric wave accumulator. Since nuclear physicists have no idea about ether quantum physics, they have implemented a faulty design: instead of using more ether to increase the level of kinetic energy/radioactivity, they use more of the radioactive materials to reach the same result.


Things do not get any better with the nuclear fusion tokamak design.

The fusion reactions produce positrons (laevorotatory subquarks); these in turn will react immediately with preons (dextrorotatory subquarks, fractional charges of electrons).

Contrary to what modern quantum physics tells us, a positron and a preon WILL NOT annihilate each other: they will simply retake their place in the ether string lattice.

Thus, a tokamak will act as a gigantic cavity resonator, producing positrons and preons which will increase the density of the ether strings confined to the torus; this is where the extra energy comes from.

But the actual design, using highly expensive gyrotrons to heat the plasma, not to mention the use of very high magnetic fields, to produce in theory 1 Gigawatt of energy, does not take into account the science of ether physics.

Let us remember that Nikola Tesla was able to produce ball lightning spheres (3 cm diameter), each measuring 1 Megawatt of energy, very easily.

This is the real science of cold fusion, ball lightning physics; just using palladium hydride together with current, and then waiting days or even weeks for something to happen, means that the scientists who developed these techniques have no idea how an atom works at the quantum level.


A tokamak will produce a huge amount of positrons which will react immediately with preons, thus increasing the density of ether strings in the magnetically confined torus.

https://web.archive.org/web/20170808100451/http://www.ccfe.ac.uk/assets/Documents/PRLVOL90p135004.pdf (Positron Creation and Annihilation in Tokamak Plasmas with Runaway Electrons)


Let us remember how easily the Tibetan monks created 52 KW of energy, using musical instruments:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1388219#msg1388219

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1569140#msg1569140

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 22, 2016, 11:15:28 PM
ON ANTIQUARKS

There are about a dozen subquark triplets shapes possible: half of these have been mistakenly identified as "anti"quarks:

https://books.google.ro/books?id=5Qgfx4bXkT4C&pg=PR7&dq=esp+of+quarks+phillips&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=esp%20of%20quarks%20phillips&f=false

(pg. 61-65)


https://web.archive.org/web/20120303052100/http://smphillips.8m.com/pdfs/ESP_of_Quarks.pdf

(pg. 76-77, fig. 5-10 to 5-12)


The lines which unite the subquarks to form a quark are made up of bosons, and come in various geometrical shapes.

Therefore, there are no antiprotons: the particle accelerator experiments have simply detected the quarks whose subquark lines of force have more complex geometrical shapes.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 23, 2016, 03:38:38 AM
SUPERCONDUCTOR MEISSNER EFFECT

When a material makes the transition from the normal to superconducting state, it actively excludes magnetic fields from its interior; this is called the Meissner effect.

A mixed state Meissner effect occurs with Type II materials.


(http://cdn.phys.org/newman/gfx/news/hires/2015/whatisasuper.jpg)

http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=22671&sid=6d86abee6302644d55097d5ff99d75e5#p22684


Ether/superconductor temperature:

http://bourabai.ru/conductivity-e.htm (Temperature of the Substance, Electrons and Ether section)


Flaws in the classical superconductor theories:

http://phys.org/news/2016-04-physicists-flaws-superconductor-theory.html


(http://newt.phys.unsw.edu.au/~jw/graphics/levitation.GIF)

As the temperature of the superconductor reaches the level of temperature of the ether, the subquark lattice state of the material will approach that of the baryon state of ether of the atom.

This is the reason for the superconductors having currents passing through them with no resistance.

At the baryon stage of the ether, the laevorotatory subquarks, or positrons, will start to manifest their antigravitational properties, inducing the ether strings/telluric waves/subquark field to increase their density next to the material.

This in turn will cause any magnet which is placed with the emissive vortex next to the superconductor, to be repulsed by the emissive vortices of the activated positrons (laevorotatory subquarks), not to mention the higher density of the ether strings which will be found next to the superconductor.

This is the Meissner effect.


Tesla was able to transmit energy and signals, at room temperature, using a different method: he simply injected the currents directly into the longitudinal boson waves which make up the subquark strings (transverse radio waves).

To achieve the state of superconductivity at room temperature, the material has to reach at least the baryon state of ether, either through the Biefeld-Brown effect, or double torsion, or more preferably acoustic/sound activation of the positrons.


Superconducting levitation:

http://www.mn.uio.no/fysikk/english/research/groups/amks/superconductivity/levitation/


(http://www.mn.uio.no/fysikk/english/research/groups/amks/superconductivity/levitation/lines.gif)

(https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--fx09P8M0--/18lpr771umpnujpg.jpg)

Mixed Meissner effect, with flux pinning, for a type II superconductor


http://www.calpoly.edu/~rbrown/levitation.html

http://phys.org/news/2011-10-quantum-levitating-video-viral.html

http://no.mosem.eu/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/MOSEM%C2%B2_Moebius_poster.pdf

http://io9.gizmodo.com/5850729/quantum-locking-will-blow-your-mind--but-how-does-it-work
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 24, 2016, 04:29:02 AM
NUCLEAR FUSION TOKAMAK: POSITRON-PREON ETHER STRINGS II

Mainstream quantum physicists are beginning to understand that positrons and preons do not annihilate each other:

http://www.epola.co.uk/epola_org/

http://www.cartesio-episteme.net/ep8/electron_positron_sea.pdf (The Cubic Lattice Solution section, page 6)


The 1014 positrons created in a tokamak are not annihilated in collisions with preons; on the contrary, it is these positrons which provide the extra energy observed in the tokamak plasma experiments.


Every science student is taught that the indivisible unit of charge is that of the electron. But 2 years ago, scientists found that charge sometimes shatters into "quasi-particles" that have one-third the fundamental charge. And in this week's issue of Nature, researchers announce they have spotted one-fifth-charge quasi-particles--a decisive finding suggesting that its time to change any physics textbooks still claiming that electron charge is indivisible.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/quarter-electrons-may-enable-quantum-computer/

https://str.llnl.gov/str/Laughlin.html

https://web.archive.org/web/20130621182913/http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/1999/05/19-01.html



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 25, 2016, 02:02:01 AM
FRACTIONAL QUANTUM HALL EFFECT


https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1998/stormer-lecture.pdf

Horst Stormer, Nobel lecture:

The fractional quantum Hall effect is a very counterintuitive physical phenomenon. It implies, that many electrons, acting in concert, can create new particles having a charge smaller than the charge of any individual electron. This is not the way things are supposed to be. A collection of objects may assemble to form a bigger object, or the parts may remain their size, but they don’t create anything smaller. If the new particles were doubly-charged, it wouldn’t be so paradoxical — electrons could ‘just stick together” and form pairs. But fractional charges are very bizarre, indeed. Not only are they smaller than the charge of any constituent electron, but they are exactly 1/3 or 1/5 or 1/7, etc. of an electronic charge, depending on the conditions under which they have been prepared. And yet we know with certainty, that none of these electrons has split up into pieces.

Fractional charge is the most puzzling of the observations, but there are others. Quantum numbers — usually integers or half-integers -— turn out to be also fractional, such as 2/5, 4/9, and 11/7, or even 5/23. Moreover, bits of magnetic field can get attached to each electron, creating yet other objects. Such composite particles have properties very different from those of the electrons. They sometimes seem to be oblivious to huge magnetic fields and move in straight lines, although any bare electron would orbit on a very tight circle. Their mass is unrelated to the mass of the original electron but arises solely from interactions with their neighbors. More so, the attached magnetic field changes drastically the characteristics of the particles, from fermions to bosons and back to fermions, depending on the field strength. And finally, some of these composites are conjectured to coalesce and form pairs, vaguely similar to the formation of electron pairs in superconductivity. This would provide yet another astounding new state with weird properties. All of these strange phenomena occur in two-dimensional electron systems at low temperatures exposed to a high magnetic field — only electrons and a magnetic field.


This is the current state of modern quantum physics, where the observed phenomena cannot be explained at all, without a proper understanding of subquark ether physics.


Since the temperature of the material (superconductor) will approach the temperature of the ether, the proton/neutron/electron lattice will attain the first state of ether, the baryon level of the implosion of the atom.

An electron has nine subdivisions, called preons, or dextrorotatory subquarks.

A proton also has nine subdivisions, called positrons, or laevorotatory subquarks.

(http://www.weare1.us/Babbitt%20color.jpg)

A subquark consists of some 14 billion bosons and antibosons, arranged in strings.

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr01.htm

The Anu has--as observed so far--three proper motions, i.e., motions of its own, independent of any imposed upon it from outside. It turns incessantly upon its own axis. spinning like a top; it describes a small circle with its axis, as though the axis of the spinning top moved in a small circle; it has a regular pulsation, a contraction and expansion, like the pulsation of the heart. When a force is brought to bear upon it, it dances up and down, flings itself wildly from side to side, performs the most astonishing and rapid gyrations, but the three fundamental motions incessantly persist. If it be made to vibrate, as a whole, at the rate which gives any one of the seven colours, the whorl belonging to that colour glows out brilliantly.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 26, 2016, 12:03:02 AM
ELECTRON NEMATICITY

Nematicity: electron clouds in superconducting materials can snap into an aligned and directional order

http://phys.org/news/2016-02-physicists-properties-superconductivity.html

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1307/1307.3526.pdf

The nature of the normal state from which superconductivity emerges in unconventional
superconductors remains a mystery.



http://www.sciencealert.com/physicists-achieve-superconductivity-at-room-temperature


And yet, preon/positron nematicity was discovered over 100 years ago.

"An electric current brought to bear upon the Anu checks their proper motions, i.e., renders them slower; the Anu exposed to it arrange themselves in parallel lines, and in each line the heart-shaped depression receives the flow, which passes out through the apex into the depression of the next, and so on. The Anu always set themselves to the current. Fig. 4. In all the diagrams the heart-shaped body, exaggerated to show the depression caused by the inflow and the point caused by the outflow, is a single Anu."

(http://www.alliancesforhumanity.com/matter/matter_files/image016.jpg)


The effect of superconductivity on the hydrogen atom, described over 100 years ago:

"When the gaseous atom of Hydrogen is raised to the E4 level the wall of the limiting spheroid in which the bodies are enclosed, being composed of the matter of the gaseous kind, drops away and the six bodies are set free. They at once re-arrange themselves in two triangles, each enclosed by a limiting sphere; one sphere having a positive character, the other being negative. These form the Hydrogen particles of the lowest etheric plane, marked E4 (ether 4)."

(http://www.alliancesforhumanity.com/matter/matter_files/image003.jpg)

(ether 4 = baryon state of ether; ether 3 = meson state; ether 2 = quark state; ether 1 = subquark state)


http://www.smphillips.8m.com/occult-chemistry-11.html

(http://www.smphillips.8m.com/images/7-fold%20nature%20of%20spirillae.gif)

Unwinding the strings of the subquarks

"If one of these wires be taken away from the atom, and as it were untwisted from its peculiar spiral shape and laid out on a flat surface, it will be seen that it is a complete circle--a tightly twisted endless coil. This coil is itself a spiral containing 1,680 turns; it can be unwound, and it will then make a much larger circle. There are in each wire seven sets of such coils or spirillae, each finer than the preceding coil to which its axis lies at right angles. The process of unwinding them in succession may be continued until we have nothing but an enormous circle of the tiniest imaginable dots lying like pearls upon an invisible string. These dots are so inconceivably small that many millions of them are needed to make one ultimate physical atom.

Further probability is lent to this assumption by the remarkable fact that--if we assume one bubble to be what corresponds to an atom on the seventh or highest of our planes and then suppose the law of multiplication to begin its operation. so that 49 bubbles shall form the atom of the next or sixth plane, 2,401 that of the fifth. and so once find that the number indicated for the physical atom (49^6) corresponds almost exactly with the calculation based upon the actual counting of the coils."

bubble = boson

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr01.htm


Journey inside a boson:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1774536#msg1774536
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 26, 2016, 11:33:22 AM
GRANITE MONOLITH SUPERCONDUCTOR I

Few researchers have knowledge of the huge granite blocks of Sacsayhuaman (Peru) and Mount Shoria (Siberia) which well exceed in weight the monoliths of Lebanon (largest stone weighing 1,650 tons).

Gigantic stone turned upside down in Sacsayhuaman, Peru

Weight: 20,000 tons

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1833909#msg1833909

(http://www.messagetoeagle.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/upsidedownstarisinperu.jpg)

(http://files.el-libertario.webnode.es/200008201-5beec5ce80/Enorme%20piedra%20dada%20la%20vuelta;%20Sacsayhuaman.JPG)

The quarries for the stones are located 9 miles and 20 miles away, on the other side of a mountain range and a deep river gorge. Within a few hundred yards of the complex is a single stone that was carved from the mountainside, moved some distance, and then abandoned. The stone contains steps, platforms and depressions, probably intended as a part of the fortifications. It now sits upside-down, the size of a five-storey house.

http://www.ancient-wisdom.com/perusacsahuaman.htm

http://el-libertario.webnode.es/en/piedras-ciclopeas/ (the best collection of the cyclopic monoliths to be found around the world)


Cyclopic granite monoliths of Mount Shoria

Weight: at least 4,000 tons

(http://files.el-libertario.webnode.es/200008104-bd4bfbe477/piedras%20%20monte%20Shoria,%20PS%204.JPG)

(http://files.el-libertario.webnode.es/200008105-6babf6da16/piedras%20%20monte%20Shoria,%20PS%205.JPG)

(http://files.el-libertario.webnode.es/200008106-4ed5250c90/piedras%20%20monte%20Shoria,%20PS%206.JPG)

(http://files.el-libertario.webnode.es/200008109-47f7e4991e/piedras%20%20monte%20Shoria,%20PS%209.JPG)

http://files.el-libertario.webnode.es/200008107-9aac09bea7/piedras%20%20monte%20Shoria,%20PS%207.JPG

http://files.el-libertario.webnode.es/200008108-ec344ed2e9/piedras%20%20monte%20Shoria,%20PS%208.JPG


http://thetruthwins.com/archives/newly-found-megalithic-ruins-in-russia-contain-the-largest-blocks-of-stone-ever-discovered

http://earthepochs.blogspot.ro/2014/02/super-megaliths.html


The most recent theory regarding the huge monoliths in Lebanon is related to the works attributed to Marcus Vitruvius Pollio in which a certain kind of machinery is described that could be used to transport extremely heavy blocks of stones (the authors assume that the temple in Lebanon was built by the Romans).

However, the works of Vitruvius were forged during the Rennaisance:

https://books.google.ro/books?id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=fomenko+history+science&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=fomenko%20history%20science&f=false (pages 27-28)

No one can explain how the immense blocks of stones in Lebanon were transported half a mile uphill, and then raised and placed into position.

(http://files.el-libertario.webnode.es/200000284-198f71b181/Baalbek.JPG)

(http://files.el-libertario.webnode.es/200004181-68f4f6b794/Baalbek%205.JPG)


There is only one explanation possible: ball lightning technology (implosion of the atoms of the atoms of the granite monoliths to the baryon state of ether, superconductivity at room temperature).
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 27, 2016, 09:13:47 AM
GRANITE MONOLITH SUPERCONDUCTOR II

According to the local Aymara Indians, the megalithic complex at Tiahuanaco was built by Viracocha and his followers when they created a ‘heavenly fire’ that consumed the stones and enabled large blocks to be lifted by hand ‘as if they were cork’.

In 'ancient' Egypt, a rectangular stone was covered on 4 sides with wet papyrus. A specially carved wooden rod was struck against the uncovered stone face and removed. While holding the rod, the vibrations would continue to increase, at the greatest amplitude, the rod was reapplied to the exposed stone face and the energy from the rod would suffuse through the stone.

Ball Lightning, Paradox of Physics:

https://books.google.ro/books?id=OLbvX5UnxXoC&pg=PA8&dq=ball+lightning+mystery+of+physics&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=ball%20lightning%20mystery%20of%20physics&f=false

Ball lightning spheres were created in a lab (Dr. Kiril Chukanov), but a very high cost (over $100,000):

http://www.rexresearch.com/chukanov/chukanov.htm

http://pesn.com/2010/11/16/9501726_Chukanov_quantum_free_energy_heater_for_sale/

Moreover, these ball lightning objects consist of very hot plasma: Tesla was able to create these spheres (3 cm in diameter, 1 megawatt of energy each) at room temperature.


Here is the device used at Tiahuanaco, Luxor, Karnac, Lebanon, Mount Shoria, to levitate the immense blocks of granite (implosion of the atom to the first state of ether, the baryon state of superconductivity):

http://www.crystalinks.com/ptahdjed300.jpg

http://vbaras.com/images/ptah_logobox.jpg

Tuning fork + djed + ankh

The hollow tubes of the ankh become a cavity resonator creating the double torsion needed for the atoms inside to reach the baryon level, and thus attract the telluric waves, to form a ball lightning sphere which will encompass the ankh itself.


http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr01.htm

"In 100 "spirillae of the lowest order" there ought to be just 700 bubbles; so there are in the seven thinner, coloured wires, but in the three thicker wires there are 704. So the increase is at present 1 in 175. And the same curious little increase holds good in the relation of the different orders of spirillae."

Journey inside a boson:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1774536#msg1774536

The most mysterious feature of the pyramid of Gizeh is the groove (FA-MI interval) inside the Grand Gallery:

(http://thegreatpyramidofgiza.ca/@Giza$Grand%20Gallery$Chapter_files/image003.jpg)

By analogy, there will be a FA-MI interval at each subsequent increasing level (going from the boson itself, to the other more complex boson configurations, all the way to the subquark) to be overcome: this is the role played by the extra bosons observed.

The role of the FA-MI interval in vibrations:

http://www.ardue.org.uk/university/intro/octave.html


The ball lightning sphere (or the acoustic energy of the sound waves created, as in the tibetan levitation of granite monoliths) will provide the necessary energy to the atoms of the block of stone so that each subsequent FA - MI interval will be fulfilled.

The ultimate FA-MI interval, inside one of the two pyramids which make up a boson, will receive the sound wave energy so that the Queen's chamber, or the aether chamber, will be activated (extreme yang will turn into yin, the sound waves will fill the cavity completely, thus turning themselves into stillness/silence) creating the suction force necessary to bring into play the five element sequence of the second pyramid (https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1570956#msg1570956 ).
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 30, 2016, 07:04:32 AM
GRANITE MONOLITH SUPERCONDUCTOR III

The correct estimate for the weight of the granite monolith at Sacsahuaman is 20,000 tons.

(http://files.el-libertario.webnode.es/200008201-5beec5ce80/Enorme%20piedra%20dada%20la%20vuelta;%20Sacsayhuaman.JPG)

https://web.archive.org/web/20161030140034/http://www.noufors.com/Documents/Books,%20Manuals%20and%20Published%20Papers/Books%20in%20PDF%20Format/Erich%20von%20Daniken%20-%20Chariots%20Of%20The%20Gods.pdf

Our imagination is unable to conceive what technical resources our forefathers used to extract a monolithic rock of more than 100 tons from a quarry, and then transport it and work it in a distant spot. But when we are confronted with a block with an estimated weight of 20,000 tons, our imagination, made rather blase by the technical achievements of today, is given its severest shock. On the way back from the fortifications of Sacsayhuaman, in a crater in the mountainside, a few hundred yards away, the visitor comes across a monstrosity. It is a single stone block the size of a four-storey house. It has been impeccably dressed in the most craftsmanlike way; it has steps and ramps and is adorned with spirals and holes. Surely the fashioning of this unprecedented stone block cannot have been merely a bit of leisure activity for the Incas? Surely it is much more likely that it served some as yet inexplicable purpose? To make the solution of the puzzle even more difficult the whole monstrous block stands on its head. So the steps run downward from the roof; the holes point in different directions like the indentations of a grenade; strange depressions, shaped rather like chairs, seem to hang floating in space.

Who can imagine that human hands and human endeavour excavated, transported and dressed this block? What power overturned it?

What titantic forces were at work here?


The quarries for the stones are located 9 miles and 20 miles away, on the other side of a mountain range and a deep river gorge. Within a few hundred yards of the complex is a single stone that was carved from the mountainside, moved some distance, and then abandoned. The stone contains steps, platforms and depressions, probably intended as a part of the fortifications. It now sits upside-down, the size of a five-storey house.

http://www.ancient-wisdom.com/perusacsahuaman.htm
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 30, 2016, 11:05:05 AM
SUPERCONDUCTOR PODKLETNOV EFFECT

(http://www.enterprisemission.com/images/anti-g.gif)

The superconductor Meissner effect described earlier (the expulsion of a magnetic field from the superconductor) has been taken one step further by Dr. Eugene Podkletnov,  by having the ceramic superconductor magnetically levitated and rotated at high speed in the presence of an external magnetic field.

"Then, objects placed above the rotating disc changed weight. Weight reductions of 0.3 to 0.5% were obtained, and when the rotation speed was slowly reduced from 5000 revolutions per minute to 3500, a maximum weight loss of about 2% was achieved for about 30 seconds. 5% weight reductions have been recorded, though not with the same repeatability."

The readers of this thread already know what is going on: the high speed rotation of the superconductor attracted even more subquark strings, thus contributing to the overall loss of weight (antigravitational effect of laevorotatory subquarks/positrons).


http://davidpratt.info/gravity.htm

http://www.enterprisemission.com/anti-grav.htm


Interestingly enough, neither the Podkletnov effect nor the Searl effect (described in the davidpratt link) have been applied to flywheel energy storage devices yet:

http://www.explainthatstuff.com/flywheels.html

https://www.damninteresting.com/the-mechanical-battery/


There has been an attempt to explain the antigravitational effects of the Podkletnov experiment using tensor analysis and GTR.

But there is no such thing as the theory of relativity:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg769750#msg769750 (total demolition of STR/GTR)


As was mentioned before, superconductivity of metals at room temperature is possible using the Biefeld-Brown effect, the double torsion techniques of Viktor Schauberger, and more preferably utilizing acoustic implosion of the atom (reaching the baryon state of matter, or the first state of ether; m-state or ormus metals).


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 01, 2016, 12:29:01 AM
TAN 51.8554° = TWO SACRED CUBITS

Reference #1

http://davidpratt.info/pyramid.htm

For example, the angle of slope of the Pyramid’s outer casing was 51.85 degrees.


Reference #2

The Pyramid Age, E.J. Sweeney

Chapter 1, page 4

This ratio provides a slope of 51.85 degrees (calculated).


Reference #3

http://stochasticprojectmanagement.com/?p=105

ratio of height to width: 1.571 (one half of pi)  slope: 51.85 degrees


Reference #4

https://web.archive.org/web/20160401055724/http://www.numberscience.me.uk/Giza.html

The slant angle of the face of the pyramid approximates to 51.85 degrees.


Nineteenth century archaeologists or even modern researchers into the Gizeh pyramid phenomenon have no idea what to look for, having succumbed to the official propaganda which tells us that ancient Greeks introduced the п symbol/number.

The pi ratio in the pyramid is derived from the ratio of the
pyramid baseline divided by the height.  The average baseline
is 9,068.8.  Divide this by the height (5776 +- 7 inches) and you
get 1.5701.  This value times two is 3.1402.  A better approximation
of pi is obtained using the angle of the slope of the faces of the
pyramid.  The angle for the north slope according to Petrie is
51 deg. 50 min. 40 sec. +- 1 min. 5 sec.  The same ratios in a
pyramid with this angle yield a value of 3.1427+-0.002. 

The Pi value in the pyramid is an interesting feature, but the
facts show that the value that can be found is not any more accurate
then the value of 22/7 for pi (or 11/14 for pi/4) that is traditionally
attributed to Archimedes.  It is not at all clear that the Egyptians
intended this Pi relationship to be a design feature per se.



The builders of the Gizeh pyramid could not care less about π: the entire edifice is built according to the sacred cubit figure, which is the value of 2/π.

3.1427/2 = 1.57135

1/1.57135 = 0.636395, one of the exact values of the sacred cubit


The sacred cubit is designated in the form of a horseshoe projection, known as the "Boss" on the face of the Granite Leaf in the Ante-Chamber of the Pyramid. By application of this unit of measurement it was discovered to be subdivided into 25 equal parts known now as: Pyramid inches.

ONE SACRED CUBIT = 0.6356621 meters


(http://www.aldokkan.com/photos/great_pyramid/30_great_pyramid.jpg)


Those who are seeking for the ultimate proof that the builders of the Gizeh Pyramid knew advanced calculus, have to look no further than the following demonstration, which I discovered two years ago.


As we have seen, the angle of the slope of the Pyramid’s outer casing is 51.85 degrees.

However, in order to reach/know this value, the architects of the Gizeh Pyramid must have had at their disposal the extended arctangent series:

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/1/a/6/1a65c25333063610ba7ca6aecd562356.png)


TAN 51.8554 DEGREES = TWO SACRED CUBITS = 1.27330478216 = 0.636652 x 2


In order to reach the value of 51.8554 degrees, the architects MUST have used the extended arctangent series to achieve the final result.


Moreover,

SIN 72.7 DEGREES = 1.5 SACRED CUBITS

SIN 136.12 DEGREES = LN 2



72.7 / 2 = 36.35 = 100 - 100 sacred cubits

136.12 = actual height of the Gizeh Pyramid (see https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1648156#msg1648156 )


The other angle of the triangle, 38.145 degrees, is also closely related to the sacred cubit:

38.13 = 60 sacred cubits

And 51.85/38.1 = 1.361 - therefore, all these measurements/dimensions must have been known well ahead of time to the arhitects of the Gizeh Pyramid; but in order to have the actual angle values, they needed to calculate the arctangent of two sacred cubits.


Gizeh Pyramid advanced calculus:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1573684#msg1573684

The constructors of the pyramid had at their disposal all the details needed from advanced calculus: radian measure, Taylor series expansion, natural logarithm, gamma function, Stirling series (complete with realistic error bounds), and much more.


Queen chamber niche measurements

First step – w 1.568m / l 1.0414 m / h 1.743 m
Second step – w 1.34 m / l 1.0414 m / h 0.87266 m

π/360= 0.0087266

Third step – w 1.062 m / l 1.0414 m / h 0.69733 m

π/450 = 0.0069813


(http://www.drhawass.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Queens-chamber.jpg)

The concept of radian measure, as opposed to the degree of an angle, is normally credited to Roger Cotes in 1714. He had the radian in everything but name, and he recognized its naturalness as a unit of angular measure.

The first mention of the natural logarithm was by Nicholas Mercator in his work Logarithmotechnia published in 1668, although the mathematics teacher John Speidell had already in 1619 compiled a table on the natural logarithm.



Origin of Calculus: How Mathematical Analysis Was Imported to India, Italy, France and England

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1574605#msg1574605

First zero of Riemann's Zeta function and the height of the Gizeh pyramid:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1639106#msg1639106


UPDATE


Further proof that the values of 51.8554 and 38.1446 are related to the sacred cubit.

51.8554/14.134725 = 11/3

1400/11 = 127.27272727

127.272727 = 63.63636363 x 2

51.8554 x 27 = 1400


51.8554 x 1.618034 = 83.904

1.618034 = PHI

83.904 x 0.6366 = 53.413

53.413 x 0.2548 = 13.61

0.02544 = one sacred inch (0.636/25)

136.1 = height of Gizeh Pyramid without the masonry base


Relationship between the two angles:

The other angle of the triangle, 38.145 degrees, is also closely related to the sacred cubit:

38.13 = 60 sacred cubits

And 51.85/38.1 = 1.361 - therefore, all these measurements/dimensions must have been known well ahead of time to the arhitects of the Gizeh Pyramid; but in order to have the actual angle values, they needed to calculate the arctangent of two sacred cubits.

TAN 51.8554 DEGREES = TWO SACRED CUBITS = 1.27330478216 = 0.636652 x 2


In order to reach the value of 51.8554 degrees, the architects MUST have used the extended arctangent series to achieve the final result.

Just a "very good approximation" won't do it.

One needs the correct value to the fifth decimal, something that can be achieved ONLY by using advanced calculus.

The Egyptians did not build the Gizeh Pyramid:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1625605#msg1625605

Mysteries of Egyptian Zodiacs, table of contents/link:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1412429#msg1412429

Summary of medieval/Renaissance dates for the Egyptian Zodiacs:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg940930#msg940930


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 04, 2016, 09:43:08 AM
TAN 51.8554° = TWO SACRED CUBITS (II)

There is no other way to calculate the inverse tangent function of a certain angle (without using a pocket calculator/computer) other than resorting to power series, that is, utilizing calculus. Moreover, one would need a clear understanding of the concept of the radian measure.

The architects of the Giza Pyramid had these choices at their disposal in order to solve the following equation:

TAN X = 1.27330478216 = 0.636652 x 2


1. Maclaurin series in conjunction with the arctan reciprocal formula

(https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/1e513f13f671fc98e01e5b25c47a69905ae2fedf)



(https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/ecb0a376d9148e3cf65ea6e6ed5fb37752a581c7)

(equation #3)


51.8554° = 0.907045 radians

1/1.27330478216 = 0.78535

Substituting the value of 0.78535 in the Maclaurin arctan series and solving the reciprocal arctan equation, up to the O(x11) term we get:

0.905045

This corresponds to a 51.983° value.

Therefore, the builders of the Pyramid must have had at their disposal the notion of the derivative (either the Newton-Leibniz or the Madhava definitions) in order to obtain the arctan Maclaurin series, not to mention the reciprocal arctan equation; even in that case, they had to be able to compute powers of certain numbers, going perhaps all the way to the O(x17) term (in the Maclaurin series) or even beyond, to obtain a meaningful accuracy.


2. Extended arctangent series

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/1/a/6/1a65c25333063610ba7ca6aecd562356.png)

This is a result from advanced calculus.


3. Gauss-Pfaff-Borchardt-Carlson iterative formula

http://www.ams.org/journals/mcom/1972-26-118/S0025-5718-1972-0307438-2/S0025-5718-1972-0307438-2.pdf

This formula necessitates the use of the concept of derivatives for its mathematical proof.

https://books.google.ro/books?id=cGnSMGSE5Y4C&pg=PR20&lpg=PR20&dq=numerical+methods+that+work+forman+acton&source=bl&ots=_TWAL76eh8&sig=UoUEc2xjUGxLP0awbJv64HXJG14&hl=ro&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjCsci5h4_QAhUJaRQKHcR6CkoQ6AEIXTAH#v=onepage&q=numerical%20methods%20that%20work%20forman%20acton&f=false (pg 6-9)

Other variants of this formula:

http://files.ele-math.com/articles/jmi-09-73.pdf

A more advanced look at this approach:

https://www.math.ust.hk/~machiang/education/enhancement/arithmetic_geometric.pdf


4. My formula

ARCTAN v =  2n x ((2- {2+ [2+ (2+ 2{1/(1+ v2)}1/2)1/2]...1/2}))1/2 (n+1 parentheses to be evaluated)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 05, 2016, 09:11:52 AM
TAN 51.8554° = TWO SACRED CUBITS (III)

The controversy created by the measurements of the base of the Giza Pyramid made by C. Piazzi Smyth and W.F. Petrie was solved by D. Davidson who discovered the 286.1 displacement factor of the four sides of the base of the pyramid:

(http://thegreatpyramidofgiza.ca/@Giza$Relationship%20of%20Inner%20Square%20Circuit%20and%20Outer%20Square%20Circuit$Chapter_files/image001.jpg)

I = 35.8 Pyramid Inches
J = 35.8 Pyramid Inches

286.1/8 = 35.7625

https://web.archive.org/web/20140101024850/http://thegreatpyramidofgiza.ca/content/#relationship-of-inner-square-circuit-and-outer-square-circuit

http://www.gizapyramid.com/beford%20article%202.htm

http://the-ultimate-frontier.org/history/Pyramid.htm


5.23 + 136.1 + 7.28 = 148.61

5.23 = masonry base = width of the queen's chamber

136.1 = 53.47 x 2.5454

7.28 = 286.1 pyramid inches

[148.612 + (233.424/2)2]1/2 = 188.962

SIN X = 116.712/188.962 = 0.617648

The architects of the Gizeh Pyramid must have had at their disposal the arcsin power series, in order to attain at least three significant digits accuracy.

(https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/95f14b98c56e2bd452efa34a7c0d6e0f9542fc70)

Not even Bhaskara's formula (or Ptolemy's less accurate table of chords with interpolation approximations) will provide the accuracy needed for the final result (moreover, the second formula involves the radian measure and a very precise approximation of π, using at least 355/113).

(https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/c75694bd39c455a7f0a838e8c826592c701ea3b7)

(https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/6f93842c1e1cce894c281d597de8235a243aa6f3)

Substituting the value of 0.617648 on the left side of the equations and solving for x, will lead to an inaccurate result.

In the official chronology of history, ancient Egyptians could barely work out very simple fractions; the 355/113 approximation to π, not to mention raising a number to the 17th power was way beyond their computational capabilities.

339 = 3 x 113

533.3 x 1 sacred cubit = 339


(https://image.ibb.co/h12HQd/pyr1_zps536964c8.jpg)

One author noted the following:

As our drawing clearly shows, not only the pyramid's envelope but also everything inside
it was determined with the aid of three equal circles. Theodolitic equipment placed within shaft D beamed upward a key vertical line whose function we shall soon describe. But first this equipment beamed out the horizontal rock/masonry line, on which the centers of the three circles were placed. The first of these (Point 1) was at D; Points 2 and 3, where its circle intersected the line, served as centers for the other two, overlapping circles. To draw these circles the pyramid's architects, of course, had to decide on the proper radius.

Our own calculations show that the radius adopted for the three circles envisioned by us was equal to 60 such Sacred Cubits; the number 60 being, not accidentally, the base number of the Sumerian sexagesimal mathematical system. This measure of 60 Sacred Cubits is dominant in the lengths and heights of the pyramid's inner structure as well as in the dimensions of its base.



However, the builders MUST have had ALL of the other measurements of the pyramid (angles, lengths, displacement factor) at their disposal BEFORE proceeding with the drawing of the circles, which must have been a geometrical aid meant to correctly place the other features of the Gizeh Pyramid on a drawing. And this fact, of course, takes us right back to the core the problem: calculation of arctangents and arcsines, using power series approximations.


For a radius of 60 sacred cubits, the circumference of the circle will measure:

60 sc x 2 x π = 240

π = 2/sc

377 is the 14th Fibonacci number

377 sc = 240

14.134725 is the first zero of the Riemann Zeta function

377/14.134725 = 26.67 (one of the fundamental numbers of the Gizeh Pyramid)


3 x 60 sc = 180 sc = 114.588

233.424 - (114.588 x 2) = 4.248

4.248 sc = 2.7


And the same problem with the approximation of angles, using inverse trigonometric functions, had to be dealt with again, since the angle of the descending passage measures 26.6°:

http://www.linux-host.org/energy/ejet.html

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 07, 2016, 02:46:26 AM
TAN 51.8554° = TWO SACRED CUBITS (IV)

A careful analysis of my previous messages will reveal the fact that there are some 30 cm (12") missing from the diagram which features the three circles, each having a radius of 60 sacred cubits (38.13 m).

Virtually all texts and treatises on the Gizeh Pyramid list the height of the floor of the King's Chamber as 43.1 meters.

43.1 - 38.13 = 4.97 meters

These texts, in turn, base their analysis on the classic works written by C. Piazzi Smyth and W.F. Petrie.

And yet none of these distinguished authors noticed the full extent of the effect of subsidence on the Gizeh Pyramid.

With one exception, the exhaustive and in-depth treatise on the Great Pyramid written by D. Davidson and H. Aldersmith:

http://www.magia-metachemica.net/uploads/1/0/6/2/10624795/davidson_the_great_pyramid_its_divine_message.pdf

pages 151 - 158

With the full effect of subsidence taken into consideration, we arrive at the correct figures posted in my messages:

Height of the Gizeh Pyramid without the masonry base/apex = 136.1 meters

Height of the Gizeh Pyramid with the masonry base = 141.347 meters


The Gizeh Pyramid was built very recently, from a chronological point of view: in the period 1680 - 1700 AD.

Its arhitects knew calculus very well, in fact they had knowledge of the value of the first zero of Riemann's Zeta function.

This knowledge, in turn, was used by the descendants of Khem to write the works attributed to the Bernoulli brothers, Euler, Fermat, Lagrange, Newton.

Calculus was imported to both India and Italy/England.

We have seen earlier how the paleomagnetical analysis of the artefacts found at Pompeii, Herculaneum, and Southern Italy actually belong to the 17th century, and how the maps dated 1725/1778 both feature Pompeii and Herculaneum as thriving cities in full activity.

Some of these results (Fibonacci sequences and equations) were used to invent the music ascribed to Bach, Vivaldi, Haydn, Mozart (documented earlier in this thread).

Exploding the myth of Mozart:

http://www.rense.com/general45/mozrt.htm


http://web.archive.org/web/20110805132716/http://www.artofrecordproduction.com/content/view/195/22/

Each and every one Mozart's piano sonatas are based on Fibonacci numbers sequences/formulas.


Evidence suggests that classical music composed by Mozart, Beethoven, and Bach embraces phi.

http://www.maths.surrey.ac.uk/hosted-sites/R.Knott/Fibonacci/fibInArt.html#mozart


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258507180_THE_MATHEMATICAL_ARCHITECTURE_OF_BACH'S_''THE_ART_OF_FUGUE''


http://people.sju.edu/~rhall/proposal.pdf (page 5 for an example of Bach's use of mathematics in creating music)


http://www.limelightmagazine.com.au/Article/356061,deconstructing-the-genius-of-bach.aspx


http://www.ncurproceedings.org/ojs/index.php/NCUR2012/article/view/151 (An Examination of J.S. Bach's compositions using the golden ratio and Fibonacci Sequence) - you can access the pdf version there

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 09, 2016, 04:07:36 AM
SAGNAC EFFECT

The original papers published by G. Sagnac (The Luminiferous Ether is Detected as a Wind Effect Relative to the Ether Using a Uniformly Rotating Interferometer):

http://zelmanov.ptep-online.com/papers/zj-2008-07.pdf

http://zelmanov.ptep-online.com/papers/zj-2008-08.pdf

A beautiful introduction to the Sagnac experiment:

http://aflb.ensmp.fr/AFLB-401/aflb401m820.pdf

http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/SagnacRel/SagnacandRel.html

The Sagnac effect shows that light signals emitted upon a rotating disc do not travel at the same speed with and against the direction of rotation of the disc.

The difference in time (dt) for the light to traverse the path, in opposite directions, was derived by Sagnac as:

dt = 4Aω/c2

where A is the area enclosed by the light path, ω Radians per second is the angular velocity of spin and c the speed of light.

As early as 1897, O. Lodge was able to obtain the same formula as above.

The French pair, Dufour & Prunier repeated the Sagnac test, thirty years after Sagnac had done it, and got the same result. They then did other very important variations on the original Sagnac experiments. They showed that the photographic record could be taken upon the spinning disc or from the fixed laboratory and that the result was the same:

http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/pdf/Dufour_and_Prunier-On_the_Fringe_Movement_Registered_on_a_Platform_in_Uniform_Motion_%281942%29.pdf

The Sagnac effect also applies to straight line motion:

http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Ives/Herbert_Ives_Light_Signals_Sent_Around_a_Closed_Path.pdf (famous H. Ives experiment: Light Signals Sent Around a Closed Path)

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0609/0609222.pdf (first experiment conducted by R. Wang)

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0609/0609202.pdf (second experiment carried out by R. Wang)

It should be pointed out that his third experiment, the fiber-optic parallelogram test, has to be explained further by Professor Wang, therefore it cannot yet be added to the other well-known tests which prove a linear Sagnac effect.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242479763_First-Order_Fiber-Interferometric_Experiments_for_Crucial_Test_of_Light-Speed_Constancy

http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Mechanics%20/%20Electrodynamics/Download/4387

There have been several attempts to try to explain the Sagnac effect, either using STR, GTR or other field theories.

J.H. Field (STR, time dilation), R. Klauber (NTO, non-time orthogonal metric in spacetime), A. Tartaglia/M.L. Ruggiero/G. Rizzi (flat spacetime, Aharonov-Bohm effect), P. Maraner/J.P. Zendri (Minkowski spacetime, Aharonov-Bohm effect), S.J.G. Gift (GTR), M.F. Yagan (cumulative Doppler effect using STR), A.G. Kelly (universal relativity), A. Sfarti (STR), F. Amador (Evans field theory), F. Selleri (specific set of spacetime transformations which lead directly to MLET, Modified Lorentz Ether Theory).

These authors do not seem to understand that there is no such thing as the theory of relativity/spacetime continuum:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg769750#msg769750

The presence of the Sagnac effect  in the GPS system clearly shows that none of the explanations listed above are adequate, for the path of the radiation from the GPS satellite to the receiver clearly follows a straight line and the instantaneous velocity of the receiver (ether strings rotation) is not affected significantly by the radial acceleration during the instant of reception. This observation validates Ives' claim that the Sagnac effect is not caused by rotation.

http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Ronald_Hatch/Hatch-Relativity_and_GPS-II_1995.pdf

http://worldnpa.org/abstracts/abstracts_5789.pdf

http://db.naturalphilosophy.org/abstract/?abstractid=1843&subpage=pdf

https://web.archive.org/web/20070315063351/http://egtphysics.net/Index.htm (select the Ether Drift option to access the article)

(one can also do a google search using http://ivanik3.narod.ru/GPS/Hatch/EtherDrift.pdf and then access the html/in cache format to view the document)


One of the best works on the Sagnac effect and its relationship to ether:

http://www.aetherometry.com/publications/direct/AToS/AS3-I.3.pdf

Ether Sagnac effect:

http://www.geocities.ws/mail0110261847/npa/npa2007y.pdf

Geocentric Sagnac effect:

http://www.ldolphin.org/sagnac.html


Dr. Yuri Galaev ether drift experiments:
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1722791#msg1722791


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 10, 2016, 10:57:57 AM
C.M. HILL PULSAR OBSERVATIONS

Charles M. Hill has shown, via an analysis of millisecond pulsar data, that clocks on the earth have cyclic variations due to the eccentricity of the earth's orbit around the sun (in the geocentric model, the same cyclic variations are caused by the orbit of the Sun which is bounded by the two Tropics).

http://www.naturalphilosophy.org//pdf//abstracts/abstracts_1767.pdf

Hill has shown, using external pulsar timing sources, if the Earth is not in circular orbit, the local clock rate will vary as a function of the changing gravitational potential and orbital velocity.

Charles M. Hill (1995) has reported results comparing the clocks
on the earth to millisecond pulsars. This comparison
clearly reveals the source for the cyclic clock biases
described above. Specifically, in the sun’s frame, the vector
sum of the earth’s orbital velocity and the earth’s spin
velocity causes a cyclic clock rate term which integrates
into a cyclic clock bias as a function of the along track
distance from the earth’s center. (Though not addressed
here, the clocks in the GPS satellites would also suffer
cyclic clock-rate terms as a result of the vector sum of the
satellite orbit velocity with the earth’s orbit velocity.) Note
that in the sun’s frame these cyclic clock disturbances are
properly recognized and removed in the process of
determining a correct time within the sun’s barycentric
frame. Like the cyclic clock-rate error, which occurs as a
result of ignoring the sun’s gravitational potential, this
velocity product (in the sun’s frame) gives a clock rate
error that is ignored in the earth’s frame.
As Hill (1995) describes, the pulsar data reveals a diurnal
variation in the clock rate of about 300 ps s peak-to-peak.
The noon second is about 300 ps shorter (frequency
higher at noon) than the midnight second because of the
product of the earth’s orbital and spin velocities at the
equator. The term causing this clock rate variation comes
from the squaring of the vector addition of the two
velocities. It is given by:

Δf = (vevs/c)cosθ

where the ‘‘e’’ subscript designates the orbital velocity, the
‘‘s’’ subscript the spin velocity, and θ is the angle between
the earth’s orbital velocity and the earth spin velocity at
the clock. Plugging in the values gives a clock rate peak
magnitude of 153 ps s or 2.1 μs per radian of the earth
rotation rate. Clearly, the cosine term integrates to a value
of one for a single quadrant of rotation. The result directly
corresponds to the bias term given in Eq. (8 ) above.
The difference in sun’s gravitational potential causes a
clock rate term given by:

Δf = {1 - 2GM/(ra - recosØ)c2}1/2 - {1 - 2GM/rac2}1/2

where the ‘‘a‘‘ subscript designates the orbital radius, the
‘‘e‘‘ subscript the earth radius and Ø is the angle between
the earth radius to the clock and the orbital radius of the
earth. Plugging in the values gives a clock rate peak
magnitude of 0.42 ps s (365 times smaller than the velocity
cross product term) or 2.1 μs per radian of the earth
orbital rate. The sign of this gravitational term is opposite
to that of the diurnal term. (The frequency is lower at
noon.) It causes the diurnal period of one sidereal day,
which results from Eq. (10) to become a period of one
solar day. Again, the result clearly corresponds to the bias
given in Eq. (8 ) above. In the earth’s frame, both clock rate
terms are ignored. It is by ignoring these cyclic rate terms
in the earth’s frame that the clock biases are generated,
which cause the speed of light to appear as isotropic.
The point of the above is worth emphasizing again. Clocks
external to the solar system (millisecond pulsars) can be
compared to clocks on the earth. Since clocks run at a
unique rate, the difference in the external clocks and the
earth-bound clocks can provide us with the unique
knowledge of the true clock rate of clocks on the earth. The
values obtained show that a cyclic clock rate occurs which
integrates into a cyclic clock bias. The cyclic clock rate
arises from two sources including (1) the product term of
the spin velocity combined with the orbital velocity, and
(2) the differences in the gravitational potential of the sun
at the clocks’ position compared to that at the center of the
earth. When the earth’s frame is used, it is easy to ignore
the composite velocity term because the orbital velocity is
removed. (But even though it is easy to ignore, removing it
assigns an erroneous cyclic clock rate to the clocks
according to the millisecond pulsars.) However, the
absence of the second cyclic term, due to the gradient of
the sun’s gravitational potential, cannot be explained by
SRT when the earth’s frame is used. As we saw above, two
faulty attempts have been made to explain its absence. The
millisecond pulsars testify to its presence, and it causes the
clock bias value to have a cyclic period of one year such
that the bias always remains a function of the distance in
the direction of the changing orbital velocity vector.

Using the SRT, no proper explanation for the apparently
missing effect of the sun’s gravitational potential upon the
clocks in the earth’s frame can be found.

SRT cannot explain the missing effect from the sun’s
gravitational potential and incorrectly assigns multiple
rates to the same clock in the same identical environment.


http://worldnpa.org/abstracts/abstracts_5789.pdf (full article)


BY ASSUMING THAT STR IS CORRECT, MODERN ASTROPHYSICS MUST ALSO ASSUME THAT THE ORBITAL VELOCITY OF THE EARTH AROUND THE SUN, IN AN ELLIPTICAL ORBIT, MUST BE A CONSTANT.

However, upon further reflection, it became
apparent that one significant complication with respect to
the two frames was not dealt with. Specifically, GPS was
compared in the two frames assuming that the earth’s
orbital velocity was constant.

What is the significance of this interim conclusion? We
have shown that, assuming the speed of light is isotropic
in the sun’s frame, the velocity of clocks on the spinning
earth will cause them to be biased by just the amount
needed to make it appear as if the speed of light is
actually isotropic on the earth.

However, the true believer in
SRT can argue that this is simply a coincidence and that it
is still the magic of SRT which automatically causes the
speed of light to be isotropic on the earth. There is no way
to refute his argument in this simplified case where we
have assumed that the direction of the orbital velocity
vector is constant. But, when the change in the orbital
velocity direction is allowed, we get an astonishing result.

By contrast, if SRT/GRT is
correct, we would expect that the clocks on earth and in
the GPS system would require an adjustment for the
effect of the sun’s differential gravitational potential.
Since clocks on earth and in the GPS system function
properly by ignoring the effect of the sun’s gravitational
potential,
we must conclude that SRT/GRT is wrong.

http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Ronald_Hatch/Hatch-Clock_Behavior_and_theSearch_for_an_Underlying_Mechanism_for_Relativistic_Phenomena_2002.pdf

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 10, 2016, 10:55:30 PM
C.M. HILL PULSAR OBSERVATIONS II


http://file.scirp.org/pdf/JMP20120800006_80885197.pdf (pg. 718-720, 744)

Another observation that also clearly conflicts with the
constancy and isotropy of the velocity of light was discovered
during the implementation and calibration of
set-ups for Very Long Baseline Interferometry (VLBI)
radio astronomy observations. The resolution of optical
and radio astronomy observations can be improved by
orders of magnitude by analyzing the data recorded in
different observatories over the earth surface using interferometric
methods. The condition is that these data be
synchronous. The method consists in superposing coherently
the data recorded in different observatories with the
help of computers taking into account the instantaneous
position of the antennas etc. For the (VLBI) radio astronomy
observations clock synchronization at intercontinental
distances via the GPS achieve 0.1 ns. Nevertheless,
on testing the so synchronized clocks by confronting
them with the arrival of the wave fronts from distant
pulsars, which according to the TR may be synchronous,
it was observed that the pulsar signal reaches the foregoing
side of Earth 4.2 μs before the rear side along the
orbital motion of Earth. This discrepancy exceeds
the time resolution by more than four orders of magnitude.
Nevertheless along the transverse direction the arrival
of the pulsar signal was synchronous. This apparent
discrepancy in the GPS clock synchronization is again
raising very hot debates about the nature of space. Some
people speak of scandalous clocks that are biased
along the Earth’s orbital motion, others see in these
facts definitive prove that the velocity of light along different
directions within the solar system is not the same.


Many people believe that GR accounts for all the observed
effects caused by gravitational fields. However, in
reality GR is unable to explain an increasing number of
clear observational facts, several of them discovered recently
with the help of the GPS. For instance, GR
predicts the gravitational time dilation and the slowing of
the rate of clocks by the gravitational potential of Earth,
of the Sun, of the galaxy etc. Due to the gravitational
time dilation of the solar gravitational potential, clocks in
the GPS satellites having their orbital plane nearly parallel
to the Earth-Sun axis should undergo a 12 hour period
harmonic variation in their rate so that the difference
between the delay accumulated along the half of the orbit
closest to the Sun amounts up to about 24 ns in the time
display, which would be recovered along the half of the
orbit farthest from the Sun. Such an oscillation exceeds
the resolution of the measurements by more than two
orders of magnitude and, if present, would be very easily
observed. Nevertheless, contradicting the predictions of
GR, no sign of such oscillation is observed.
This is the
well known and so long unsolved non-midnight problem.
In fact observations show that the rate of the
atomic clocks on Earth and in the 24 GPS satellites is
ruled by only and exclusively the Earth’s gravitational
field and that effects of the solar gravitational potential
are completely absent.
Surprisingly and happily the GPS
works better than expected from the TR.


Obviously the gravitational
slowing of the atomic clocks on Earth cannot be due to
relative velocity because these clocks rest with respect to
the laboratory observer. What is immediately disturbing
here is that two completely distinct physical causes produce
identical effects, which by it alone is highly suspicious.
GR gives only a geometrical interpretation to the
gravitational time dilation. However, if motions cause
time dilation, why then does the orbital motion of Earth
suppress the time dilation caused by the solar gravitational
potential on the earthbased and GPS clocks?
Absurdly
in one case motion causes time dilation and in the
other case it suppresses it. This contradiction lets evident
that what causes the gravitational time dilation is not the
gravitational potential and that moreover this time dilation
cannot be caused by a scalar quantity. If the time dilation
shown by the atomic clocks within the earthbased
laboratories is not due to the gravitational potential and
cannot be due to relative velocity too then it is necessarily
due to some other cause. This impasse once more
puts in check the central idea of the TR, according to
which the relative velocity with respect to the observer is
the physical parameter that rules the effects of motions.
The above facts show that the parameter that rules the
effects of motions is not relative velocity but a velocity
of a more fundamental nature.


See also http://www.hrpub.org/download/20150510/UJPA2-18403649.pdf (pg. 147)


On the other hand, the time dilation effect of the solar
gravitational field on the atomic clocks orbiting with
Earth round the Sun, which is predicted by GR but not
observed, is a highly precise observation. It exceeds by
orders of magnitude the experimental precision and
hence is infinitely more reliable. If the orbital motion of
Earth round the Sun suppresses the time dilation due to
the solar gravitational field and moreover does not show
the predicted relativistic time dilation due to this orbital
motion, then it seems reasonable that a clock in a satellite
orbiting round the Earth in a direct equatorial orbit or in a
jet flying round the Earth too should give no evidence of
such a relativistic time dilation. The relativistic time dilation
alleged in both these round the world Sagnac experiments
is in clear and frontal contradiction with the
absence of such a relativistic time dilation effect in the
case of the orbiting Earth round the Sun.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 11, 2016, 02:05:49 AM
RUDERFER EXPERIMENT

Ruderfer, Martin (1960) “First-Order Ether Drift
Experiment Using the Mössbauer Radiation,”
Physical Review Letters, Vol. 5, No. 3, Sept. 1, pp
191-192

Ruderfer, Martin (1961) “Errata—First-Order Ether
Drift Experiment Using the Mössbauer Radiation,”
Physical Review Letters, Vol. 7, No. 9, Nov. 1, p 361


in 1961, M. Ruderfer proved mathematically and experimentally, using the spinning Mossbauer effect, the FIRST NULL RESULT in ether drift theory.

"What students are not told is that the Turner & Hill experiment is a garbled version of a 1960 investigation by Ruderfer, who was seeking to discover fluctuations in gamma ray frequency which might indicate motion of an electromagnetic medium across the plane of the spinning disk, causing cyclic Doppler-type changes in the transit times of the gamma rays crossing that disk. Initially Ruderfer put it out that his results were negative for ether drift, but 14 months later he published an errata which stated that mathematical analysis had shown that if an ether wind were blowing across the plane of the spinning disk, one would expect that Doppler fluctuations in the frequency of the gamma radiation detected at the centre of the disk would be compensated by equal and opposite fluctuations in the emitted frequency of the gamma rays, caused by the effect of variations in the ether speed of the source.

What Ruderfer's experiment had stumbled on was that there could be a static electromagnetic medium at rest with respect to the rest of the universe. And it could be that any motion with respect to that medium affects the gamma ray source, and the central Mossbauer detector, by slowing down the rate of process of each by half the square of the ratio of each one's absolute ether speed to the absolute speed of propagation of light. If such were the case, it would follow (as a mathematical necessity) that irrespective of the direction and speed of ether drift of the lab, the central detector of the spinning disk would always observe a steady slowing of the gamma radiation frequency by half the square of the ratio of the spin speed of the source to the out-and-return speed of light, as measured by the detector in a reference frame which is non-rotating with respect to the fixed stars.

Ruderfer's experiment and his errata were of great significance in the history of modern physics because of their psychological impact on the ether deniers. Previously, the Michelson & Morley ether drift experiment had been successfully portrayed as 'negative' rather than 'null' because the proposed compensating factor, Fitzgerald contraction, was a theoretical construct. However, in the case of the Ruderfer experiment, the ether deniers were shocked to find that the experiment provided proof of the existence of the compensating factor in the observed frequency reduction, making it indubitably a null ether drift experiment.

Since the motion-induced frequency reduction of the gamma ray source is by a steady 'half the square of the ratio of the disk spin speed to the speed of propagation of the gamma rays', and since this is exactly the amount required to give the same result, irrespective of whether the disk is at ether rest, or is orientated edgewise (or at right angles) to a hypothetical ether drift, this constituted prima facie evidence for something for which the ether deniers have a particular fear and loathing - 'laws of nature which conspire to conceal the effect of ether drift'."

https://web.archive.org/web/20070315063351/http://egtphysics.net/Index.htm (select the Ether Drift article option)

http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Ronald_Hatch/Hatch-Clock_Behavior_and_theSearch_for_an_Underlying_Mechanism_for_Relativistic_Phenomena_2002.pdf


Analysis of the spinning Mossbauer experiments is a natural step toward analysis of the
slightly more complex and much larger-scale Global Positioning System (GPS). This
system constitutes a large scale near-equivalent to the spinning Mossbauer experiments.
The transit time between the satellite and ground-based receivers is routinely measured.
In addition, the atomic clocks on the satellite are carefully monitored; and high precision
corrections are provided as part of the information transmitted from the satellites.
Because the satellites and the receivers rotate at different rates (unlike the Mossbauer
experiments), a correction for the motion of the receiver during the transit time is
required. This correction is generally referred to as a Sagnac correction, since it adjusts
for anisotropy of the speed of light as far as the receiver is concerned. Why is there no
requirement for a Sagnac correction due to the earth’s orbital motion? Like the transit
time in the spinning Mossbauer experiments, any such effect would be completely
canceled by the orbital-velocity effect on the satellite clocks.



Specifically, there is substantial independent experimental evidence that clock speed always affects the clock frequency and, as the GPS system shows, the spin velocity of the earth clearly affects the clock rate. This being the case, the null result of the rotating Mössbauer experiments actually implies that an ether drift must exist or else the clock effect would not be canceled and a null result would not be present.

A GPS satellite orbiting the Earth, while at the same time the entire system is orbiting the Sun, IS A LARGE SCALE SPINNING MOSSBAUER EXPERIMENT.


Given the very fact that these GPS satellites DO NOT record the orbital Sagnac effect, means that THE HYPOTHESES OF THE RUDERFER EXPERIMENT ARE FULFILLED.

Why is there no requirement for a Sagnac correction due to the earth’s orbital motion? Like the transit time in the spinning Mossbauer experiments, any such effect would be completely canceled by the orbital-velocity effect on the satellite clocks.

However, indirectly, the counteracting effects of the transit time and clock slowing induced biases indicate that an ether drift is present. This is because there is independent evidence that clocks are slowed as a result of their speed. Thus, ether drift must exist or else the clock slowing effect would be observed.

In fact, there is other evidence that the wave-front bending and absence of the
Sagnac effect in the earth-centered frame is due to the clock-biasing effects of velocity
and that an ether drift velocity actually exists in the earth-centered frame. First, the
gradient of the solar gravitational effects upon clocks on the surface of the earth is such
that the clocks will speed up and slow down in precisely the correct way to retain the
appropriate up-wind and down-wind clock biases. Thus, the clocks must be biased or
else the solar gravitational effects would become apparent.



Second, as Charles M. Hill has shown, clocks on the earth clearly vary their rate as
the speed of the earth around the sun varies. Earth clocks run slower when the earth’s
speed increases and the earth’s distance from the sun is decreased near perihelion. The
earth’s clocks run faster near aphelion. This variation must be counteracted via an ether drift effect else it could be detected in GPS and VLBI experiments.


https://web.archive.org/web/20170808104846/http://qem.ee.nthu.edu.tw/f1b.pdf

This is an IOP article.

The author recognizes the earth's orbital Sagnac is missing whereas the earth's rotational Sagnac is not.

He uses GPS and a link between Japan and the US to prove this.

In GPS the actual magnitude of the Sagnac correction
due to earth’s rotation depends on the positions of
satellites and receiver and a typical value is 30 m, as the
propagation time is about 0.1s and the linear speed due
to earth’s rotation is about 464 m/s at the equator. The
GPS provides an accuracy of about 10 m or better in positioning.
Thus the precision of GPS will be degraded significantly,
if the Sagnac correction due to earth’s rotation
is not taken into account. On the other hand, the orbital
motion of the earth around the sun has a linear speed of
about 30 km/s which is about 100 times that of earth’s
rotation. Thus the present high-precision GPS would be
entirely impossible if the omitted correction due to orbital
motion is really necessary.



In an intercontinental microwave link between Japan and
the USA via a geostationary satellite as relay, the influence
of earth’s rotation is also demonstrated in a high-precision
time comparison between the atomic clocks at two remote
ground stations.
In this transpacific-link experiment, a synchronization
error of as large as about 0.3 µs was observed unexpectedly.


Meanwhile, as in GPS, no effects of earth’s orbital motion
are reported in these links, although they would be
easier to observe if they are in existence.
Thereby, it is evident
that the wave propagation in GPS or the intercontinental
microwave link depends on the earth’s rotation, but
is entirely independent of earth’s orbital motion around
the sun or whatever. As a consequence, the propagation
mechanism in GPS or intercontinental link can be viewed
as classical in conjunction with an ECI frame, rather than
the ECEF or any other frame, being selected as the unique
propagation frame. In other words, the wave in GPS or the
intercontinental microwave link can be viewed as propagating
via a classical medium stationary in a geocentric
inertial frame.



http://www.anti-relativity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=39644&sid=380ab2ccf12f0e84dc604ec3feeed59e#p39644

http://www.anti-relativity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=37771#p37771


OFFICIAL GPS DATA, provided by NASA/JPL.

https://web.archive.org/web/20130218082359/http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/ptti/ptti2006/paper28.pdf

"The term “Sagnac effect” is part of the vocabulary of only the observer in the rotating reference frame. The corresponding correction applied by the inertial observer might be called a “velocity correction.” While the interpretation of the correction is different in the two frames, the numerical value is the same in either frame."


Calculations performed at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center.

https://arxiv.org/vc/arxiv/papers/0912/0912.3934v1.pdf

Please note the theoretical orbital sagnac shows up in these calculations, but is not picked up/registered/recorded by GPS satellites.


The effect of an ether drift on the GPS one-way range measurements is exactly
counteracted by the effect of the ether drift on the receiver clocks.



As such, modern science is making a last stand in order to explain the GPS/Ruderfer/Sagnac effects/experiments: a local ether theory named MLET (Modified Lorentz Ether Theory).

MLET (Modified Lorentz Ether Theory) is based on the Lorentz transformation (Lorentz factor/contraction), and thus, is equally invalid.

https://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Relativity%20Theory/Download/7149


The colossal mistakes committed by Lorentz and Einstein in deriving the Lorentz transformation/factor:

http://relativityunraveled.net/chapter-4-the-michelson-morley-experiment/

http://relativityunraveled.net/chapter-5-the-lorentz-transformation/

http://relativityunraveled.net/chapter-1-introduction/

Dr. Hans Zweig, Stanford University: http://wiki.naturalphilosophy.org/wiki/hans-j-zweig/


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1782182#msg1782182 (missing orbital motion Sagnac effect)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 11, 2016, 10:22:25 AM
SAGNAC EFFECT II: RING LASER GYROSCOPES

"For a circular path of radius R, the difference between the different time intervals can also be represented as Δt = 2vl/c2, where v = ΩR is the speed of the circular motion and l = 2πR is the circumference of the circle.

The travel-time difference of two counterpropagating light beams in moving fiber is proportional to both the total length and the speed of the fiber, regardless of whether the motion is circular or uniform.

In a segment of uniformly moving fiber with a speed of v and a length of Δl, the travel-time difference is 2vΔl/c2."

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0609/0609222.pdf


The Sagnac effect also applies to straight line motion:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1846045#msg1846045 (Sagnac effect)


Now, we can easily understand how the path of the radiation from the GPS satellite to the receiver clearly follows a straight line and the instantaneous velocity of the receiver (ether strings rotation) is not affected significantly by the radial acceleration during the instant of reception.

The rotation of the telluric currents/ether strings/wind/drift above the surface of the flat Earth affects the light signal: the difference in time is the Sagnac effect.


Dr. Dayton Miller ether drift results: "The measurements were latitude-dependent as well."

http://www.orgonelab.org/miller.htm


Dr. Yuri Galaev ether drift results:

ETHERAL WIND IN EXPERIENCE OF MILLIMETRIC RADIOWAVES PROPAGATION

http://home.t01.itscom.net/allais/blackprior/galaev/galaev-1.pdf

journal pgs 211-225

The expression (28) enables by the results [5, 6], obtained at the altitude ZM, to calculate high-altitude speed relation of the ethereal wind WM (Z) at the latitude φM. (pg. 217)

On page 218 we can find the complete formula (28), (30) (see also (35) and page 223).


"Basically, a laser is fired through a half-silvered mirror. Half the light goes one way around a large coiled loop, and half the light goes the other way. They are then recombined and interfered. Due to rotation, after the light goes through in either direction, the wavelength of light will be slightly shifted for each direction. This will establish a beat frequency on the detector which is proportional to the angular velocity of the ring laser gyroscope."

"Ring lasers are inertial rotation sensors using the Sagnac effect, which is the frequency splitting of two counter-rotating laser beams due to rotation (Sagnac 1913)."


A ring laser gyroscope will record the effect of the ether drift/strings upon the laser beams: the Sagnac effect.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 15, 2016, 03:20:26 AM
SAGNAC EFFECT III

The optical whirlwind effect of an artificial rotation of an overall system really shows itself, without unexpected compensation, as an effect of the first order of the movement in comparison with the ether.  The experience directly reveals […] the linear delay […] that the overall rotation of the optical system produces in the ether between the two systems of inverse waves T and R during their propagation around the circuit.

G. Sagnac


"By applying Stokes’ rule the derivation of Sagnac effect can be changed from an
integration over a surface to an integration along a line, which is correct in relation to
where the light really is. This demonstrates that Sagnac effect is translational, and that an ether-wind has been detected by Sagnac and by the GPS system.

Since Sagnac effect is an effect in light that is enclosed inside an optical fiber we can
conclude that Sagnac effect is distributed along a line and not over an area. No light and
no rotation exists in the enclosed area. Sagnac detected therefore an effect of translation
although he had to rotate the equipment to produce the effect inside the fiber. By this
solution Sagnac found a method to circumvent Einstein's clock synchronization problem. The Sagnac effect is distributed in every small part of the line.

The fact that Sagnac effect is caused by translation means that the same effect as in a rotating circle also must exist in a translating straight line.

The most important error regarding Sagnac effect is the classification of the effect as rotational. The effect is translational since it is distributed along a line. This means that the same effect must exist along a straight line. In the global positioning system (GPS) a compensation for this translational effect is done.  The high precision in the GPS system demands this correction, when time stations on our planet are compared.

The GPS system cannot afford to ignore the ether wind."


"If the Sagnac effect can be produced in linear uniform motion, then the claim that it
is a characteristic of radial motion is simply incorrect. Because the rules of SR apply to linear uniform motion, the only conclusion is that SR is incorrect."


"The underlying experiment by Sagnac was first performed almost a century ago in 1913.  The effect is routinely employed today in fiber optic gyroscopes which measures very minute changes in angular orientation.

There are multiple claims in the literature attempting to use either the special relativity theory (SRT) or the general theory of relativity (GRT) to explain the effect. The conclusion in virtually all of the explanations is that it is a rotational effect.  As far as I am aware, the earliest claim that the Sagnac Effect was not a rotational effect was by Ives. Ives was a pioneer in the development of television at Bell Telephone Laboratories.  The following quotations are from his 1938 article.
 
     The experiment was interpreted by its author as positive evidence for the existence of the luminiferous ether…

     It is the purpose of this paper first to show that the Sagnac experiment in its essentials involves no consideration of rotation, and second to investigate the results obtained when transported clocks are used.
 
Ives analyzed the Sagnac experiment using a hexagonal path rather than a circular one.
 
He concluded with this statement:
 
     The net result of this study appears to be to leave the argument of Sagnac as to the significance of his experiment as strong as it ever was.

The Sagnac effect is not due to rotation, but instead is a linear effect due to a true anisotropic light speed in a moving frame.

In 1938 Ives showed by analysis that the measured Sagnac effect would be unchanged if the Sagnac phase detector were moved along a cord of a hexagon-shaped light path rather than rotating the entire structure. Thus, he showed the effect could be induced without rotation or acceleration."


"Something was affecting the light in order for it to consistently produce the fringe displacement. Sagnac (1913) demonstrated it was ether.

The GPS satellites must be pre-programmed with the Sagnac correction in order to work properly. This is a fact that is generally hidden from the public."


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 16, 2016, 12:42:28 AM
SAGNAC EFFECT IV

Further proofs that the Sagnac effect applies to uniform/linear/translational motion.

The other question one might ask is at what level curvature is important--if it is circular motion which causes the Sagnac effect as Ashby claims, how much does the path have to deviate from a straight line to cause the effect? At Los Angeles the earth rotates about 27 meters during the nominal 70 millisecond transit time of the signal from satellite to receiver. The deviation of the 27 meter movement from the straight line chord distance is only 35 microns at its largest point. It certainly seems incredible that a 35 micron deviation from a straight line could induce a 27 meter change in the measured range.


As a final proof that it is movement of the receiver which is significant--not whether that movement is in a curved or straight line path--a test was run using the highly precise differential carrier phase solution. The reference site was stationary on the earth and assumed to properly apply the Sagnac effect. However, at the remote site the antenna was moved up and down 32 centimeters (at Los Angeles) over an eight second interval. The result of the height movement was that the remote receiver followed a straight line path with respect to the center of the earth.

The Sagnac effect was still applied at the remote receiver. The result was solved for position that simply moved up and down in height the 32 centimeters with rms residuals
which were unchanged (i.e. a few millimeters). If a straight line path did not need the Sagnac adjustment to the ranges the rms residuals should have increased to multiple meters. This shows again that it is any motion--not just circular motion which causes the Sagnac effect.

http://web.stcloudstate.edu/ruwang/ION58PROCEEDINGS.pdf

(Conducting a Crucial Experiment of the Constancy of the Speed of Light Using GPS, R. Wang/R. Hatch)


In the Sagnac experiment, an ether wind must exist due to its propagation above the flat surface of the Earth which leads to the observed time difference.

"Sagnac detected the first-order effect of a man-made ether wind by using light following
a closed path in a rotating apparatus. In relation to his equipment, light traveled at
different speeds in two opposite directions."

In light of these results, mainstream science has resorted to modifying the speed of light
using two approaches: the Modified Lorentz Ether Theory and Non Time Orthogonal Analysis. However, both of these hypotheses are based either on the Lorentz transformation or on the Minkowski metric/spacetime, and as such are totally in error.


The Sagnac effect demonstrates that electromagnetic beams traveling in opposite directions will not travel at the same speed.

"So what is making one of the light  beams travel slower? Sagnac said it was due to the ether impeding its  velocity - a resistance that is easily generated by rotating the table. So  predictable and precise are these results that the “Sagnac effect,” as it is  commonly called, is used routinely in today’s technology for the purpose of sensing rotation, as well as in mechanical gyroscopes."

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 17, 2016, 12:40:46 AM
SAGNAC EFFECT V

In 1913, G. Sagnac proved that the speed of light is variable (Sagnac effect).

This fact is in total agreement with the original equations published by J.C. Maxwell in 1861:

(https://s2.postimg.org/c73ke0sc9/maxwell8.jpg)

Einstein, 1905:

"The principle of the constancy of the velocity of light is of course contained in Maxwell's equations”

We can infer immediately that Einstein had no knowledge whatsoever of the original ether equations derived by Maxwell, and based his false/erroneous conclusions on the MODIFIED/CENSORED Heaviside-Lorentz equations.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1639521#msg1639521

In the original ether equations, the speed of light is variable.

http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Mechanics%20/%20Electrodynamics/Download/5373

"The average speed of this flow is what determines the speed of light."

Aether sinks = dextrorotatory magnetic monopoles/subquarks

Aether sources = laevorotatory magnetic monopoles/subquarks



"Einstein claims that “The principle of the constancy of the velocityof light is of course contained in Maxwell's equations”.

If the Lorentz force had still been included as one of Maxwell’s equations, they could
have been written in total time derivative format (see Appendix A in ‘The Double
Helix Theory of the Magnetic Field’) and Einstein would not have been able to make
this claim. A total time derivative electromagnetic wave equation would allow the
electromagnetic wave speed to alter from the perspective of a moving observer."

http://web.archive.org/web/20071006083222/http://www.wbabin.net/science/tombe4.pdf


"And even more interesting still is the fact that Maxwell's original equation (D) is introduced in modern textbooks, under the misnomer of „The Lorentz Force‟, as being something extra that is lacking in Maxwell's equations, and which is needed as an extra equation to compliment Maxwell's equations, in order to make the set complete, as if it had never been one of Maxwell's equations in the first place! Maxwell in fact derived the so-called Lorentz force when Lorentz was only eight years old. Using the name „The Lorentz Force‟ in modern textbooks for equation (D) is somewhat regrettable, in that it gives the false impression that the μv×H expression is something that arises as a consequence of doing a „Lorentz transformation‟. A Lorentz transformation is an unfortunate product of Hendrik Lorentz‟s misunderstandings regarding the subject of electromagnetism, and these misunderstandings led to even greater misunderstandings when Albert Einstein got unto the job. Neither Lorentz nor Einstein seemed to have been aware of the contents of Maxwell's original papers, while both of them seemed to be under the impression that they were fixing something that wasn't broken in the first place. In doing so, Einstein managed to drop the luminiferous aether out of physics altogether, claiming that he was basing his investigation on what he had read in the so-called „Maxwell-Hertz equations for empty space‟! But whatever these Maxwell-Hertz equations might have been, they certainly can't have been Maxwell's original equations. This is a tragic story of confusion heaped upon more confusion. The aether was a crucial aspect in the development of Maxwell's equations, yet in 1905, Albert Einstein managed to impose Galileo's „Principle of Equivalence‟ upon Maxwell's equations while ignoring the aether altogether. The result was the abominable product which is hailed by modern physicists and known as „The Special Theory of Relativity‟. "

http://www.nanotechinnov.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Maxwell-Original-Equations.pdf

http://www.cartesio-episteme.net/ep8/distortion.pdf


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1615813#msg1615813 (magnetic monopoles and the original set of Maxwell's equations)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: Username on December 17, 2016, 03:22:39 AM
I am your biggest fan, but you have been off base lately; you had a solid argument concerning certain views, but I feel like you aren't holding up the mustard lately. Bring back the math.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 17, 2016, 04:02:09 AM
Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality.

N. Tesla



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 18, 2016, 12:27:57 AM
SAGNAC EFFECT VI

In the Sagnac experiment, the light speed varied to c + ωr in one direction and c – ωr in the other direction.

"A solution to the original/corrected Maxwell equations indicates that these equations are invariant under the Galilean transformation. Velocity vectors are additive, which means that the speed of light can be exceeded."

http://www.omicsonline.com/open-access/back-to-galilean-transformation-and-newtonian-physics-refuting-thetheory-of-relativity-2090-0902-1000198.pdf

"Maxwell’s [modified] equations are a brilliant formulation of the laws of electromagnetism. However, they were derived for static systems, i.e.; where there was no motion relative to the relevant coordinate system (RCS). At the turn of the twentieth century some scientists assumed that these equations pertain also to dynamic systems, wherefrom it follows that the speed of light is constant in all inertial coordinate systems. This in turn led to the Lorentz transformation and to Einstein’s theory of relativity.

The complete set of the EM (corrected Maxwell) equations is presented in chapter 1. It is shown that the notion of the speed of light being constant in all inertial coordinate systems stems from the wrong application of Maxwell's [modified] equations to dynamic systems. It is also pointed out that due to terms restored to the corrected Maxwell equations they do not equate under the Lorentz transformation rendering it, along with the theory of relativity which is based on this transformation, invalid.

A solution to the original/corrected Maxwell equations indicates that these equations are invariant under the Galilean transformation.

Consequently velocity vectors are additive, which means that the speed of light can be exceeded.

The common representation of Maxwell’s [modified] equations is valid only for static systems.

The physicists at the turn of the twentieth century were unaware of this limitation. They assumed that Maxwell’s [modified] equations were universally valid (i.e.: applicable to any inertial coordinate system) and tried to apply them to dynamic systems which led to inconsistencies. But instead of realizing and correcting the error (by modifying Maxwell’s equations; [i.e., using the original ether equations published by Maxwell in 1861) they introduced the Lorentz transformation which was the foundation of the flawed theory of relativity."


J.C. Maxwell used a dynamical model to derive his famous equations.


http://www.nanotechinnov.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Maxwell-Original-Equations.pdf (section 8, pages 8-9, exposes one of the deceptions used to hide the original form and meaning of Maxwell's aether equations)

"Maxwell was working on the basis that his equations apply in the rest frame of the luminiferous medium. The speed of light would therefore be measured relative to that medium. When observed from any frame of reference that is in motion relative to the luminiferous medium, the speed of light would simply be measured as per Galilean vector addition of velocities. Einstein wrongly preached that Maxwell’s equations are independent of any particular frame of reference and that hence the speed of light would always be observed to have the same value no matter from which frame of reference it is observed. Einstein had absolutely no basis upon which to draw this absurd conclusion and it is his abandoning of Galilean vector addition of velocities in relation to the speed of light that lies at the cornerstone of his special theory of relativity, and as such it is fair to state that on this basis alone Einstein’s theories of relativity are completely and totally false."

http://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Journal%20ReprintsMechanics%20/%20Electrodynamics/Download/3757


E = vXB and Maxwell’s Fourth Equation

http://www.gsjournal.net/old/science/tombe16.pdf (how the convective component of Maxwell's original equations was carefully removed/censored in order to facilitate the introduction of the false Lorentz transformation/relativistic effects)


"Einstein claims that “The principle of the constancy of the velocityof light is of course contained in Maxwell's equations”.

If the Lorentz force had still been included as one of Maxwell’s equations, they could
have been written in total time derivative format (see Appendix A in ‘The Double
Helix Theory of the Magnetic Field’) and Einstein would not have been able to make
this claim. A total time derivative electromagnetic wave equation would allow the
electromagnetic wave speed to alter from the perspective of a moving observer."

http://web.archive.org/web/20071006083222/http://www.wbabin.net/science/tombe4.pdf



http://web.stcloudstate.edu/ruwang/ION58PROCEEDINGS.pdf

(Conducting a Crucial Experiment of the Constancy of the Speed of Light Using GPS, R. Wang/R. Hatch) pages 499-500, 503 of the paper (pgs 5-6, 9 in the pdf document)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 21, 2016, 12:05:13 AM
SAGNAC EFFECT VII

When light is emitted in opposite directions on a platform in motion, it does NOT travel at the same speed.

The Sagnac effect proves the existence of the ether, the absolute reference frame of the universe.

The Sagnac effect is a direct consequence of the physical context expressed by J.C. Maxwell's original set of ether equations.


The Significance of Maxwell’s Equations

http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Essays-Mechanics%20/%20Electrodynamics/Download/4258

"Modern physics denies the existence of such a medium just as it denies the existence of centrifugal force as a physical reality, even though centrifugal force is the most significant factor behind the electromagnetic wave propagation mechanism within this medium. Maxwell’s real achievements are in fact totally alien to modern physics and indeed he was not remotely working along the same lines as Einstein.

In the year 1856, Weber and Kohlrausch performed an experiment with a Leyden jar and established the ratio between a quantity of electricity measured statically to the same quantity of electricity measured electrodynamically. This ratio turned out to be numerically related to the speed of light.

Maxwell showed that the ratio in question could be used in Newton’s equation for the speed of a wave in an elastic solid, hence confirming that light is an elastic wave in a particulate solid.

Einstein’s entire basis for postulating the constancy of the speed of light lay with the misinformed view that Maxwell’s equations do not contain a convective term. It is in this respect in particular that Maxwell’s contribution to electromagnetism has been totally distorted. Maxwell and Einstein were not remotely working along the same lines, while Maxwell was quite clear about the fact that the speed of light is measured relative to an elastic solid (comprised of fluid vortices), and that it is most certainly not frame independent as is believed by relativists."



http://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Mathematical%20Physics/Download/6314 (Weber-Kohlrausch Experiment)

"In 1856, Weber and Kohlrausch linked optical phenomena to electromagnetism. They discharged a Leyden jar and linked the speed of light to the electrostatic/electrodynamic ratio. In 1861, Maxwell showed how this ratio can be inserted into Newton’s equation for the speed of a wave in an elastic solid, and hence he showed that light is an electromagnetic wave. Modern textbooks unfortunately approach this issue with the benefit of hindsight while eliminating the rationale behind it by eliminating the sea of aethereal vortices along with its associated density and transverse elasticity. And to make matters worse, modern textbooks tend to focus on the mathematical solutions to Maxwell’s equations rather than on the physical meaning behind them."

http://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Mechanics%20/%20Electrodynamics/Download/213 (The Speed of Light varies with Magnetic Flux Density)




Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 22, 2016, 06:05:11 AM
MARCH 20, 1662 AD

Each and every controversy/contradiction of science, religion, history could have been well settled on the date of March 20, 1662.

There were to be no more future discussions/debates on vacuum vs. ether, theory of evolution vs. creationism, spherical earth vs. flat surface of the earth, heliocentricity vs. geocentricity: each and every dispute should have been resolved in totality on that very date.

March 20, 1662, represents by far the most important astronomical date in the history of scientific observations, of science in general, of astrophysics, of religion.


Because on that very date, right on the day of the vernal equinox, a total solar eclipse occurred.


And yet, in the official chronology of history, with the exception of a very obscure reference, NONE of the famous astronomers of the day could have cared less about this remarkable celestial phenomenon.

The Jesuits in India/China, F. Verbiest, J. Schall von Bell,  even the young N. Flamsteed fail to notice/record this most important of all the total solar eclipses.

It is only in a very brief mention by Domenico Cassini, that this solar eclipse is even recorded at all.

D. Cassini, Ephemerides nouisssimae motuum coelestium:

http://amshistorica.unibo.it/25 (pg. 28, 29, 34, 35)


What should have been by far the most important astronomical event of the millenium, of all time, a chance to settle once and for all the Gregorian calendar reform controversy, the raging debate on heliocentricity vs. geocentricity, aroused no interest at all from the scientific community at that point in time.


And yet, the registered date for the total solar eclipse which occurred in early 1662, March 20 (right on the vernal equinox) cannot be true.

http://www-nonlinear.physik.uni-bremen.de/download/GREGCAL.pdf

The Gregorian calendar was developed in the later part of the 16th century,
mainly by Aloysius Lilius and Christophorus Clavius. It was named after
Pope Gregory XIII who decreed its implementation in 1582. By that time
the Julian calendar had run out of step with the astronomical data in two
ways. In its solar part, it had accumulated an error of ten days; the true
average vernal equinox fell on March 11 rather than March 21 as the calendar
assumed. This was corrected by omitting the ten calendar days October 5
through October 14, 1582.


Papal Bull, Gregory XIII, 1582:

Therefore we took care not only that the vernal equinox returns on its former date, of which it has already deviated approximately ten days since the Nicene Council, and so that the fourteenth day of the Paschal moon is given its rightful place, from which it is now distant four days and more, but also that there is founded a methodical and rational system which ensures, in the future, that the equinox and the fourteenth day of the moon do not move from their appropriate positions.


According to the official chronology and astronomy, the direction of Earth's rotation axis executes a slow precession with a period of approximately 26,000 years.

Therefore, in the year 325 e.n., official date for the Council of Nicaea, the winter solstice MUST HAVE FALLEN on December 21 or December 22; in the year 968 e.n., on December 16; and in the year 1582, on December 11.

We are told that the motivation for the Gregorian reform was that the Julian calendar assumes that the time between vernal equinoxes is 365.25 days, when in fact it is about 11 minutes less. The accumulated error between these values was about 10 days (starting from the Council of Nicaea) when the reform was made, resulting in the equinox occurring on March 11 and moving steadily earlier in the calendar, also by the 16th century AD the winter solstice fell around December 11.



Domenico Cassini, in the official chronology of history, agrees wholeheartedly with the Gregorian calendar reform, and even defends it vigorously.

But it was Cassini who installed the most accurate observatory at San Petronio, and made ample use of it to monitor the accuracy of the new calendar. Cassini’s observations allowed exact calculations of future equinoxes on the Gregorian calendar to be made in advance.

https://books.google.ro/books?id=y7fEHa7eHYEC&pg=PA20&lpg=PA20&dq=cassini+gregorian+calendar+reform&source=bl&ots=IPFAZPd13o&sig=E6dNCk18VbIkVKzD0e9hNx-gZ2Q&hl=ro&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwirp5HhmoXRAhUECBoKHcIvDFwQ6AEIVTAE#v=onepage&q=cassini%20gregorian%20calendar%20reform&f=false


If the date of the total solar eclipse of the spring in the year 1662 AD really had fallen on March 20, the very day of the vernal equinox, then it would have constituted a perfect, total astronomical verification of the Gregorian calendar reform; also a valid proof that the chronology of history, from Hipparchus to Ptolemy and from Exiguus to Clavius, based on the axial precession of the Earth, was correct (thus resolving once and for all the heliocentricity vs. geocentricity debate).


No RE axial precession means that the Earth did not ever orbit around the Sun, as we have been led to believe. And it means that the entire chronology of the official history has been forged at least after 1750 AD.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1826955#msg1826955 (the vernal equinox in the year 1582 AD must have fallen on March 16)

The falsification of the Gregorian calendar reform:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1638725#msg1638725

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1638504#msg1638504
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 26, 2016, 02:46:04 AM
MAGNETIC MONOPOLE ELECTROGRAVITY

“Maxwell had actually written a unified field theory of electromagnetics and gravitation - not just the unification of electricity and magnetism as is commonly believed. Further, this can readily be shown by examining some significant even startling - elementary differences between quaternion mathematics and the present vector mathematics.

Let us briefly look at one of these key differences, to show that the present vector mathematics expression of Maxwell's theory is only a subset of his quaternion theory.

What Heaviside's theory specifically omitted was electrogravitation (KG) - the ability to transform electromagnetic force field energy into gravitational potential energy, and vice-versa. And that has been omitted because of the assumptions of the vector theory in the nature of: (1) EM vector field combination, and (2) a zero-vector resultant of the interaction of multiple nonzero EM force vectors.

Briefly, in Heaviside's vector mathematics, the abstract vector space in which the vectors exist has no stress nor consequent "curvature" in it. That is, the mathematical vector space does not change due to interactions between the vectors it "contains". This, of course is not necessarily true in the "real space" of the physical world. Thus when such an abstract vector space and its concomitant coordinate system are taken to model physical space (physical reality), the model will be valid only when the physical space itself has no appreciable local curvature, and is in a state of total equilibrium with respect to its interactions with observable charged particles and masses.

So abstract vector theory implicitly assumes "no locked-in stress energy of the vector space itself". By assumption, the only interactions are between the objects (the vectors) placed in/on that space. Therefore, when two or more translation vectors sum or multiply locally to a zero-vector translation resultant, in such an "unstressable" vector space one is justified in: (1) replacing the system of summing/multiplying translation vector components with a zero-vector, and (2) discarding the previous translation vector components of the zero-vector system. That is, one may properly equate the translation zero-vector system with a zero-vector, since the presence or absence of the combined vectors can have no further action. Specifically, axiomatically they exert no stress on the abstract vector space. Under those assumptions, the system can be replaced by its equivalent zero-factor alone.

Note that, applied to electromagnetics, this modeling procedure eliminates any theoretical possibility of electrogravitation (EM stress curvature of local ether/aether continuum) a priori.

Force Vectors are Translations of Stress

Conceptually, a force vector is actually a release of some implied stress in a local medium. The force is applied to create stress in a second local region immediately adjacent to the primary region of stress. Of course the stress being thus "translated" by the force vector may be either tensile or compressive in nature, but a priori the force vector always represents the translation of that stress from its tail-end toward its head.
Consequently, an EM force vector is a gradient (inflow or outflow) in a scalar EM potential (stress), where the referent potential stress may be either tensile or compressive. Since modern Heaviside-type vectors do not distinguish between, or even recognize, the two "head and tail" scalar EM potentials involved in a vector, one needs to refer to Whittaker  to get it right. Whittaker, a fine mathematician in his own right, showed that any vector field can be replaced by two scalar waves. Unfortunately, the electrogravitational implications of Whittaker's profound work were not recognized and followed up, and their connection to Maxwell's quaternionic EM theory was not noticed nor examined.

So the idea of a vector EM force represents a release of a primary "tail-associated" scalar potential, and a bleedoff of that potential. It represents an increase in its primary "head-associated" scalar potential, and a bleed into that potential. Each scalar potential itself represents trapped EM energy density in the local vacuum, in the form of two or more (even an infinite number of) internal (infolded) EM force vector components (which may be either fixed, dynamic, or a blend of the two). The trapped energy density, however, may be either positive or negative with respect to the local energy density of the standard ambient vacuum, since the potential may be either compressive or tensile.

So in 1988, we have finally arrived at the state where the potentials are more-or-less understood by a consensus of quantum physicists as being the primary EM reality, while the force fields are now seen to be secondary effects generated from the potentials.
This understanding, however, still has a long way to go before it penetrates the main bastions of physics and electrical engineering. Most scientists and electrical engineers are still adamantly committed to the Heaviside version of Maxwell's theory, and are strongly conditioned that the EM force fields are the primary effectors in electromagnetics.

They are also nearly totally resistant to the idea that there may be a fundamental error in automatically replacing a zero-resultant system of EM translation force vectors with a zero factor, rather than replacing the system with the combination of a conditional zero vector (conditional for translation only) and a scalar stress potential. Consequently, most orthodox scientists and engineers are still strongly conditioned against quaternions, and erroneously believe that Heaviside's translation was complete. Seemingly it has never occurred to most mathematicians and scientists that zero-vectors are usually not truly equal. Stress-wise, zero resultant combinant systems of multiple translation vectors usually differ in: (1) magnitude, (2) polarization, (3) type of stress, (4) frequency components, (5) nonlinear components, and (6) dynamic internal variation.

In the vector product of two identical vectors,

(http://www.nzdl.org/gsdl/collect/hdl/index/assoc/HASHedcc.dir/Image1899.gif)

we will obtain,

(http://www.nzdl.org/gsdl/collect/hdl/index/assoc/HASHedcc.dir/Image1906.gif)

where A is the length (magnitude) of vector, and the angle is zero.

After Heaviside and Gibbs, electrical engineers are trained to replace the cross product with the zero vector, discarding the components of the zero vector system as having no further consequences, either electromagnetically or physically.

Now let us look at the comparable quaternion expression of this situation. First, in addition to the three vector components, a quaternion also has a scalar component, w.

So the quaternion q corresponding to vector is:

(http://www.nzdl.org/gsdl/collect/hdl/index/assoc/HASHedcc.dir/Image1914.gif)

The physical interpretation of this equation is that there locally exists a stress w in the medium and a translation change vector in that stress.

When the quaternion is multiplied times itself (that is, times an identical quaternion), the vector part zeros, just as it did for the vector expression. However, the scalar part does not go to zero. Instead, we have:

(http://www.nzdl.org/gsdl/collect/hdl/index/assoc/HASHedcc.dir/Image1916.gif)

The zero translation vector resultant of the system shows that the system now does not produce translation of a charged particle. Because the force vectors have been infolded, the scalar term shows that the system is stressing, and the magnitude of that stress is given by the scalar term A2.

Notice that the zero vector in the equation does not represent the absence of translation vectors, but it represents the presence of a system of multiple (in this case, two) vectors, one of them acting upon the other in such a manner that their external translation effect has been lost and only their stress effect remains. The quaternion scalar expression has, in fact, captured the local stress due to the forces acting one on the other, so to speak. It is focused on the local stress, and the abstract vector space, adding a higher dimension to it.

In other words, the zero translation vector resultant in the equation represents the internal stress action of a nontranslating system of vectors that are present, infolded, and acting internally together on the common medium that entraps them and locks them together. The two translation vectors have formed a deterministically substructured medium-stressing system, and this is a local gravitational effect.

One sees that, if we would capture gravitation in a vector mathematics theory of EM, we must again restore the scalar term and convert the vector to a quaternion, so that one captures the quaternionically infolded stresses. These infolded stresses actually represent curvature effects in the abstract vector space itself. Changing to quaternions changes the abstract vector space, adding higher dimensions to it.

In the equation, then, we have a local gravitational effect - a local increase in the energy density of a vacuum.

We have presented only the barest illustration of how Maxwell's original quaternion theory was actually a unified field theory of electrogravitation, where gravitation deals with the stress (enfolded and trapped forces) of the medium, and electrogravitation deals with the electromagnetic stress (enfolded and trapped EM forces) of the medium.

Recapitulation: From Maxwell to 1900

In summary, Maxwell himself was well-aware of the importance and reality of the potential stress of the medium. However, after Maxwell's death, Heaviside - together with Hertz - was responsible for striving to strip away the electromagnetic potentials from Maxwell's theory, and for strongly conditioning physicists and electrical engineers that the potentials were only mathematical conveniences and had no physical reality. Heaviside also discarded the scalar component of the quaternion, and - together with Gibbs - finalized the present modern vector analysis.

The scalar component of the quaternion, however, was the term which precisely captured the electrogravitational stress of the medium. By discarding this term, Heaviside (aided by Hertz and Gibbs) actually discarded electrogravitation, and the unified EM-G field aspects of Maxwell's theory. However, the theory and the calculations were greatly simplified in so doing, and this excision of electrogravitation provided a theory that was much more easily grasped and applied by scientists and engineers - even though they were now working in a subset of Maxwell's theory in which gravity and EM remained mutually exclusive and did not interact with each other.

Shortly before 1900, the vectorists' view prevailed, and the Heaviside version of Maxwell's theory became the established and universal "EM theory" taught in all major universities - and erroneously taught as "Maxwell's theory"! Though gravitation had been removed, the beautiful unification of the electrical and magnetic fields had been retained, and so the rise in applied and theoretical electromagnetics and electromagnetic devices began, ushering in the modern age."

(Maxwell's lost unified field theory of electromagnetics and gravitation, T. Bearden)

" ... In discarding the scalar component of the quaternion, Heaviside and Gibbs unwittingly discarded the unified EM/G [electromagnetic/ gravitational] portion of Maxwell's theory that arises when the translation/directional components of two interacting quaternions reduce to zero, but the scalar resultant remains and infolds a deterministic, dynamic structure that is a function of oppositive directional/translational components. In the infolding of EM energy inside a scalar potential, a structured scalar potential results, almost precisely as later shown by Whittaker but unnoticed by the scientific community. The simple vector equations produced by Heaviside and Gibbs captured only that subset of Maxwell's theory where EM and gravitation are mutually exclusive. In that subset, electromagnetic circuits and equipment will not ever, and cannot ever, produce gravitational or inertial effects in materials and equipment.

It is to be noted that Kaluza combined electromagnetics and gravitation as a unified theory in 1921.  Kaluza added a fifth (spatial) dimension to Minkowski's 4-space, and applied Einstein's relativity theory to 5 dimensions.

To Kaluza's delight, a common 5-d potential is responsible for both electromagnetic field and gravitational field.  The "bleed-off' of this 5-potential in the 5th dimension (which is wrapped around each point in our 3-space) is what we know as the electromagnetic force field.  The bleed-off of this 5-potential in and through our 3-space is what we know as the gravitational force field."

http://www.cheniere.org/books/aids/ch4.htm

http://www.oocities.org/area51/shadowlands/9654/bearden/testunify.html


Now we know that there is no such thing as the Minkowski spacetime continuum, and no other higher dimensions.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.phptopic=65085.msg1736864#msg1736864 (total demolition of STR/GTR)

Ether theory means that there are more infinitesimal levels of strings of bosons, which form each and every known particle in quantum physics: baryons (9 subquarks structure), mesons (6 subquarks structure), quarks (3 subquarks structure) and the subquarks themselves (gravitons/magnetic monopoles).

In ether theory, ELECTRICITY = MAGNETISM = TERRESTRIAL GRAVITY: subquarks = gravitons = magnetic monopoles.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.phptopic=30499.msg1615813#msg1615813



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 26, 2016, 08:17:29 AM
MAGNETIC MONOPOLE ELECTROGRAVITY II

"In the 1880s, several scientists --- Heaviside, Gibbs, Hertz etc. --- strongly assaulted the Maxwellian theory and dramatically reduced it, creating vector algebra in the process. Then circa 1892 Lorentz arbitrarily symmetrized the already seriously constrained Heaviside-Maxwell equations, just to get simpler equations easier to solve algebraically, and thus to dramatically reduce the need for numerical methods (which were a "real bear" before the computer). But that symmetrization also arbitrarily discarded all asymmetrical Maxwellian systems - the very ones of interest to us today if we are seriously interested in usable EM energy from the vacuum.

So anyone seriously interested in potential systems that accept and use additional EM energy from the vacuum, must first violate the Lorentz symmetry condition, else all his efforts are doomed to failure a priori.

We point out that quaternion algebra has a higher group symmetry than either vector algebra or tensor algebra, and hence it reveals much more EM phenomenology and dynamics than does EM in vector or tensor form.

Today, the tremendously crippled Maxwell-Heaviside equations --- symmetrized by Lorentz --- are taught in all our universities in the electrical engineering (EE) department. Note that the EE professors still dutifully symmetrize the equations, following Lorentz, and thus they continue to arbitrarily discard all asymmetrical Maxwellian systems. Hence none of them has the foggiest notion of how to go about developing an "energy from the vacuum" system, which is asymmetrical a priori.

The resulting classical electromagnetics and electrical engineering (CEM/EE) model taught in all our university EE departments also contains very serious falsities. Most of modern physics, such as special and general relativity, quantum field theory, etc., has been developed since the 1880s and 1890s fixating of the symmetrized Maxwell-Heaviside equations.

When Lorentz symmetrically regauged the Maxwell-Heaviside equations, he arbitrarily discarded the entire class of Maxwellian systems that are far from equilibrium in their exchange with their active (vacuum) environment. Lorentz revised (symmetrically regauged) the Maxwell-Heaviside equations to make them amenable to separation of variables and closed analytical solutions.

The domain of Lorentz's symmetrically regauged equations is only a small subset of the domain of the Maxwell-Heaviside equations they replace. Indeed, the later Lorentz symmetrical regauging discards an entire class of Maxwellian systems permitted by nature and by the Maxwell-Heaviside equations before they are symmetrically regauged."


"From the beginning, Poynting only considered that component of the energy flow that actually enters the circuit. He considered only the "boundary layer" right on the conductor surfaces, so to speak.

Heaviside considered that component that enters the circuit, and also uncovered and recognized the gigantic component in the surrounding space that does not enter the circuit but misses it entirely and is wasted.

Heaviside himself recognized the gravitational implications of his extra component of energy flow, which is in closed circular loops. Beneath the floorboards of his little garret apartment, years after his death, handwritten papers were found where Heaviside used this component for a unified EM approach to gravitation.

Heaviside's theory was an extension of what Poynting had considered, and Heaviside also corrected Poynting as to the direction of flow. Heaviside was fully aware of the enormity of the "dark energy" flow missed by Poynting, but had absolutely no explanation as to where such a startlingly large EM energy flow — pouring from the terminals of every dipole, generator, or battery — could possibly be coming from.

Heaviside was fully aware that the energy flow diverged into the wire was only a minuscule fraction of the total. He was fully aware that the remaining component was so huge that the energy flow vector remaining — after the divergence of the Poynting component into the circuit — was still almost parallel to the conductors. However, he had no explanation at all of where such an enormous and baffling energy flow could possibly originate.

Had Heaviside strongly stated the enormity of the nondiverged component of the energy flow, he would have been viciously attacked and scientifically discredited as a perpetual motion advocate. His words were measured and cautious, but there is no doubt that he recognized the enormity of the nondiverged EM energy flow component.

Lorentz then entered the EM energy flow scene to face the terrible problem so quietly raised by Heaviside. Lorentz understood the presence of the Poynting component, and also of the extra Heaviside component, but could find no explanation for the startling, enormous magnitude of the EM energy pouring out of the terminals of the power source (pouring from the source dipole) if the Heaviside component was accounted.

Unable to solve the dark energy flow problem by any rational means, Lorentz found a clever way to avoid it. He reasoned that the nondiverged Heaviside component was "physically insignificant" (his term) because it did not even enter the circuit. Since it did nothing of any physical consequences, or so he reasoned, then it could just be discarded. So Lorentz simply integrated the entire energy flow vector (the vector representing the sum of both the Heaviside nondiverged component and the Poynting diverged component) around an assumed closed surface enclosing any volume of interest. A priori, this mathematical procedure discards the dark Heaviside energy flow component because of its nondivergence. It retains only the intercepted Poynting diverged component that enters the circuit.

See E. R. Laithwaite, “Oliver Heaviside – establishment shaker,” Electrical Review, 211(16), Nov. 12, 1982, p. 44-45.

Laithwaite felt that Heaviside’s postulation that a flux of gravitational energy combines with the (ExH) electromagnetic energy flux, could shake the foundations of physics. Quoting from Laithwaite: “Heaviside had originally written the energy flow as S = (E x H) + G, where G is a circuital flux.

Poynting had only written S = (E x H). Taking p to be the density of matter and e the intensity of a gravitational force, Heaviside found that the circuital flux G can be expressed as pu - ce, where u represents the velocity of p and c is a constant.”

One of the rather "bad examples" of ubiquitous errors in electrodynamics is the conventional illustration of a so-called planar EM wavefront moving through space."

(http://www.zamandayolculuk.com/09-4/1em-radiation.png)

Dr. Robert H. Romer, former Editor of the American Journal of Physics, also chastised the diagram shown above, purporting to illustrate the transverse plane wave traveling through 3-space. In endnote 24 of his noteworthy editorial, Dr. Romer takes that diagram to task as follows:

"…that dreadful diagram purporting to show the electric and magnetic fields of a plane wave, as a function of position (and/or time?) that besmirch the pages of almost every introductory book. …it is a horrible diagram. 'Misleading' would be too kind a word; 'wrong' is more accurate." "…perhaps then, for historical interest, [we should] find out how that diagram came to contaminate our literature in the first place."


Ether = subquark strings travelling in double torsion fashion (one string is made up of dextrorotatory subquarks, the other string consists of laevorotatory subquarks)


(https://web.archive.org/web/20210607142847/http://www.selfhealgo.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/DOUBLE_HELIX_PHASE_CONJUGATED_WAVE_1-300x165.jpg)


http://spiritofmaat.com/archive/feb2/bearden.htm

“The fact is that Maxwell’s core ideas in electromagnetism had their origins in a sea of molecular vortices exactly along the lines of what Tesla and Sir Oliver Lodge were referring to.

Maxwell identified the cause of magnetic repulsion in terms of the centrifugal pressure arising in a sea of molecular vortices. He identified the mechanism for the force on a current carrying wire, and also for motionally induced EMF, in terms of differential centrifugal pressure in this sea of molecular vortices. He explained time varying electromagnetic induction on the basis that the tiny vortices in space are acting like fly-wheels.

There was another curl equation in Maxwell’s original list of 1864, but it does not appear in modern sets of ‘Maxwell’s Equations’. This very important curl equation,

curl A = μH (2)

which relates to the fly-wheel nature of the magnetic field, is played down nowadays in favour of the much less informative equation, div B = 0, which is obtained by taking the divergence of equation (2).

 The third curl equation, which appeared in both Maxwell’s original listing and in modern listings, is Ampère’s circuital law, and Maxwell is most famous for having extended it to include the concept of displacement current. The displacement current concept was purely Maxwell’s own idea, although Maxwell’s concept of it bears no relationship to the term which bears the same name in modern textbooks.

Therefore, contrary to what is taught in modern textbooks, Maxwell’s version of Ampère’s Circuital Law does not mean that a changing electric field induces a magnetic field. In the context of an electromagnetic wave, both of these two curl equations must refer to a situation in which the changing magnetic field of a primary circuit induces an electric field in a secondary circuit. The displacement in question, as Maxwell initially suspected, is an angular displacement, which takes place in the fine-grained electric circuits (rotating electron-positron dipoles) which fill all of space, and which press against each other with centrifugal force while striving to dilate. Every cubic picometre of space contains a two-pin electric power point (a rotating electron-positron dipole). These power points exist everywhere and they connect the universe to the source of its animation. Electromagnetic waves are a propagation of angular acceleration (or precession) through this electric sea of tiny aethereal vortices and the undulations correspond to oscillations in fine-grained centrifugal pressure. These pressure oscillations are caused by an excess outflow of aether from the positrons of the electric sea.”

http://www.nanotechinnov.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Maxwell-Original-Equations.pdf (section 8, pages 8-9, exposes one of the deceptions used to hide the original form and meaning of Maxwell's aether equations)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 27, 2016, 02:14:53 AM
MAGNETIC MONOPOLE ELECTROGRAVITY III: BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT

In earlier experimentation, Thomas Townsend Brown had made the startling discovery that a Coolidge X-ray tube exhibited thrust when charged to high voltage. It took Brown a while to realize that the motion was not caused by the X rays themselves, but by the electricity coursing through the tube. Brown went on to develop a device he called the "Gravitor," an electrical condenser sealed in a Bakelite case, that would exhibit a one percent weight gain or a one percent weight loss when connected to a 100-kilovolt power supply.

"The Gravitor, in all reality, is a very efficient motor. Unlike other forms of motor, it does not in any way involve the principles of electromagnetism, but instead it utilizes the principles of electro-gravitation.

A simple gravitor has no moving parts, but is apparently capable of moving itself from within itself. It is highly efficient for the reason that it uses no gears, shafts, propellers or wheels in creating its motive power. It has no internal mechanical resistance and no observable rise in temperature. Contrary to the common belief that gravitational motors must necessarily be vertical-acting, the gravitor, it is found, acts equally well in every conceivable direction."

T.T. Brown, 1929


In 1955, he went to work for the French aerospace company SNCASO—Société Nationale de Constructions Aéronautiques du SudOuest. During this one-year research period, he ran his discs in a vacuum. If anything, they worked better in a vacuum.

http://www.rexresearch.com/gravitor/gravitor.htm

Since the time of the first test the apparatus and the methods used have been greatly improved and simplified. Cellular "gravitators" have taken the place of the large balls of lead. Rotating frames supporting two and four gravitators have made possible acceleration measurements. Molecular gravitators made of solid blocks of massive dielectric have given still greater efficiency. Rotors and pendulums operating under oil have eliminated atmospheric considerations as to pressure, temperature and humidity.

The disturbing effects of ionization, electron emission and pure electro-statics have likewise been carefully analyzed and eliminated. Finally after many years of tedious work and with refinement of methods we succeeded in observing the gravitational variations produced by the moon and sun and much smaller variations produced by the different planets.

Let us take, for example, the case of a gravitator totally immersed in oil but suspended so as to act as a pendulum and swing along the line of its elements.

(https://i84.servimg.com/u/f84/17/91/23/29/00fig210.gif)

When the direct current with high voltage (75-300 kilovolts) is applied the gravitator swings up the arc until its propulsive force balances the force of the earth's gravity resolved to that point, then it stops, but it does not remain there. The pendulum then gradually returns to the vertical or starting position even while the potential is maintained. The pendulum swings only to one side of the vertical. Less than five seconds is required for the test pendulum to reach the maximum amplitude of the swing but from thirty to eighty seconds are required for it to return to zero.

(T.T. Brown, How I Control Gravitation, 1929)


“Brown’s first experiments consisted of two lead spheres connected by a nonconductive glass rod, like a dumbell. One sphere was charged positive, the other negative, with a total of 120 kilovolts between them. This formed a large electric dipole. When suspended, the system moved toward the positive pole, arcing upwards and staying there against the force of gravity tugging downward. This showed that electric dipoles generate self-acceleration toward the positive pole. This experiment was repeated in oil, in a grounded tank, proving that ion wind was not responsible.

Improved versions of this setup replaced the lead spheres with metal plates, and glass rod with dielectric plates or blocks. This created a high voltage parallel plate capacitor with one or more layers. Brown’s British patent #300,111 – issued in 1927 – described what he termed a “cellular gravitator” consisting of numerous metal plates interleaved with dielectric plates, the entire block wrapped in insulating material and end plates connected to output electrodes and a spark gap to limit the input voltage. This device produced significant acceleration.

Brown’s 1927 patent described a self-contained device that exhibited no ion wind effects and relied solely upon the electrogravitational action arising from the electric dipoles within the gravitator-capacitor.”


“When a high voltage (~30 kV) is applied to a capacitor whose electrodes have different physical dimensions, the capacitor experiences a net force toward the smaller electrode (Biefeld-Brown effect).

The calculations indicate that ionic wind is at least three orders of magnitude too small to explain the magnitude of the observed force on the capacitor (in open air experiments).”
In the Paris test miniature saucer type airfoils were operated in a vaccum exceeding 10-6mm Hg. Bursts of thrust (towards the positive) were observed every time there was a vaccum spark within the large bell jar.

Condensers of various types, air dielectric and barium titanate were assembled on a rotary support to eliminate the electrostatic effect of chamber walls and observations were made of the rate of rotation. Intense acceleration was always observed during the vacuum spark (which, incidentally, illuminated the entire interior of the vacuum chamber). Barium Titanate dielectrique always exceeded air dielectric in total thrust. The results which were most significant from the standpoint of the Biefeld-Brown effect, was that thrust continued, even when there was no vacuum spark, causing the rotor to accelerate in the negative to positive direction to the point where voltage had to be reduced or the experiment discontinued because of the danger that the rotor would fly apart.

In short, it appears there is strong evidence that Biefeld-Brown effect does exist in the negative to positive direction in a vacuum of at least 10-6 Torr. The residual thrust is several orders of magnitude larger than the remaining ambient ionization can account for. Going further in your letter of January 28th, the condenser "Gravitor" as described in my British patent, only showed a loss of weight when vertically oriented so that the negative-to-postive thrust was upward. In other words, the thrust tended to "lift" the gravitor."

T.T. Brown, 1973


“The initial experiments conducted by Townsend Brown, concerning the behavior of a condenser when charged with electricity, had the characteristic of simplicity which has marked most other great scientific advancements.

The first startling revelation was that if placed in free suspension with the poles horizontal, the condenser, when charged, exhibited a forward thrust toward the positive poles. A reversal of polarity caused a reversal of the direction of thrust. The experiment was set up as follows:

(https://web.archive.org/web/20110502081059im_/http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/rose5.jpg)

The antigravity effect of vertical thrust is demonstrated by balancing a condenser on a beam balance and then charging it. After charging, if the positive pole is pointed upward, the condenser moves up.

If the charge is reversed and the positive pole pointed downward, the condenser thrusts down. The experiment is conducted as follows:"

(https://web.archive.org/web/20110502081059im_/http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/rose3.jpg)


VACUUM TEST #1

http://lifters.online.fr/lifters/ascvacuum/index.htm (includes all necessary technical information and the video itself)


At the pressure of 1.72 x 10^-6 Torr ( High Vacuum conditions ), the apparatus rotates when the High Voltage is increased from 0 to +45 KV.


VACUUM TEST #2

https://web.archive.org/web/20050216062907/http://www-personal.umich.edu/~reginald/liftvac.html (includes technical information and video)


VACUUM TEST #3

https://web.archive.org/web/20070212193741/http://www.t-spark.de/t-spark/t-sparke/liftere.htm (includes technical information and video)


MULTIPLE TESTS PERFORMED IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT ION WIND COULD NOT HAVE AN INFLUENCE ON THE EXPERIMENTS THEMSELVES:

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/lifteriw.htm


VACUUM TEST #4: PROJECT MONTGOLFIER

https://web.archive.org/web/20140110041712/http://projetmontgolfier.info/

https://web.archive.org/web/20131025082102/http://projetmontgolfier.info/TT_Brown_Proposal.html

https://web.archive.org/web/20130522083124/http://projetmontgolfier.info/uploads/Section_3__Final_Report.pdf

In 1955 and 1956 Townsend Brown made two trips to Paris where he conducted tests of his electrokinetic apparatus and electrogravitic vacuum chamber tests in collaboration with the French aeronautical company Société National de Construction Aeronautiques du Sud Ouest (S.N.C.A.S.O.) .

In addition the Project Montgolfier team constructed a very large vacuum chamber for performing vacuum tests of smaller discs at a pressure of 5 X 10-5 mm Hg:

(http://starburstfound.org/electrograviticsblog/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Mont-3-1024x720.jpg)

The report says that under high vacuum conditions the discs always moved in the direction of the positive pole, regardless of the polarity on the outboard wire. 

These vacuum chamber experiments were a decisive milestone in that they demonstrated beyond a doubt that electrogravitic propulsion was a real physical phenomenon. 

PAGE 26 OF THE FINAL REPORT FULLY DESCRIBES THE OBSERVED BIEFELD BROWN EFFECT IN FULL VACUUM CHAMBER

When the DISK SHAPED CAPACITOR WAS USED, the total deviation/movement was A FULL 30 DEGREES (deviation totale du systeme 30 degre).


VIDEO: BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT, balancing a condenser on a beam balance

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/elghatv1.htm (includes three videos of the experiment)

(http://jnaudin.free.fr/images/elghatab.jpg)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 28, 2016, 12:09:16 AM
MAGNETIC MONOPOLE ELECTROGRAVITY IV: NIPHER EXPERIMENTS

“Dr. Francis Nipher, Professor of physics, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, did some of the pioneering electrogravitics work at Washington University in St. Louis back around the turn of the last century. He applied high voltage to lead balls, lead spheres and hollow metal boxes and compared the repulsive effect induced in small test spheres hung vertically near them, similar to the original Cavendish experiments but with high voltage. Dr. Nipher went to great lengths to insert protective, grounded screens of glass between the solid lead spheres and the suspended balls to rule out electrostatic effects.”

Before connecting any form of electric current to the modified Cavendish apparatus, Prof.  Nipher took special precaution to carefully screen the moving element from any electrostatic or electromagnetic effects. His apparatus briefly consists of two large lead spheres ten inches in diameter, resting upon heavy sheets of hard rubber. Two small lead balls, each one inch in diameter, were now suspended from two silk threads, stationed at the sides of the two large lead spheres, from which they were separated by a little distance. Moreover, the suspended balls were insulated elaborately from the large spheres by enclosing them first airtight in a long wooden box, which was also covered with tinned iron sheets as well as cardboard sheets. There was, furthermore, a metal shield between the box and the large metal spheres. The large metal lead spheres now exerted a certain gravitational force upon the suspended small lead balls … and the small lead balls were slightly moved over towards the large spheres.

In further experiments Prof.  Nipher decided to check his results. To do this he replaced the large solid lead spheres with two metal boxes, each filled with loose cotton batting. These hollow boxes (having practically no mass) rested upon insulators. They were separated from the protective screen by sheets of glass and were grounded to it by heavy copper wires. The metal boxes were then charged in every way that the solid lead spheres had been, but not the slightest change in the position of the lead balls could be detected. This would seem to prove conclusively that the "repulsion" and "gravitational nullification" effects that he had produced when the solid balls were electrically charged were genuine and based undoubtedly on a true inter-atomic electrical reaction, and not upon any form of electrostatic or electromagnetic effects between the large and small masses. If they had been, the metal boxes, with no mass, would have served as well as the solid balls.


The relationship between gravitation and the electric field was first observed experimentally by Dr. Francis Nipher. Nipher's conclusion was that sheilded electrostatic fields directly influence the action of gravitation. He further concluded that gravitation and electrical fields are absolutely linked.

http://www.rexresearch.com/nipher/nipher1.htm

New Evidence of a Relation Between Gravitation & Electrical Action (1920)
Gravitational Repulsion (1916)
Gravitation & Electrical Action (1916)
Can Electricity Reverse the Effect of Gravity? (1918)

The relationship between gravitation and the electric field was first observed experimentally by Dr. Francis Nipher. Dr. Francis Nipher conducted extensive experiments during 1918, on a modified Cavendish experiment. He reproduced the classical arrangements for the experiment, where gravitational attraction could be measured between free-swinging masses, and a large fixed central mass. Dr. Nipher modified the Cavendish experiment by applying a large electrical field to the large central mass, which was sheilded inside a Faraday cage. When electrostatic charge was applied to the large fixed mass, the free-swinging masses exhibited a reduced attraction to the central mass, when the central mass was only slightly charged. As the electric field strength was increased, there arose a voltage threshold which resulted in no attraction at all between the fixed mass and the free-swinging masses. Increasing the potential applied to the central mass beyond that threshold, resulted in the free-swinging masses being repelled (!) from the fixed central mass. Nipher's conclusion was that sheilded electrostatic fields directly influence the action of gravitation. He further concluded that gravitation and electrical fields are absolutely linked.


"These results seem to indicate clearly that gravitational attraction between masses of matter depends upon electrical potential due to electrical charges upon them."

Every working day of the following college year has been devoted to testing the validity of the above statement. No results in conflict with it have been obtained. Not only has gravitational attraction been diminished by electrification of the attracting bodies when direct electrical action has been wholly cut off by a metal shield, but it has been made negative. It has been converted into a repulsion. This result has been obtained many times throughout the year. On one occasion during the latter part of the year, this repulsion was made somewhat more than twice as great as normal attraction."

Increasing the potential applied to the central mass beyond that threshold, resulted in the free-swinging masses being repelled (!) from the fixed central mass. Nipher's conclusion was that sheilded electrostatic fields directly influence the action of gravitation. He further concluded that gravitation and electrical fields are absolutely linked.

Dr. Francis Nipher one of the most distinguished physicists of the United States:

http://www.accessgenealogy.com/missouri/biography-of-francis-eugene-nipher-ll-d.htm


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 28, 2016, 01:28:46 AM
MAGNETIC MONOPOLE ELECTROGRAVITY V: SUBQUARK G FORCE

The rate of acceleration of a falling object, which acquires kinetic energy is a measure of energy flow via conduction through the ether.

The velocity of a free-falling object is changing by approximately 9.8 m/s every second because of the constant pressure applied by ether strings on matter.

On a flat surface of the Earth, the g force equals π2 and is not related at all to the mass/radius of the Earth.

π is the inverse value of the sacred cubit:

1 sacred  cubit = 2/π

g = π2 = 4/sc2 m/s2

https://web.archive.org/web/20120802231648/http://reocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/3324/pan3.gif

There are several values to be used for the sacred cubit depending on the color of the light spectrum: starting from 0.62832 all the way to 0.64 – the most important value is of course 0.63566, the sacred cubit.

The color spectrum of the subquark is related directly to each and every form of force known to physics: from gamma radiation and x-rays to microwaves and radio waves.

http://www.weare1.us/Babbitt%20color.jpg

The darker colors correspond to the terrestrial gravity force (aether sink), the brigher colors to the antigravitational force (aether source).

Subquark = Magnetic Monopole = Graviton

If we select the value of the sacred cubit corresponding to a darker color, 0.63855, then we obtain g = 9.81 m/s2.

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0709/0709.0408.pdf (formula for g in terms of ether pressure and ether density, pg 4)

http://www.aetherometry.com/Aetherometry_Intro/pratt_aether_grav.php (section 3, Gravitational Pendulums, g related to π2)

18 x (1/sc2)-1 = 7.273 (height of the apex of the Gizeh Pyramid)

286.1 sacred inches = 7.273 meters (286.1 = the displacement factor of the Gizeh Pyramid = 450 sacred cubits)

Thus, the value of g is directly related to the value of the first zero of Riemann’s Zeta function.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1584725#msg1584725


Kinetic theory of terrestrial gravitation:
http://www.rexresearch.com/brush/brush.htm


http://bourabai.kz/gorbatz/gravity-e.htm (ether pressure theory with formulas; G constant related to the density of ether; as is known from astrophysics, G can be shown to be directly connected to density in a single formula)

http://bourabai.kz/gorbatz/ether-e06.htm (calculation of the density of ether)

“This implies an important conclusion: bodies of different volumes that are in the same gradient medium acquire the same acceleration.

Note that if we keep watch on the fall of bodies of different masses and volumes in the Earth’s gravitation field under conditions when the effect of the air resistance is minimized (or excluded), the bodies acquire the same acceleration. Galileo was the first to establish this fact. The most vivid experiment corroborating the fact of equal acceleration for bodies of different masses is a fall of a lead pellet and bird feather in the deaerated glass tube. Imagine we start dividing one of the falling bodies into some parts and watching on the fall of these parts in the vacuum. Quite apparently, both large and small parts will fall down with the same acceleration in the Earth’s gravitation field. If we continue this division down to atoms we can obtain the same result. Hence it follows that the gravitation field is applied to every element that has a mass and constitutes a physical body. This field will equally accelerate large and small bodies only if it is gradient and acts on every elementary particle of the bodies. But a gradient gravitation field can act on bodies if there is a medium in which the bodies are immersed. Such a medium is the ether medium. The ether medium has a gradient effect not on the outer sheath of a body (a bird feather or lead pellet), but directly on the nuclei and electrons constituting the bodies. That is why bodies of different densities acquire equal acceleration.

Equal acceleration of the bodies of different volumes and masses in the gravitation field also indicates such an interesting fact that it does not matter what external volume the body has and what its density is. Only the ether medium volume that is forced out by the total amount of elementary particles (atomic nuclei, electrons etc.) matters. If gravitation forces acted on the outer sheath of the bodies then the bodies of a lower density would accelerate in the gravitation field faster than those of a higher density.

The examples discussed above allow clarifying the action mechanism of the gravitation force of physical bodies on each other. Newton was the first to presume that there is a certain relation between the gravitation mechanism and Archimedean principle. The medium exerting pressure on a gravitating body is the ether.”


http://www.orgonelab.org/newtonletter.htm (I. Newton letter to R. Boyle)

4. When two bodies moving towards one another come near together, I suppose the aether between them to grow rarer than before, and the spaces of its graduated rarity to extend further from the superficies of the bodies towards one another; and this, by reason that the aether cannot move and play up and down so freely in the strait passage between the bodies, as it could before they came so near together.

5. Now, from the fourth supposition it follows, that when two bodies approaching one another come so near together as to make the aether between them begin to rarefy, they will begin to have a reluctance from being brought nearer together, and an endeavour to recede from one another; which reluctance and endeavour will increase as they come nearer together, because thereby they cause the interjacent aether to rarefy more and more. But at length, when they come so near together that the excess of pressure of the external aether which surrounds the bodies, above that of the rarefied aether, which is between them, is so great as to overcome the reluctance which the bodies have from being brought together; then will that excess of pressure drive them with violence together, and make them adhere strongly to one another, as was said in the second supposition.


The origin of biochirality is to be found in the physics of the subquark:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488624#msg1488624


The sacred cubit and the Gizeh Pyramid advanced calculus:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1573684#msg1573684

The sacred cubit and the zeros of the Riemann Zeta function:
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1584725#msg1584725

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1834389#msg1834389 (four consecutive messages)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 05, 2017, 02:42:40 AM
QUANTUM RIEMANN'S ZETA FUNCTION

(http://right.is/contributor/upload/351507/images/5a.jpg)

hfrustum = 141.34725 meters

Zeta function first zero = 14.134725

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1774536#msg1774536 (structure of a boson: two pyramids facing each other)


Relationship between the zeta function and music theory:

https://michaelberryphysics.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/berry454.pdf

http://www.ams.org/samplings/math-history/prime-chaos.pdf

http://xenharmonic.wikispaces.com/The+Riemann+Zeta+Function+and+Tuning

http://blog.echen.me/2011/03/14/prime-numbers-and-the-riemann-zeta-function/

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/54c161ffe4b063fc8ab03446/t/54cab277e4b042fd7653bec5/1422570103763/The+Return+of+Zeta.pdf

In a sense, if the zeros of the zeta function are like musical notes, then prime numbers
are chords, and theorems about these entities are symphonies, says quantum chaologist
Michael Berry of the University of Bristol in England. The Riemann hypothesis
imposes a pleasing harmony on the zeta-zero notes, he adds.

One of the first inklings of a connection between number theory and quantum
mechanics came in 1972. Hugh Montgomery of the University of Michigan had
discovered a formula that describes the average spacing between consecutive zeros
(values of b) of the zeta function. During a visit to the Institute for Advanced Study in
Princeton, N.J., he showed his result to quantum physicist Freeman Dyson, when they
happened to meet at afternoon tea.

Dyson immediately recognized it as identical to the result obtained for so-called
random matrix models, which are used to describe the energy levels of large atoms or
heavy nuclei. By an amazing coincidence, Dyson was one of just a handful of
physicists in the world who had done such calculations and could appreciate
Montgomery's work.


14.134725 x 180 = 2544.25

0.0254425 = one sacred inch

0.0254425 x 25 = 0.6360625 = one sacred cubit

14.134725 - 4π = 1.568354 (value of the width of the first section from the queen chamber niche)


There is a very interesting connection between the dimensions of the Gizeh pyramid and the value of the next zero of Riemann's zeta function.

21.022 - 6π = 2.172476 (this would be the value of the width of the first section in the queen chamber niche, in a pyramid whose hfrustum = 210.22 meters)

Queen chamber niche measurements

First step – w 1.568m / l 1.0414 m / h 1.743 m
Second step – w 1.34 m / l 1.0414 m / h 0.87266 m
Third step – w 1.062 m / l 1.0414 m / h 0.69733 m
Fourth step - w = 0.773 m / l = 1.0414 m / h = 0.69733 m
Fifth step - w = 0.5156 m / l = 1.0414 m / h = 0.69733 m

Total width = height of masonry base of the Gizeh pyramid

141.34725 - 5.23 = 136.1

5.23/1.562 = 3.3482

3.3482 x 2.1724 = 7.2737 (hGizeh apex = 286.1 sacred inches)


210.22 - 7.2737 = 202.94

202.94/2.5424 = 79.822

Then, the value of the apex of the 210.22 meters pyramid will be: 16.1886

16.1886 meters = 636.3 sacred inches


Height of apex of pyramid: 7.2738 units (286.1 si)

Two apexes in merkabah formation: 9.245 units total height (http://www.absoluteempowerment.com/attachments/Image/Merkabah/002.gif )

The distance from the very center of the boson to the apex of the sothic triangle which embeds the merkabah triangles will measure exactly 14.134725.

(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/3c/b7/a4/3cb7a41658fdf9be32547380931ff76f.jpg)

The projection of the helical sound wave vortex, in the form a very complex spiral, on the center line will represent the values of the non-trivial zeros of the zeta function.

This is the significance of the relationship between quantum mechanics and Riemann's zeta function.

I believe that there must a deep connection between the seven musical notes (as expressed in the grand gallery measurements), the five elements theory (as expressed in the subterranean chamber/queen chamber/king chamber/djed/apex sections) and the distribution/values of the zeros of the zeta function.

(http://thegreatpyramidofgiza.ca/@Giza$Grand%20Gallery$Chapter_files/image003.jpg)

Then, the FA-MI interval would correspond to the Lehmer phenomenon (a pair of zeros which are extremely close).

The increasing density of the roots would be related to cymatics, and to the displacement factor, 286.1 value, of the Gizeh pyramid.

This, then, would constitute the basis to find an exact pattern for the values of the zeros of the zeta function, and possibly a way to prove Riemann's hypothesis.

The Gizeh pyramid is the architectural equivalent of Riemann's Zeta function.


The significance of Lehmer's phenomenon:

http://www.ams.org/journals/mcom/2011-80-276/S0025-5718-2011-02472-5/S0025-5718-2011-02472-5.pdf

7954022502373.43289015387 and 7954022502373.43289494012

18580341990011.1593414105 and 18580341990011.1593364110

20825125156965.3882387859 and 20825125156965.3882484837

https://sites.google.com/site/riemannzetazeros/lehmerphenomenon


The derivation of the Riemann-Siegel formula:

https://web.viu.ca/pughg/thesis.d/masters.thesis.pdf


Zeta function zeroes gaps:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022314X07001059

http://www.ams.org/journals/proc/2010-138-12/S0002-9939-2010-10443-4/S0002-9939-2010-10443-4.pdf

http://numbers.computation.free.fr/Constants/Miscellaneous/zetazeros.pdf


Riemann's Hypothesis:

https://web.viu.ca/pughg/Riemannzeta/riemannzetalong.html

http://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/physics1.htm

http://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin//zeta/RHproofs.htm


List of zeroes of the zeta function:

http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/zeta_tables/index.html


Cymatics:

http://old.world-mysteries.com/sci_cymatics.htm
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 05, 2017, 12:04:13 PM
The increasing density of the roots would be related to cymatics, and to the displacement factor, 286.1 value, of the Gizeh pyramid.

The average gap (spacing) between consecutive zeros of Riemann's Zeta function on the critical line in the vicinity of the value z, is:

2π/log(z/2π)

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.75.7474&rep=rep1&type=pdf

But this is actually a sacred cubit formula:

4/{sc x ln[(z x sc)/4]} = ((where sc = one sacred cubit = 2/π))

4/{sc x lnz  +  [sc x ln(sc/4)]} =

4/{lnzsc  +  [sc x ln(2.861/18)]} =

4/{lnzsc  -  5sc/(2 x 1.361)}

Let us remember how I put to good use the xsc term here:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1579680#msg1579680

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1580108#msg1580108


For z = 1 x 106, we get

average spacing = 1/1.9063 = 1/3sc


http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022314X12000261

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022314X07001059

http://www.ams.org/journals/proc/2010-138-12/S0002-9939-2010-10443-4/S0002-9939-2010-10443-4.pdf


In the following paper, we can see further sacred cubit equations (of course, the author does not realize he is using sacred cubits):

http://www.dam.brown.edu/people/mumford/blog/2014/RiemannZeta.html

1.27 = 2sc

1.557/1.361 = 1.144 = 4 x 0.286
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 07, 2017, 03:06:50 AM
QUANTUM RIEMANN'S ZETA FUNCTION II

(https://image.ibb.co/nmf8gJ/riem.jpg)

"In purely mathematical terms, the computations indicate that the spacings between consecutive zeroes of the zeta function behave, statistically, like the spacings between consecutive eigenvalues of large, random matrices belonging to a class known as the
Gaussian Unitary Ensemble. It was in precisely this context that the zeta function first caught the eye of physicists, in the early 1970’s.

One of the most exciting possibilities involves an astonishing, unexpected connection
between the distribution of prime numbers and the energy levels of excited atoms. The
vehicle is a branch of mathematics known as random matrix theory.

If the random matrices belong to a class of matrices known as the Gaussian Unitary
Ensemble (GUE), physicists obtain good estimates of the average spacing between
consecutive energy levels of heavy atomic nuclei and other complex quantum systems.
It turns out that the spacings between consecutive zeros of the zeta function also
appear to behave statistically like the spacings between consecutive eigenvalues of
these large, random matrices. Indeed, this observation also suggests that the infinitely
many zeros specified in the Riemann hypothesis are irregularly distributed in a
particular way along the line 1/2 + bi."

http://www.bourbaphy.fr/keating.pdf

http://www.bristol.ac.uk/maths/research/highlights/riemann-hypothesis/

The correlation between the arrangement of the Riemann zeroes and the energy levels of quantum chaotic systems means that the zeta function can describe the very intricate quantum physics on an infinitesimal level.

How then could this extraordinary mathematical relationship arise out of a totally random process described by the big bang theory/stellar evolution hypotheses?

https://www.ias.edu/ideas/2013/primes-random-matrices

The Lehmer phenomenon (two zeros of the zeta function are so close together that it is unusually difficult to find a sign change between them) also points out to the extraordinary intricacies which the zeta function possesses.

(https://image.ibb.co/fmOEoy/riem2.jpg)

(http://mathworld.wolfram.com/images/eps-gif/GramsLaw_1000.gif)

(zeros of the Riemann-Siegel function Z(t) alternate with Gram points)

The highly nonlinear (apparently random) distribution of the zeros is due to the structure of the Riemann-Siegel formula:

(http://web.mit.edu/kenta/www/six/parallel/other-files/siegel1.png)

The relationship between the 1/nσ x cos(2πxlogn) function and music theory:

http://xenharmonic.wikispaces.com/file/view/Zetamusic5.pdf


A very good and accessible introduction to the theory of Riemann's zeta function:

http://www.mat.uniroma3.it/scuola_orientamento/alumni/laureati/menici/critical_line.pdf


On Riemann's hypothesis:

http://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/conreyRH.pdf


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 07, 2017, 07:46:45 AM
QUANTUM RIEMANN'S ZETA FUNCTION III

Let us imagine two Gizeh pyramids facing each other: 534 total units (the very reason the Tibetan monks used a single 534 hz drum in the granite block levitation described earlier).

In the center we have the two apexes which rotate in the shape of a merkabah (one is the shadow of the other).

174.53 units = hfrustum (141.134725) + hsubterranean chamber/pit

534 - 2x174.53 = 184.94

184.94 = 7.2738 x 25.425

Distance from the center of the parabindu (merkabah consisting of the two rotating apexes) to where the sound wave is emitted/manifests itself:

14.134725

14.134725 x 2 = 28.26945

184.94 - 28.26945 = 156.67 units left


The length/path allowed for the sound wave to propagate:

63.566 (or 63.6363) units

156.67 - 2x63.566 = 29.4

29.4/7.2738 = 10 x 0.40417

0.40417 = 1sc2


29.4 - 28.26945 = 1.13055 = 8 x 0.14134725


The extra 29.4 units means that there will be a second sound wave emitted from the pyramid frustums which starts at 14.134725 units from the tip of the frustum.


This means that there will be a second Riemann's zeta function wave which will propagate in a direction opposite to that of the first zeta function wave (which starts from the apex itself).

These waves will travel only within the alloted (sacred) distance of 63.566... units.


14.134725 + 63.6363 = 77.771025

Zero #19 = 77.145

Zero #20 = 79.3374 (1.566375 units in the opposite direction, 79.3374 - 77.771025 = 1.566375; the distance is added to the previous total of 77.771025 units)

In the currently accepted theory, the average gap/spacing formula between consecutive zeros is just a side note; in my opinion, it plays a far greater role in determining the values of the zeros of the zeta function.

2π/log(z/2π) = 4/{sc x lnz  +  [sc x ln(sc/4)]}

As a simple example,

the average spacing in the vicinity of 14.134725 will be:

7.75

14.134725 + 7.75 = 21.884725

(21.884725 - 21.022)/2.542 = 0.33938

0.534 x 1sc = 0.33938

Once the seven note scale (including the FA-MI interval) and the five elements recursion formula is incorporated into this scheme, we should have a better understanding of the relationship between the mathematics of the zeta function and the sacred cubit dimensions of the Gizeh pyramid.



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 08, 2017, 11:42:55 PM
QUANTUM RIEMANN'S ZETA FUNCTION IV

The formula for the average gap/spacing between consecutive zeros can be inferred immediately, as it basically is a sacred cubit formula relating the mean spacing to the lntsc term.

However, once we know this formula, we can easily obtain the first term of the number of zeros equation in certain segment:

N(t) = (t/2π)ln(t/2π)

The derivation is detailed here:

http://plouffe.fr/simon/math/The%20Theory%20Of%20The%20Riemann%20Zeta-Function%20-Titshmarch.pdf pg 214

The next term in the formula, -t/2π can also be deduced using the certain symmetries offered by studying the zeta function in its proper context: the sacred cubit dimensions of the Gizeh pyramid.

In the first segment, 63.63 units in length, we will have 48 zeros (we do not count the two 14.134725 zeros as they constitute the starting point of the segment itself) for the two zeta functions: left to right, and right to left.

63.63/36 = 14.134725/8 = 1.7675

2.542 - 1.7675 = 0.775

2π/log(14.134725/2π) = 7.75

148.61/1.7675 = 84.08 = 53.44/1sc


How to derive the full number of zeros in a certain segment formula:

https://ntriantafilidis.wordpress.com/2013/11/26/the-number-of-non-trivial-zeros-of-the-riemann-zeta-function/

http://numbers.computation.free.fr/Constants/Miscellaneous/zetazeros.pdf

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/54d2/1807f0b589caee582fa153fd699a9b46194d.pdf


The reason for the accuracy of the Riemann-Siegel formula is that it includes in the cosine term all the features described above.

The phase of the cosine term is basically the formula for the number of zeros in a certain segment.

The frequency of the cosine term is directly related to the average gap/spacing formula.

The sum also includes a varying amplitude (n-1/2).


The mass of a boson is given by the standing wave created by the two zeta functions which propagate along the sacred 63.63 units distance.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 11, 2017, 12:18:47 AM
QUANTUM RIEMANN'S ZETA FUNCTION V

(http://numbers.computation.free.fr/Constants/Miscellaneous/Z.png)

The Riemann-Siegel function Z(t) for values of t near 0. In dashed, the value of the zeta function


The asymptotic correction terms expressed in terms of elementary transcendental functions are replaced by terms evaluated through higher transcendental functions (the error function):

http://www.math.yorku.ca/~akuznets/on_the_Riemann_Siegel_formula.pdf


How B. Riemann applied the saddle-point method to obtain the asymptotic form of the correction terms:

https://michaelberryphysics.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/berry483.pdf


The Riemann Zeros and Eigenvalue Asymptotics

http://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/berry-keating1.pdf


An analysis of the Riemann-Siegel coefficients to very high order, with surprising conclusions:

https://michaelberryphysics.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/berry265.pdf

“Improvement from adding more correction terms in Riemann-Siegel remainder is not to continue indefinitely.”


The complexity of the Riemann-Siegel coefficients (C20 (z) term):

(https://image.ibb.co/fC1joy/riem3.jpg)


An alternative to the Riemann-Siegel formula: improving the convergence of the Euler-Maclaurin expansion thereby greatly reducing the length of the main sum:

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.758.2810&rep=rep1&type=pdf


All these formulas, however, do not explain the distribution of the zeros of the zeta function and its connection to the quantum physical model, one of the most important goals of modern science.

How could the Tibetan monks have known the intricate interrelation between the values of the five elements of the Gizeh pyramid, 26.7, 53.4, 80, 136.1 and 534, and its relevance to the smallest particle in quantum physics (even smaller than the boson)?

The fact that the height of the Gizeh pyramid, excluding the masonry base, measures 136.1 meters was discovered in 1985.

It is obvious that the information about the values of the five elements was known to the architects of the Gizeh pyramid and that this information was obtained by the Tibetan priests/monks and kept under strict secrecy.

Then, another question arises: how could these architects have viewed the workings of the quantum physical model of the boson, and have realized that the standing waves inside the boson can be represented by zeta functions, and further, that the value of the first zero of the zeta function, 14.134725, multiplied by ten, will equal the height of the smallest particle to be found inside a boson (141.34725)?


The highest known possible ability to view object microscopically using psi faculties (a skill/aptitude available to all humans in dreams) is described here:

https://web.archive.org/web/20120128042636/http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_09_4_phillips.pdf (100% proof that these observations are real, as they describe the correct model of the atom before the discovery of isotopes and the correct placement of the elements within the periodic table, such as astatine, francium, and proctactinium decades before they were detected)

However, this ability cannot be employed further to investigate the interior of a boson.

And yet, the architects of the Gizeh pyramid knew the exact dimensions of the smallest particle to be found inside a boson and its relationship to the zeta function.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 12, 2017, 12:37:32 AM
QUANTUM RIEMANN'S ZETA FUNCTION VI

The Riemann Zeta function takes the prize for the most complicated and enigmatic function.

The lack of a proof of the Riemann hypothesis doesn’t just mean we don’t know all the zeros are on the line x = 1/2, it means that, despite all the zeros we know of lying neatly and precisely smack bang on the line x = 1/2, no one knows why any of them do, for if we had a definitive reason why the first zero 1/2 + 14.13472514i has real value precisely 1/2, we would have a definitive reason to know why they all do.


A classic work on Riemann’s hypothesis:

https://pkubbs.net/attach/boards/Mathematics/M.1156640281.A/book.pdf


On some reasons for doubting Riemann’s hypothesis:

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.751.9485&rep=rep1&type=pdf


List of zeroes of the zeta function:

http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/zeta_tables/index.html


In my opinion, the apparently random distribution of the zeros of the zeta function is totally related to the concept of a sacred cubit fractal (fractal: a mathematical set that exhibits a repeating pattern displayed at every scale).

Five elements of the Gizeh pyramid:

26.7
53.4
80
136.1
534

Sacred cubit distance allowed for the two zeta function waves: 63.636363... (we could also use 2/π)

Applying the five elements proportions to the sacred cubit distance:

63.636363
16.1773
9.5445
6.36363
3.1815

(if we use 0.636619772 as a value for the sacred cubit, then 16.1773 becomes 16.18034, the exact value of phi x 10, the golden ratio)

21.022 - 14.134725 = 6.887275

6.887275 - 6.363 = 1/3sc


16.1773
4.123
2.426595
1.61773
0.808865



(14.134725 - 4π = 1.568354; the value of the width of the first section from the queen chamber niche)


16.1773 - 9.5445 = 6.6338

6.6338
1.68632
0.99492
0.66328
0.33164


1.68632 - 0.99492 = 0.6914

0.6914
0.17578
0.10371
0.06914
0.03457


9.5445 - 6.363 = 3.1815 (3.1815 = 5 sacred cubits)

3.1815
0.80886
0.477225
0.31815
0.159075



0.80886 - 0.477225 = 0.331635

0.331635
0.084315
0.049745
0.0331635
0.01658

14.134725 + 6.6338 = 20.7685

14.134725 + 6.363 = 20.497725

14.134725 + 9.5445 = 23.679225

23.679225 + 1.68632 = 25.365545


23.679225 - 20.497725 = 3.1815

3.1815 = 5/[3 x (6.887275 - 6.363)]


23.679225 + 0.99492 + 0.33164 = 25.0057 (third zero of the zeta function = 25.0108)


We already know the main terms of the average spacing/gap between the zeta function zeros and of the number of zeros in a certain segment.

The sacred cubit fractal (dividing the critical line into 63.6363... segments, and further using the five elements proportions) is the hidden template of the zeta function.


14.134725 x 180 = 2544.25

0.0254425 = one sacred inch

0.0254425 x 25 = 0.6360625 = one sacred cubit

18 x 25 = 450

286.1 = 450 sacred cubits (where 286.1 is the famous displacement factor of the Gizeh pyramid)



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 12, 2017, 11:21:40 AM
QUANTUM RIEMANN'S ZETA FUNCTION VII

Sacred cubit structure of the Lehmer pairs

The Lehmer phenomenon (two zeros of the zeta function are so close together that it is unusually difficult to find a sign change between them) is closely related to the de Bruijn-Newman constant.

The results proven by N. C. de Bruijn and C. Newman show that there is a real constant
Λ, which satisfies −∞ < Λ ≤ 1/2.

The Riemann hypothesis is equivalent to the conjecture that Λ ≤ 0; no upper bound better than Λ ≤ 1/2 has been found so far, but several lower bounds have been calculated:

An improved bound for the de Bruijn-Newman constant: Λ > −1.14541×10-11

http://www.ams.org/journals/mcom/2011-80-276/S0025-5718-2011-02472-5/S0025-5718-2011-02472-5.pdf

An improved bound for the de Bruijn-Newman constant: Λ > −2.7 × 10-9

http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/doc/debruijn.newman.pdf


(https://image.ibb.co/n7Jsad/riem4.jpg)


A treatise which specializes in the calculation of Lehmer pairs (see pages 64-87 for a list):

http://www.slideshare.net/MatthewKehoe1/riemanntex


On Lehmer pairs:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1612.08627.pdf


Lehmer pair #1

7005.062866
7005.100554

110 x 63.6363 = 6999.993

110 x 63.661977 = 7002.8175

The segment containing the Lehmer pair will be bounded by 6999.993 and 7063.5167, with 71 zeros for each zeta function.

136.1/110 = (1/sc)2/2


Lehmer pair #2

17,143.7865
17,143.82184

269 x 63.6363 = 17118.1647

269/14.134725 ~= 19


Lehmer pair #3

63,137.21153
63,137.23238

991 x 63.661977 = 63089.019
992 x 63.6363 = 63120.96

991/7.28 = 136.12


Lehmer pair #4

66,678.07586
66,678.09534

1047 x 63.6363 = 66627.2061

3141/3 = 1047

3141/2 = 1/0.63674 x 10-4


Lehmer pair #5 (only the first value of the pair will be included and the corresponding multiplier obtained by dividing by 63.6363... and/or 63.661977...; the complete list in the reference listed above, pg. 64-87)

71,732.90121

1127 and 1126

1126/286.1 = 1/0.254085


Lehmer pair #6

139,735.4983

2195 and 2194

(see next pair for the calculation)


Lehmer pair #7

173,042.4722

2719 and 2718

2719/2195 = (1/sc)2/2


Lehmer pair #8

178,168.1651

2799 and 2798

2799 x sc/2 x 3/5 = 534


Lehmer pair #9

182,258.5504

2864 and 2862

2862/7.2738 = 1/2.5415 x 10-3


Lehmer pair #10

437,894.4613

6881 and 6878

6878 = 24 x 286.5 ~= 16 x 136.5 x π


Lehmer pair #11

439,609.6516

6908 and 6905

6908 ~= 123 x 4 = 700 x π2

6908 - 6881 = 27


Lehmer pair #12

692,736.741

10885 and 10888

10888 = 80 x 136.1


Lehmer pair #13

1,169,186.579

18372 and 18365

18365/2.67 = 6878.277 (see Lehmer pair #10)


There is a very interesting connection linking sacred cubit values and Lehmer pairs: these pairs are not located randomly on the critical line; they are related to certain sacred cubit figures. Once this sacred cubit law which governs the location of the Lehmer pairs is known in full, we can apply the sacred cubit fractal equations to find their values.

In my opinion, the Lehmer pair of zeros has to be in mathematical relationship with the zeros of the other zeta function located on the same 63.6363... segment, in the vicinity of the Lehmer pair.


On the extreme values of the zeta function:

https://web.williams.edu/Mathematics/sjmiller/public_html/math/papers/ACM_Newman_FnField80.pdf

https://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/maths/people/staff/stefan_grosskinsky/rcssm/ws2/00ExtremeBehaviour.pdf

http://mat.uab.cat/~bac16/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/talk.bondarenko.pdf

https://heilbronn.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Hughes_MaxZeta0T.pdf

http://siauliaims.su.lt/pdfai/2004/stesle-04.pdf






Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 15, 2017, 07:22:07 AM
QUANTUM RIEMANN'S ZETA FUNCTION VIII

"What did these revelations over tea at Princeton mean for the Riemann Hypothesis? If the  points at sea level in Riemann's landscape can be explained by the mathematics of energy  levels in physics, then there was the exciting prospect of actually proving why the points at sea level lie in a straight line. A zero off the line would be like having an imaginary energy  level,  something  not  permitted  by  the  equations  of  quantum  physics.  Here  was  the  best  hope yet for providing some sort of explanation for Riemann's Hypothesis.

In  1989  Odlyzko  plotted  the  distances  between  the  zeros and compared  it to  Montgomery's prediction. This time the fit was staggering. Here  was  convincing  evidence  of  a  new  aspect  of  the  zeros.  From  as  far  away  as  1020  they  were  sending  out  the  very  clear  message  that  they  were  being  produced  by  some complicated mathematical drum.

Berry's  interest  in  the  primes  coincided  with  his  growing  understanding  of  the  differences  between  the  statistics  of  energy  levels  in  electrons  playing  quantum  billiards  and  the  energy levels in a random quantum drum. 'I thought it might be interesting to look again at  the story of the Riemann zeros and Dyson's ideas in the light of the new connections with  quantum chaos.' Would the special statistics that Berry had discovered in the energy levels  of  quantum  billiards  be  reflected  in  the  statistics  of  the  zeros  of  the  Riemann  zeta  landscape? 'I thought it would be very nice to see if the zeros actually behaved in this way,  and  I  did  some  rough  calculations.'  But  he  didn't  have  enough  data.  'Then  I  heard  of  Odlyzko,  who'd  done  these  epic  calculations.  I  wrote  to  him  and  he  was  wonderfully  helpful. He explained to me that he'd been a little worried because his calculations beyond  a  certain  point  had  started  to  show  some  deviations.  He  thought  he  must  have  made  a mistake in his computations.'

But  Odlyzko  did  not  have  the  insights  of  a  physicist.  When  Berry  compared  the  zeros  to  the   energy   levels   of   chaotic   quantum   billiards,   he   found   a   perfect   match.   The  discrepancies  that  Odlyzko  had  observed  turned  out  to  be  the  first  sign  of  the  difference between the statistics of frequencies in a random quantum drum and the energy levels of  chaotic quantum billiards. He had not been aware of this new chaotic quantum system, but Berry recognised it straight away: This  was  a  great  moment  because  it  was  obviously  right.  That  was  to  me  absolute  convincing  circumstantial  evidence  that  if  you  think  the  Riemann  Hypothesis  is  true,  then the Riemann zeros would have underlying them not just a quantum system, but a quantum system  with  a  classical  counterpart,  moderately  simple  but  chaotic.

It was all very fascinating seeing the same pictures cropping up in both  areas,  but who could  point to  some  genuine  contribution  to  prime  number  theory  that  these  connections  had  made possible?  Peter Sarnak  offered  the  quantum  physicists  a  challenge:  use  the  analogy  between quantum  chaos  and  prime  numbers  to  tell  us  something  we  don't  already  know  about Riemann's landscape - something specific that couldn't be hidden behind statistics.

There  are  certain  attributes  of  the  Riemann  zeta  function,  called  its  moments,
which  it  was  known  should  give  rise  to  a  sequence  of  numbers.  The  trouble  was  that mathematicians  had very  little  clue  as  to  how  to  calculate  the sequence  itself.

Before  the  Seattle  meeting,  Conrey  had  done  a  huge  amount  of  work  on  the  problem  of the  next  number  in collaboration  with  a  colleague, Amit  Ghosh,  which  suggested  that  the third number in the sequence (after 1 and 2) was a big jump away, at 42. For Conrey, that this should be the number next in the sequence  'was  kind  of  surprising'.

In  the  meantime,  Conrey  had  joined  forces  with  another  mathematician,  Steve  Gonek. With a  huge  effort,  squeezing all  they  could  from  their  knowledge  of  number  theory,  they came  up  with  a  guess  for  the  fourth  number  in  the  sequence  -  24,024.  'So  we  had  this sequence: 1, 2, 42, 24,024, . . . We tried like the Dickens to guess what the sequence was. We knew our method couldn't go any further because it was giving a negative answer for the next number in the sequence.' It was known that all the numbers in the sequence were bigger  than  zero.  Conrey  arrived  at  Vienna  prepared  to  talk  about  why  they  thought  the next number in the sequence was 24,024.

'Keating  arrived  a  little  late.  On  the  afternoon  he  was  going  to  give  his  lecture  I  saw  him, and  I'd  seen  his  title  and  I  had  begun  to  wonder  whether  he  had  got  it.  As  soon  as  he showed  up  I  went  and  immediately  asked  him,  "Did  you  figure  it  out?"  He  said  yes,  he'd got the 42.' In fact, with his graduate student, Nina Snaith, Keating had created a formula that  would  generate  every  number  in  the  sequence.  'Then  I  told  him  about  the  24,024.' This  was  the  real  test.  Would  Keating  and  Snaith's  formula  match  Conrey  and  Gonek's guess of 24,024? After all, Keating had known that he was meant to be getting 42, so he might  have  cooked  his  formula  to  get  this  number.  This  new  number,  24,024,  was completely new to Keating and not one he could fake."

(from Music of the Primes)

https://plus.maths.org/issue28/features/sautoy/2pdf/index.html/op.pdf



The University of Bristol has been at the forefront of showing that there are striking similarities between the Riemann zeros and the quantum energy levels of classically chaotic systems.

From a conference in 1996 in Seattle, aimed at fostering collaboration between physicists and number theorists, came early evidence of correlation between the arrangement of the Riemann zeroes and the energy levels of quantum chaotic systems. If this were true it would prove the Riemann hypothesis.

Now, there are certain attributes of the Riemann zeta function called its moments which should give rise to a sequence of numbers. However, before the Seattle conference, only two of these moments were known: 1, as calculated by Hardy and Littlewood in 1918; and 2, calculated by Ingham in 1926.

The next number in the series was suggested as 42 by Conrey (now also at Bristol) and Ghosh in 1992.

The challenge for the quantum physicists then, was to use their quantum methods to check the number 42 and to calculate further moments in the series, while the number theorists tried to do the same using their methods.

Prof Jon Keating and Dr Nina Snaith at Bristol describe the energy levels in quantum systems using random matrix theory. Using RMT methods they produced a formula for calculating all of the moments of the Riemann zeta function. This formula confirmed the number 42.

Two years after Seattle, Keating and Snaith attended a follow-up conference at the Schrodinger Institute in Vienna to present their formula. Meanwhile, number theorists Conrey and Gonek had suggested the next moment in the series.

When Keating and Snaith's formula was used to calculate this moment, it coincided with the number theorists' suggestion: 24,024. The formula really works.

Usually pure mathematics supports physics, supplying the mathematical tools with which physical systems are analysed, but this is a case of the reverse: quantum physics is leading to new insights into number theory.

http://www.bristol.ac.uk/maths/research/highlights/riemann-hypothesis/




https://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/maths/research/events/colloquium/2013-14/abstracts/warwick-10-13.pdf

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5821/8635908b3d91c2e5c538bd921b9ea7ecc835.pdf

http://www.ams.org/journals/bull/2016-53-03/S0273-0979-2016-01525-4/S0273-0979-2016-01525-4.pdf


These are the numbers found so far in the sequence:

1, 2, 42, 24024; the next one should be 701149020 (taken from the Young tableaux)

But these numbers are totally related to the sacred cubit.

24024/286 = 84 = 42 x 2

84 x 1sc = 53.4

(286.1 is the displacement factor of the Gizeh pyramid)


701149020/286= 2451570

2451570/30 = 81719

2862 = 81796

81796 - 81719 = 77

7 = 2.5442 x 1/(1 - 1sc)


2863 = 23393656

23393656 x 30 = 701809680

701809680 - 701149020 = 660660

660660/286 = 2310 = 77 x 30
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 16, 2017, 12:23:09 AM
QUANTUM RIEMANN'S ZETA FUNCTION IX

“There’s a complexity to the zeta function that we have not been able to grasp"

"At the beginning of the 1970s, one mathematician stood at the head of this small band of sceptics. Don Zagier is one of the most energetic mathematicians on today's mathematical circuit,  cutting  a  dashing  figure  as  he  sweeps  through  the  corridors  of  the  Max  Planck Institute for Mathematics in Bonn, Germany's answer to the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton.

But  Zagier  recognised  that  300  million  zeros  represented  an  important  watershed.  There were theoretical reasons why the first several thousand zeros had to be on Riemann's ley line.  However,  as  one  advanced  farther  north,  the  reasons  why  early  zeros  had  to  be  on Riemann's line began  to be outweighed  by  even stronger reasons  why  zeros should start falling  off  the  line.  By  300  million  zeros,  Zagier  realised,  it  would  be  a  miracle  if  zeros weren't pushed off the line.

Zagier based his analysis on a graph he knew kept track of the behaviour of the gradient in the  hills   and  valleys  along  Riemann's  ley  line.  Zagier's  graph  represented   a  new perspective from which to view the cross-section of Riemann's landscape along the critical line.  What  was  interesting  was  that  it  facilitated  a  new  interpretation  of  the  Riemann Hypothesis.  If  this  new  graph  ever  crosses  Riemann's  critical  line, there  has  to  be  a  zero off Riemann's line in this region, making the Riemann Hypothesis false. To begin with, the graph is nowhere near the critical line, and in fact climbs away. But as one marches farther and farther north the graph starts coming down, edging towards the critical line. Every now and  again  Zagier's  graph  attempts to  crash  through  the  critical  line,  but  as  the  figure opposite illustrates something seems to be preventing it from crossing.

So, the farther north one advances, the more likely it seems that this graph might cross the critical  line.  Zagier  knew  that  the  first  real  weakness  was  around  the  300-millionth  zero. This  region  of  the  critical  line  would  be  the  real  test.  By  the  time  you  had  gone  this  far north,  if  the  graph  still  did  not  cross  the  critical  line,  then  there  really  had  to  be  a  reason why  it  didn't.  And  that  reason,  Zagier  reasoned,  would  be  that  the  Riemann  Hypothesis was true. And that is why Zagier set the threshold at 300 million zeros.

For  about  five  years  nothing  happened.  Computers  grew  slowly  more  powerful,  but  to compute  even  twice  as  many  zeros  let  alone  a  hundred  times  as  many  would  have required such a huge amount of work that nobody bothered. After all, in this business there was  no  point  expending  huge  amounts  of  energy  on  merely doubling  the  amount  of evidence.  But  then,  about  five  years  later,  computers  suddenly  got  a  lot  faster,  and  two teams  took  up  the  challenge  of  exploiting  this  new  power  to  calculate  more  zeros.  One team was in Amsterdam, run by Herman te Riele, and the second was in Australia, led by Richard Brent.

So  the  team  went  on  to  300 million.  Naturally  they  didn't  find  a  zero  off the line.

More  importantly  though,  the  evidence,  in  Zagier's  view,  was  now  overwhelmingly  in support of the Hypothesis. The computer as a calculating tool was finally powerful enough to navigate far enough north in Riemann's zeta landscape for there to be every chance of throwing up a counter-example. Despite numerous attempts by Zagier's auxiliary graph to storm  across  Riemann's  critical  line,  it  was  clear  that  something  was  acting  like  a  huge repulsive  force  stopping  the  graph  from  crossing  the  line.  And  the  reason?  The  Riemann Hypothesis.

If  the  Riemann  Hypothesis  is  false,  that  would  imply  that  the  prime number  coin  is  far  from  fair.  The  farther  east  one  finds  zeros  off  Riemann's  ley  line,  the more biased is the prime number coin. A  fair  coin  produces  truly  random  behaviour,  whereas  a  biased  coin  produces  a  pattern. The  Riemann  Hypothesis  therefore  captures  why  the  primes  look  so  random.  Riemann's brilliant insight had turned this randomness on its head by finding the connection between the zeros of his landscape and the primes. To prove that the primes are truly random, one has to prove that on the other side of Riemann's looking-glass the zeros are ordered along his critical line."

(from Music of the Primes)

(http://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/explform.jpg)

The left hand side is a step function, and on the right hand side, somehow, the zeros of the zeta function (ρ) conspire at exactly the prime numbers to make that sum jump.

"It is worthwhile to note that |xρ| = |xR(ρ)|.

With this above representation of the prime counting function, we now have an explicit way of showing that the count of primes less than a certain number, our x, is dependent upon the zeros of the Riemann zeta function. Now we can see that if Riemann’s hypothesis is true, and all of the zeros ρ have real part equal to one half, then the sum above doesn’t have to worry about other values for |xρ|. So if Riemann’s hypothesis is true, understanding that sum becomes far easier than if it were not true and the values of R(ρ) jumped around all over the place. So, if Riemann’s hypothesis is actually true, then we have an explicit definition for the prime counting function, and should we wish to know the number of primes less than a given number, we can find that number with this function and no longer have to worry about an amount of error."

http://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/encoding2.htm (the "encoding" of the distribution of prime numbers by the nontrivial zeros of the Riemann zeta function)

http://www.mathcs.emory.edu/~davidb/RHtalk.pdf (Riemann's zeros and the rhythm of the primes)

http://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/encoding1.htm



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 17, 2017, 12:04:54 AM
QUANTUM RIEMANN'S ZETA FUNCTION X

The sum of any two sides of a triangle is greater than the third side.

If any of the Riemann zeta function ζ(s) non-trivial zeros would lay off the critical line, s = σ + it, σ = 1/2 - ε, then the total length of the distance/segment alloted for the two zeta functions, 63.636363... or the choice of 200/π, would amount to more than 100 sacred cubits (0.63661977 = one sacred cubit).

(https://i.stack.imgur.com/mNgiI.jpg)

The five elements sequence of proportions would be disrupted as the distance from the previous zero to the zero which is off the critical line, and from the zeta zero which finds itself on the σ = 1/2 - ε line to the next zero would be greater than the distances from that previous zero to the next two zeta zeros to be found on the critical line.

The average distance between two consecutive zeta zeros at t = 10100 is:

2π/(lnt/2π) = 0.0272

For a Lehmer pair the value of the distance would be even less than that.

Then, the delicate balance of the five elements proportions, based on the sacred cubit measurements, would be totally disordered: no zeros in that 100 sacred cubit segment could be any longer in their proper places if they do obey the five elements law of proportions.

Moreover, the same thing would occur with the zeros of the second zeta function wave which propagates in a direction opposite to that of the first zeta function wave.

This fundamental disruption of the five elements law of proportions would propagate/transmit itself all the way back to the very first zero of the zeta function: 14.134725.

In my opinion, the zeta function sequence of zeros on the very first segment contains all the necessary information, to be able to draw a definite conclusion about the Riemann hypothesis, if we can prove that indeed those first 18 zeros obey the five elements law of proportions.

Perhaps B. Riemann did notice that those first zeros obeyed some sort of law of proportions, which then led him to the hypothesis that most probably all the remaining zeros are located on the critical line.

https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_the_real_importance_of_the_missing_black_book_of_Riemanns_for_solving_the_Riemann_Hypothesis




Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 17, 2017, 11:54:33 PM
QUANTUM RIEMANN'S ZETA FUNCTION XI

The subdivision of the 100 sc (200/π) line according to the law of proportions based on the five elements of the Gizeh pyramid (26.7, 53.4, 80, 136.1, 534) produces the zeros of the zeta function. These in turn are related directly to the distribution of the prime numbers.

Applying the five elements proportions to the sacred cubit distance:

63.636363
16.1773
9.5445
6.36363
3.1815

If we only focus on the term corresponding to the 136.1 figure, we can divide the line in this manner:

63.63 - 16.1773 = 47.459

47.459, 12.066, 7.11825, 4.7459, 2.373

9.5445, 2.4266, 1.431675, 0.95445, 0.477225

9.5445 - 2.4266 = 7.118

12.066, 3.0676, 1.8099, 1.2066, 0.6033

12.066 - 3.0676 = 9

9, 2.288, 1.35, 0.9, 0.45


14.134725 + 7.118 = 21.252725


16.1773 - 9.5445 = 6.6328

6.6328, 1.68632, 0.99492, 0.66328, 0.33164


14.134725 + 9.5445 + 1.68632 = 25.365545


14.134725 + 16.1773 = 30.31


14.134725 + 16.1773 + 2.288 = 32.6


77.771025 - 12.066 = 65.705


These would represent just the first approximations, working up the 136.1 term; by adding the terms corresponding to the 80, 53.4 and 26.7 values, in the same law of five elements proportion, will provide further accuracy in obtaining the final figure.

At each point we would be dealing with a series of the form having similar terms to these:

63.66 - (63.66 x 2.5424)/10 ± (63.66 x 2.54242)/100 ± ...

(we can also start from the right, 14.134725 + ...)

I believe that the ± signs would follow this pattern:

Five elements recursion formula

1→3
3→5
5→2
2→4
4→1

1 + Δ1 = 3
3 + Δ2 = 5
5 - Δ3 = 2
2 + Δ4 = 4
4 - Δ5 = 1

Δ1 + Δ2 - Δ3 + Δ4  - Δ5



14.134725 x 4.5 = 63.6

4.5 x 2.5424 = 11.4408

286.1 = 450 sc

11.4408 = 4 x 286.1

45 = 5 x 9 (five elements x (seven tone musical scales + two intervals)); the enneagram is actually made up of seven notes and two intervals (see: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/17/Enneagram_as_an_octave.svg/400px-Enneagram_as_an_octave.svg.png )

1.618034 = 2.5424 x 1sc = 4sc2


The 63.66 segment can be divided according to the five elements law of proportions starting from the right (the first zeta function), and/or from the left side (the second zeta function).

Each and every zero of the zeta function is created by a subdivision of the 100 sc line into proportions based on the five elements sequence.

Each and every zero of the zeta function can be represented just in terms of the 14.134725 (the first zero and hfrustum of the Gizeh pyramid divided by ten, 63.66 (200/π), 2.5424, 286.1 values.


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 19, 2017, 12:34:52 AM
QUANTUM RIEMANN'S ZETA FUNCTION XII

Most mathematicians study Riemann's zeta function in a pure mathematical setting, without paying attention to the fact that the zeta function exists in a quantum physical perspective.

The correlation between the arrangement of the Riemann zeroes and the energy levels of quantum chaotic systems means that the zeta function can describe the very intricate quantum physics on an infinitesimal level.

We have seen already that the most interesting segment of the zeta function, which no one else has been paying any attention to, is the area of the graph situated between the first zeros (± 14.134725...):

(http://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/zeros.jpg)


http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.751.9485&rep=rep1&type=pdf

"The RH and (5.3) imply that, as t → ∞, the graph of Z(t) will consist of tightly packed spikes, which will be more and more condensed as t increases, with larger and large oscillations. This I find hardly conceivable. Of course, it could happen that the RH is true and that (5.3) is not."

No physicist/mathematician asks himself/herself this question: if there will be more and more oscillations how then do these observations fit within the quantum physical model?

Nor do they understand that within the limited/infinitesimal volume of a boson, there will always be two zeta functions which will propagate in opposite directions, dividing the line into a sacred cubit fractal.

The two zeta function waves are sound waves which means we are dealing with the phenomenon called cymatics.

In my opinion, at the very point of reaching the extreme density of these sound waves (perhaps this will occur for T = e450sc, or T = e1000sc which might very well be the lower bound and, respectively, the upper bound of the Skewes number in a sacred cubit formulation), there will be a resetting of the entire system: extreme sound cymatics turns into stillness/silence (extreme yang leads to yin), and the entire process will start all over again.

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/SkewesNumber.html

https://sites.google.com/site/largenumbers/home/2-3/skewes

http://www.ams.org/journals/mcom/2000-69-231/S0025-5718-99-01104-7/S0025-5718-99-01104-7.pdf

http://lbk.fe.uni-lj.si/pdfs/aicm2008.pdf

http://eprints.ma.man.ac.uk/106/01/new.pdf

http://www.maths.manchester.ac.uk/~roger/math31022/Beamer1.pdf

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1833395#msg1833395 (sound/ether-stillness/silence/aether interplay)

If the zeta function is a sound wave, then we will have to deal with the concept of the extreme density of sound: cymatics. This is the reason why I believe that those spikes will not be allowed to get any larger. A clear distinction has to be made between studying the Riemann zeta function in a pure mathematical setting, and the study of the same function in a quantum physical context.

(https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/1000/1*MjDenYT8uozwZ81e38mCow.png)

https://medium.com/@JorgenVeisdal/the-riemann-hypothesis-explained-fa01c1f75d3f#.el1bfdd2o

It is the law of proportions based on the five elements (26.7, 53.4, 80, 136.1, 534) which is the source of the apparently random distribution of the zeros of the zeta function, and which in turn leads to the known distribution of the prime numbers.


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 24, 2017, 07:38:23 AM
THE RETURN OF KING ARTHUR

(https://mysteryoftheinquity.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/king-arthur-rpg.jpg?w=590)

In the hour of Britain's greatest need, King Arthur will return to rescue his people.

In the new radical chronology of history, King Arthur (Akhenaten), the founder of the British Empire, lived some 250 years ago.

After leaving Egypt, passing through modern day Palestine, Akhenaten set for a voyage finally reaching the British Isles. King Arthur is even described as having arrived in North America, the final destination being Avalon.

The Isle of Avallonis is reported as being far away, to reach this island would require a long journey by sea.

And King Arthur is not the only historical figure awaiting a mysterious return, in a time of great peril: Apollo (Horus) is set to return one day, from Hiperborea. There is also a third character who is destined to come back at the end of the fifth age.

In order to understand how such a thing would be possible, we need to study subquark biochirality and its relationship to the human aura.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488624#msg1488624 (biochirality and terrestrial gravity)

A very high supply of laevorotatory subquarks in the air, much higher than usual, would constitute a very effective barrier against the effects related to the dextrorotatory biochirality of the human aura, caused by terrestrial gravity.

http://creation.com/origin-of-life-the-chirality-problem

http://creation.com/god-left-handed

http://creationbc.org/index.php/right-handed-amino-acids-can-they-smack-down-the-evolutionists-chirality-problem/

https://web.archive.org/web/20140921043113/https://creationresearch.org/members-only/crsq/50/50_2/CRSQ%20Fall%202013%20lo%20res%20bookmarked%20for%20web.pdf

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/05/homochirality_i059531.html

http://www.creationismonline.com/YEC/The_Origin_Of_Life.pdf






Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 24, 2017, 08:48:47 AM
LARGE SEMIPRIME FACTORIZATION - RSA CYPHER I

Presently, nobody has able to provide significant methods for pushing integer factoring toward P . Then again, factoring is probably the hardest problem in analytical number theory.

In my opinion, the factorization of large semiprimes must be as easy as multiplying two integers: the algorithm should be proportional to the number of digits of the semiprime, and not an extremely difficult search using very sophisticated procedures.


For a 200 digit number (semiprime), the required computational time (1990) for the methods then used in integer factorization will take 4 x 1015 years.

For a 300 digit number, we would need 5 x 1021 years

For a 500 digit number, the figure would rise to 4.2 x 1032 years.


"RSA is a public key encryption algorithm which uses two different keys for encryption and decryption.

Procedure :

1.Select two very large prime numbers. (>200 digits)
2. Private key (decryption key) is calculated using p,q which are kept secret
3. Public key (encryption key) calculated as n=p*q , n is made public

Security of RSA relies on the fact that there is no Polynomial time algorithm for factorizing and integers into prime factors. Even if the adversary knows the value of n, it is computationally infeasible to factorize n to retrieve values of p and q. Therefore, the security of internet transactions is intact unless there is any polynomial time factorization algorithm."

We have seen that the sacred cubit fractal is the hidden template behind the distribution of the zeros of Riemann's zeta function.

Is there a relationship between the sacred cubit and semiprime factorization?


Background information

b1, a1 and c1 are the three sides of a right triangle

b12 + a12 = c12

b1 = d1 x d2 (divisors of b1)

a1 = (d12 - d22)/2

c1 = (d12 +d22/2


If b1 is prime, then b12 + a22 = c22 (where c2 = (b12 +1)/2 )


Modern geometry/trigonometry tells us that Pythagoras' theorem is the only known relationship relating the three sides of a right triangle, in a single equation.


But there is another equation, involving of course the sacred cubit, relating the three sides of right triangle:

b12sc + a12sc =~ [(b1 + a1 + c1)/2]2sc + ...


Since a1 + c1 = d12, with a reasonable estimate for a1, we can obtain a very good approximation for d1.


The Fibonacci numbers are actually sacred cubit numbers.

1,618034 = 4sc2 (1sc = 0.636009827, in this case)

Then Fn = 1/(8sc2 -1) x 22n x sc2n


Another formula:

b11/sc + a11/sc=~ c11/sc + ...


The first formula proves to be enough to completely solve the large integer factorization involving a semiprime having 10 or less digits. The right side of the equation is an asymptotic expansion, I was able to obtain the main term; of course, adding more terms of this expansion (a very difficult endeavor), would mean we can factorize semiprimes which have more than 10 digits, the accuracy depending on the number of terms in the expansion.

Of course, to attempt to solve the large semiprime factorization problem beyond the case where b1 has more than 10-20 digits, would mean we need a more precise algorithm, involving sacred cubits.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 24, 2017, 10:57:12 AM
LARGE SEMIPRIME FACTORIZATION - RSA CYPHER II

"Because both the system's privacy and the security of digital money depend on encryption, a breakthrough in mathematics or computer science that defeats the cryptographic system could be a disaster. The obvious mathematical breakthrough would be the development of an easy way to factor large prime numbers"
(Bill Gates 1995)


http://www.muppetlabs.com/~breadbox/txt/rsa.html

http://web.archive.org/web/20130904000227/http://csis.bits-pilani.ac.in/faculty/murali/netsec-09/seminar/refs/atharvasrep.pdf

http://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/tutorial.htm#q16

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/PrimeNumber.html



List of Fibonacci numbers (Fn) (sacred cubit sequences):

http://www.maths.surrey.ac.uk/hosted-sites/R.Knott/Fibonacci/fibtable.html


b1 has less than 10 digits

How to obtain a reasonable estimate for a1


b1 = 8141 x 131071 = 1073602561

1073602561 = 286572 + 252378911 = 28657 x 46368 - 255165215 

F23 = 28657

F24 = 46368

If b1<a1, then the a1 term will be of the form F242 - ..., F24 x F25 - ..., F25 x F26 - ..., or F252 - ...

if b1>a1, then a1 will equal F23 x F24 - ..., F222 - ... , that is, only 4-6 possible choices.


In order to get a very good estimate for d1, we will use the first remainder (and a few subsequent remainders if needed, more explanation below) obtained from the b1 for each of the above choices .

For the a1 =  F25 x F26 - ... choice, using a10 = 255165215, and substituting in the first formula, we get:

d1 = 132578.957, an excellent approximation.

Actually, a1 = 8556257280 = 750252 + 2927506655 = 75025 x 121393 - 551252545


b1 = 65537 x 131071 = 8590000127 = 750252 + 2961249502 = 75025 x 121393 - 517509698

F25 = 75025

Using the same reasoning and the same formula, we get a first estimate for d1, d1 = 130095.707


It is only by using the power of the sacred cubit that we can actually get these estimates, impossible to obtain otherwise by any other method, without resorting to sophisticated factoring methods.


The sacred cubit hidden pattern of the natural number system can be used to obtain as much information as possible out of the b1 semiprime.

b1 = 821 x 941 = 772561

772561 = 610 x 987 + 170491 = 9872 - 201608

170491 = 3772 + 28362 = 377 x 610 - 59479

F15 = 610
F16 = 987

We use each and every remainder obtained by dividing b1 by Fibonacci numbers, in a similar sequence: each subsequent remainder expressed as in the classic division formula (a = qd + r, where q and d are Fibonacci numbers, while r is the remainder to be used in the next division process)

201608 = 377 x 610 - 28362 = 3772 + 59479

F14 = 377

28362 = 144 x 233 - 5190 = 1442 + 7899

59479 = 2332 + 5190 = 233 x 377 - 28362

7899 = 892 - 22 = 89 x 55 + 3004

5190 = 89 x 55 + 295 = 892 - 2731


3004 = 552 - 21 = 55 x 34 + 1134

2731 = 552 - 294 = 55 x 34 + 861


1134 = 342 - 22 = 34 x 21 + 420

861 = 34 x 21 + 147 = 342 - 295

420 = 212 - 20 = 21 x 13 + 147

294 = 21 x 13 + 21 = 212 - 147 ; 147 + 21 = 168

147 = 21 x 8 - 21 = 13 x 8 + 43

43 = 8 x 5 + 3 = 82 - 21

21 = 5 x 3 + 6 = 52 - 4


Interestingly, we can immediately obtain a first approximation for d1, d1 = 918; by summing the remainders of b1 in their corresponding order, for a 3 digit d1 divisor. Several such sums can be obtained (where d1 can be assumed to have 3, 4, 5 digits) and one of them will actually represent a nice estimate of d1.


The crucial observation is that we can actually get the remainders of the a1 term either by noticing that 6 and 4 (remainders obtained by dividing 21 by F5 and F4) can be used to initiate the a1 sequence of remainders starting from the bottom up, or by using a very interesting shortcut involving b1sc, where this can be applied.

Actually, a1 = 105720 = 3772 - 36409 = 377 x 233 + 17879

Using the same scheme as above for the a1 term (same division by Fibonacci numbers algorithm as was utilized for the b1 term) we finally get:

40 = 82 - 24 = 8 x 3 + 16

16 = 52 - 9 = 32 + 7

9 = 3 x 5 - 6 = 2 x 3 - 3


65 = 82 + 1 = 8 x 13 - 39

39 = 8 x 5 - 1 = 52 + 14

14 = 3 x 5 -1 = 2 x 5 + 4


Knowing that 6 and 4 are the remainders of a1, we can see that from the possible choices we eventually get (11, 19, 9, and 14) only 9 and 14 will make any sense, given the fact that the remainders at each stage of the calculation have to be expressed as in the classic division formula (a = qd + r, where q and d are Fibonacci numbers, while r is the remainder).


One of the remainders of a1 will be 2857.


3004 - 2857 = 147



772561sc = 5530


5530 - 5063 = 2 x 233

5530 - 2857 = 89 x 30

(5063, another a1 remainder)

That is, there is a certain symmetry and relationship between b1sc and some of the a1 remainders.



Another example.

b1 = 1000009

For 1000009 = 3413 x 293, we get a first estimate of 3486, and by summing the remainders of b1 (576230 + 204130 + 62001 + 25840 + 5104 + 2817 + 947 ...) we get an estimate of 3400, which is amazing, because we only use the remainders from b1 and very simple approximations.


For 1000009, b1sc = 6515.72

9368 - 6515.72 = 610 x 4.66 = 987 x 2.88  (4.66 = 2 x 2.33 , and 2.88 = 2 x 1.44, both 233 and 144 are Fibonacci numbers)

9368 is one of the a1 remainders

Another a1 remainder is 3448

6515.72 - 3448 =~ 552 = 233 x 13



Thus, the factorization of semiprimes is related to the sacred cubit, and I believe the above algorithm is a start in studying further this new approach to solving this problem, based on the power of the sacred cubit.

For moderately large b1 such as:

231 - 1 = 2147483647

261 - 1 = 2.3059 x 1018

b1 = (231 - 1) x (261 - 1) = 4.951760152 x 1027

a computer which can handle the full/entire number of digits could be used to verify the algorithm proposed above, and to see if the same relationship exists between the sequence of remainders obtained for both b1 and a1.

In fact, with an a1 trial function 4 x 1035, we get an estimate for d1 = 2.353 x 1018.

Of course for the exact answer, we would need to verify the correctness of the above algorithm, involving the sequence of remainders obtained upon division by the corresponding Fibonacci numbers.




Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 24, 2017, 11:49:30 AM
ORIGIN OF URANIUM PARADOX

Uranium exists as high-grade ore at 200,000 ppm (as common as tin or zinc).

http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/uranium-resources/supply-of-uranium.aspx

"Along with most people, I hadn't understood until today how prevalent Uranium is in the Earth's crust. Discovering that made me suspicious once more, because it doesn't make any sense, given the current theory of element production.

Elements are said to be produced by fusion in stars. But most stars don't fuse past element number 2, Helium. None fuse past iron. Since Uranium is element number 92, it could only be produced by the very largest stars in collapse. It would spread out across the galaxy when they went supernova. But given how diffuse the galaxy is, you wouldn't expect planets to contain so much Uranium. I will be told that the galaxy is very old, so we have Uranium left over from eons of big stars going nova. Yes, but the half-life of Uranium is about 4.5 billion years, which is about half the lifespan of a star like the Sun.

So while the Sun is alive, ¾ of the existing Uranium will break down. So you see, Uranium doesn't persist to be recycled through several star-cycles. We can't get that sort of buildup over time. Plus, since the Earth is said to be exactly that old, it would have originally had twice as much Uranium as now, doubling our problem."


"We will now ASSUME that the clouds formed themselves into what evolutionists call proto-stars, or first-generation stars.

STARS EXPLODE AND SUPERNOVAS

PRODUCE HEAVY ELEMENTS

The problem—The Big Bang only produced hydrogen and helium. Somehow, the 90 heavier (post-helium) elements had to be made. The theorists had to figure out a way to account for their existence.

The theory—The first stars, which were formed, were so-called 'first-generation stars' (also called 'population III stars'). They contained only lighter elements (hydrogen and helium). Then all of these stars repeatedly exploded. Billions upon billions of stars kept exploding, for billions of years. Gradually, these explosions are said to have produced all our heavier elements.

This concept is as wild as those preceding it.

1 - Another imaginative necessity. Like all the other aspects of this theory, this one is included in order to somehow get the heavier (post-helium) elements into the universe. The evolutionists admit that the Big Bang would only have produced hydrogen and helium.

2 - The nuclear gaps at mass 5 and 8 make it impossible for hydrogen or helium to change itself into any of the heavier elements. This is an extremely important point, and is called the 'helium mass 4 gap' (that is, there is a gap immediately after helium 4). Therefore exploding stars could not produce the heavier elements. (Some scientists speculate that a little might be produced, but even that would not be enough to supply all the heavier elements now in our universe.) Among nuclides that can actually be formed, gaps exists at mass 5 and 8. Neither hydrogen nor helium can jump the gap at mass 5. This first gap is caused by the fact that neither a proton nor a neutron can be attached to a helium nucleus of mass 4. Because of this gap, the only element that hydrogen can normally change into is helium. Even if it spanned this gap, it would be stopped again at mass 8. Hydrogen bomb explosions produce deuterum (hydrogen 2), which, in turn, forms helium 4. In theory, the hydrogen bomb chain reaction of nuclear changes could continue changing into ever heavier elements until it reached uranium;—but the process is stopped at the gap at mass 5. If it were not for that gap, our sun would be radiating uranium toward us!

'In the sequence of atomic weight numbers 5 and 8 are vacant. That is, there is no stable atom of mass 5 or mass 8 . . The question then is: How can the build-up of elements by neutron capture get by these gaps? The process could not go beyond helium 4 and even if it spanned this gap it would be stopped again at mass 8. This basic objection to Gamow’s theory is a great disappointment in view of the promise and philosophical attractiveness of the idea.'—*William A. Fowler, California Institute of Technology, quoted in Creation Science, p. 90.

Clarification: If you will look at any standard table of the elements, you will find that the atomic weight of hydrogen is 1.008. (Deuterum is a form of hydrogen with a weight of 2.016.) Next comes helium (4.003), followed by lithium (6.939), beryllium (9.012), boron (10.811), etc. Gaps in atomic weight exist at mass 5 and 8.

But cannot hydrogen explosions cross those gaps? No. Nuclear fision (a nuclear bomb or reactor) splits (unevenly halves) uranium into barium and technetium. Nuclear fusion (a hydrogen bomb) combines (doubles) hydrogen into deuterum (helium 2), which then doubles into helium 4—and stops there. So a hydrogen explosion (even in a star) does not go across the mass 5 gap.

We will now ASSUME that hydrogen and helium explosions could go across the gaps at mass 5 and 8:

3 - There has not been enough theoretical time to produce all the needed heavier elements that now exist. We know from spectrographs that heavier elements are found all over the universe. The first stars are said to have formed about 250 million years after the initial Big Bang explosion. (No one ever dates the Big Bang over 20 billion years ago, and the date has recently been lowered to 15 billions years ago.) At some lengthy time after the gas coalesced into 'first-generation' stars, most of them are theorized to have exploded and then, 250 million years later, reformed into 'second-generation' stars. These are said to have exploded into 'third-generation' stars. Our sun is supposed to be a second- or third-generation star.

4 - There are no population III stars (also called first-generation stars) in the sky. According to the theory, there should be 'population III' stars, containing only hydrogen and helium, many of which exploded and made 'population II' (second-generation stars), but there are only population I and II stars (*Isaac Asimov, Asimov’s New Guide to Science, 1984, pp. 35-36).

5 - Random explosions do not produce intricate orbits. The theory requires that countless billions of stars exploded. How could haphazard explosions result in the marvelously intricate circlings that we find in the orbits of suns, stars, binary stars, galaxies, and star clusters? Within each galactic system, hundreds of billions of stars are involved in these interrelated orbits. Were these careful balancings not maintained, the planets would fall into the stars, and the stars would fall into their galactic centers—or they would fly apart! Over half of all the stars in the sky are in binary systems, with two or more stars circling one another. How could such astonishing patterns be the result of explosions? Because there are no 'first generation' ('Population I') stars, the Big Bang theory requires that every star exploded at least one or two times. But random explosions never produce orbits.

6 - There are not enough supernova explosions to produce the needed heavier elements. There are 81 stable elements and 90 natural elements. Each one has unusual properties and intricate orbits. When a star explodes, it is called a nova. When a large star explodes, it becomes extremely bright for a few weeks or months and is called a supernova. It is said that only the explosions of supernovas could produce much of the needed heavier elements, yet there have been relatively few such explosions.

7 - Throughout all recorded history, there have been relatively few supernova explosions. If the explosions occurred in the past, they should be occurring now. Research astronomers tell us that one or two supernova explosions are seen every century, and only 16 have exploded in our galaxy in the past 2,000 years. Past civilizations carefully recorded each one. The Chinese observed one, in A.D. 185, and another in A.D. 1006. The one in 1054 produced the Crab nebula, and was visible in broad daylight for weeks. It was recorded both in Europe and the Far East. Johannes Kepler wrote a book about the next one, in 1604. The next bright one was 1918 in Aquila, and the latest in the Veil Nebula in the Large Magellanic Cloud on February 24, 1987.

'Supernovae are quite different . . and astronomers are eager to study their spectra in detail. The main difficulty is their rarity. About 1 per 650 years is the average for any one galaxy . . The 1885 supernova of Andromeda was the closest to us in the last 350 years.'—*Isaac Asimov, New Guide to Science (1984), p. 48.

8 - Why did the stellar explosions mysteriously stop? The theory required that all the stars exploded, often. The observable facts are that, throughout recorded history, stars only rarely explode. In order to explain this, evolutionists postulate that 5 billion years ago, the explosions suddenly stopped. Very convenient. When the theory was formulated in the 1940s, through telescopes astronomers could see stars whose light left them 5 billion light-years ago. But today, we can see stars that are 15 billion light-years away. Why are we not seeing massive numbers of stellar explosions far out in space? The stars are doing just fine; it is the theory which is wrong.

9 - The most distant stars, which are said to date nearly to the time of the Big Bang explosion, are not exploding,—and yet they contain heavier elements. We can now see out in space to nearly the beginning of the Big Bang time. Because of the Hubble telescope, we can now see almost as far out in space as the beginning of the evolutionists’ theoretical time. But, as with nearby stars, the farthest ones have heavier elements (are 'second-generation'), and they are not exploding any more frequently than are the nearby ones.

10 - Supernovas do not throw off enough matter to make additional stars. There are not many stellar explosions and most of them are small-star (nova) explosions. Yet novas cast off very little matter. A small-star explosion only loses a hundred-thousandth of its matter; a supernova explosion loses about 10 percent; yet even that amount is not sufficient to produce all the heavier elements found in the planets, interstellar gas, and stars. So supernovas—Gamow’s fuel source for nearly all the elements in the universe—occur far too infrequently and produce far too small an amount of heavy elements—to produce the vast amount that exists in the universe.

11 - Only hydrogen and helium have been found in the outflowing gas from supernova explosions. The theory requires lots of supernova explosions in order to produce heavy elements. But there are not enough supernovas,—and research indicates that they do not produce heavy elements! All that was needed was to turn a spectroscope toward an exploded supernova and analyze the elements in the outflowing gas from the former star. *K. Davidson did that in 1982, and found that the Crab nebula (resulting from an A.D. 1054 supernova) only has hydrogen and helium. This means that, regardless of the temperature of the explosion, the helium mass 4 gap was never bridged. (It had been theorized that a supernova would generate temperatures high enough to bridge the gap. But the gap at mass 4 and 8 prevented it from occurring.)

12 - An explosion of a star would not produce another star. It has been theorized that supernova explosions would cause nearby gas to compress and form itself into new stars. But if a star exploded, it would only shoot outward and any gas encountered would be pushed along with it."
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 24, 2017, 11:52:54 AM
ORIGIN OF URANIUM PARADOX II

Helium Flash Paradox

"The fusion of hydrogen to helium by either the PP chain or the CNO cycle requires temperatures of the order of 10,000,000 K or higher, since only at those temperatures will there be enough hydrogen ions in the plasma with high enough velocities to tunnel through the Coulomb barrier at sufficient rates.


The Mass-5 and Mass-8 Bottlenecks

The helium that is produced as the "ash" in this thermonuclear "burning" cannot undergo fusion reactions at these temperatures or even substantially above because of a basic fact of nuclear physics in our Universe: there are no stable isotopes (of any element) having atomic masses 5 or 8. This means that the two most likely initial steps for the fusion of helium-4 (the next most abundant isotope in stars after hydrogen-1) involve combining the He-4 with H-1 to form a mass-5 isotope, or combining two He-4 nuclei to form a mass-8 isotope. But both are unstable, and so immediately fly apart before they can undergo any further reactions. This produces a bottleneck to further fusion at mass 5 and at mass 8.


High Temperatures and Helium Fusion

Only at extremely high temperatures, of order 100 million K, can this bottleneck be circumvented by a highly improbable reaction. At those temperatures, the fusion of two He-4 nuclei forms highly unstable Beryllium-8 at a fast enough rate that there is always a very small equilibrium concentration of Be-8 at any one instant.

The situation is somewhat like running water through a sieve. Normally the sieve holds no water because it drains out as fast as it is added. However, if the flow of water into the sieve is made fast enough, a small equilibrium amount of water will be in the sieve at any instant because even the sieve cannot empty the water fast enough to keep up with the incoming water.

This small concentration of Be-8 can begin to undergo reactions with other He-4 nuclei to produce an excited state of the mass-12 isotope of Carbon. This excited state is unstable, but a few of these excited Carbon nuclei emit a gamma-ray quickly enough to become stable before they disintegrate. This extremely improbable sequence is called the triple-alpha process because the net effect is to combine 3 alpha particles (that is, 3 He-4 nuclei) to form a C-12 nucleus."


And, of course, this scenario is based on the following assumption: gravity compresses the core where, at high temperature and pressure, nuclear fusion occurs.

But there is no such thing as attractive gravity: the Biefeld-Brown effect, the Lamoreaux effect, the experiments carried out by Dr. N. Kozyrev, Dr. Bruce DePalma, defy the notion of attractive gravity, as do the quotes attributed to Newton himself, in letters to Bentley, Halley and Oldenburg.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 25, 2017, 12:11:21 AM
QUANTUM RIEMANN'S ZETA FUNCTION XIII

Some of the best mathematicians in the world are beginning to realize that all of the zeros of Riemann's zeta function are actually interconnected/related to each other.

http://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/mathematics/research/research-reports-2/reports-2012/MA12_03Matiyasevich.pdf

Y. Matiyasevich provided the negative solution to Hilbert's tenth problem:

http://www.math.le.ac.uk/people/ag153/homepage/Matiyasevich.htm

http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~jean/old511/html/Martin-Davis-Hilberts-10th.pdf

Now, the algorithm in the paper makes use of very large numbers, but it proves that each zero of Riemann's zeta function depends/is related to the previous set of zeros.


The Riemann-Siegel formula describes the end product, that is, the values of the zeros of the zeta function, but does not explain why they are located exactly at those precise points on the 1/2 line:

http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/zeta_tables/zeros1

     14.134725142
     21.022039639
     25.010857580
     30.424876126
     32.935061588
     37.586178159
     40.918719012
     43.327073281
     48.005150881
     49.773832478
     52.970321478
     56.446247697
     59.347044003
     60.831778525
     65.112544048
     67.079810529
     69.546401711
     72.067157674
     75.704690699
     77.144840069
     79.337375020
     82.910380854
     84.735492981
     87.425274613
     88.809111208
     92.491899271
     94.651344041
     95.870634228
     98.831194218
...

    211.690862595
    213.347919360
    214.547044783
    216.169538508
    219.067596349
    220.714918839
    221.430705555
    224.007000255
    224.983324670
    227.421444280
    229.337413306
    231.250188700
    231.987235253
    233.693404179
    236.524229666
    237.769820481
    239.555477573


The previous twelve messages on this subject prove that the five elements law applied to the sacred cubit distance of 0.636621... will create a sacred cubit fractal, whose values will coincide with values of the zeros of the zeta function.

The zeros of Riemann's zeta function are generated by the subdivision of the sacred cubit distance according to the five elements law.

In turn, these zeros describe completely the distribution of the prime numbers.


The relationship between power tower series and the zeta function:

http://file.scirp.org/pdf/APM_2016042615075938.pdf


While the fact that if Riemann's hypothesis is true could lead in finding a polynomial time algorithm for integer factorization, such a computational breakthrough still has to be discovered on its own. The fact that semiprime factorization is directly related to the sacred cubit, in my opinion, would provide the basis to find an elegant solution (see the two messages posted on this page, on this subject).
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 25, 2017, 03:01:57 AM
SAGNAC EFFECT VIII


The Sagnac effect is far larger than the effect forecast by relativity theory.

STR has no possible function in explaining the Sagnac effect.

The Sagnac effect is a non-relativistic effect.

COMPARISON OF THE SAGNAC EFFECT WITH SPECIAL RELATIVITY, starts on page 7, calculations/formulas on page 8

http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/ebooks/Kelly-TimeandtheSpeedofLight.pdf

page 8

Because many investigators claim that the
Sagnac effect is made explicable by using the
Theory of Special Relativity, a comparison of
that theory with the actual test results is given
below. It will be shown that the effects
calculated under these two theories are of very
different orders of magnitude, and that
therefore the Special Theory is of no value in
trying to explain the effect.

COMPARISON OF THE SAGNAC EFFECT WITH STR

STR stipulates that the time t' recorded by an observer moving at velocity v is slower than the time to recorded by a stationary observer, according to:

to = t'γ

where γ = (1 - v2/c2)-1/2 = 1 + v2/2c2 + O(v/c)4...

to = t'(1 + v2/2c2)


dtR = (to - t')/to = v2/(v2 + 2c2)

dtR = relativity time ratio



Now, to - t' = 2πr/c - 2πr/(c + v) = 2πrv/(c + v)c

dt' = to - t' = tov/(c + v)


dtS = (to - t')/to = v/(v + c)


dtS = Sagnac ratio


dtS/dtR = (2c2 + v2)/v(v + c)

When v is small as compared to c, as is the case in all practical experiments, this ratio
reduces to 2c/v.


Thus the Sagnac effect is far larger than any
purely Relativistic effect. For example,
considering the data in the Pogany test (8 ),
where the rim of the disc was moving with a
velocity of 25 m/s, the ratio dtS/dtR is about
1.5 x 10^7. Any attempt to explain the Sagnac
as a Relativistic effect is thus useless, as it is
smaller by a factor of 10^7.


Referring back to equation (I), consider a disc
of radius one kilometre. In this case a fringe
shift of one fringe is achieved with a velocity
at the perimeter of the disc of 0.013m/s. This
is an extremely low velocity, being less than
lm per minute. In this case the Sagnac effect
would be 50 billion times larger than the
calculated effect under the Relativity Theory.


Post (1967) shows that the two (Sagnac and STR) are of very different orders of magnitude. He says that the dilation factor to be applied under SR is “indistinguishable with presently available equipment” and “is still one order smaller than the Doppler correction, which occurs when observing fringe shifts” in the Sagnac tests. He also points out that the Doppler effect “is v/c times smaller than the effect one wants to observe." Here Post states that the effect forecast by SR, for the time dilation aboard a moving object, is far smaller than the effect to be observed in a Sagnac test.


A.G. Kelly's extraordinary analysis of the Sagnac effect, exposing the commonly accepted misconceptions/errors about STR's relationship to the Sagnac effect:

https://books.google.ro/books?id=XVLmihZnsvUC&pg=PA44&lpg=PA44&dq=al+kelly+challenging+modern+physics+dufour+prunier&source=bl&ots=Xx6Lnjplga&sig=r0M1Y_C9RuIt7xs1MwSXaS6Fx9k&hl=ro&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwimjcGQsPHSAhUHKcAKHSybBggQ6AEIOTAD#v=onepage&q=al%20kelly%20challenging%20modern%20physics%20dufour%20prunier&f=false pages 34-60

page 45

pages 52-56

pages 56-58


The theory proposed by A.G. Kelly to explain the Sagnac effect, UTR (Universal Theory of Relativity), however, is just as wrong.

http://www.aetherometry.com/publications/direct/AToS/AS3-I.2.pdf (page 30)


"Something was affecting the light in order for it to consistently produce the fringe displacement. Sagnac (1913) demonstrated it was ether.

The optical whirlwind effect of an artificial rotation of an overall system really shows itself, without unexpected compensation, as an effect of the first order of the movement in comparison with the ether.  The experience directly reveals […] the linear delay […] that the overall rotation of the optical system produces in the ether between the two systems of inverse waves T and R during their propagation around the circuit.

G. Sagnac


The translational/linear Sagnac effect IS A FACT OF SCIENCE.

Professor Ruyong Wang, in two well-designed experiments showed unambiguously that an identical Sagnac effect appearing in uniform radial motion occurs in linear inertial motion.

He tested the travel-time difference between two counter-propagating light beams in uniformly moving fiber.

The travel-time difference was found to be:

Δt = 2vΔL/c^2

where ΔL is the length of the fiber segment moving with the source and detector at a v, whether the segment was moving uniformly or circularly.



https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0609/0609222.pdf (first experiment conducted by R. Wang)

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0609/0609202.pdf (second experiment carried out by R. Wang)

"For a circular path of radius R, the difference between the different time intervals can also be represented as Δt = 2vl/c^2, where v = ΩR is the speed of the circular motion and l = 2πR is the circumference of the circle.

The travel-time difference of two counterpropagating light beams in moving fiber is proportional to both the total length and the speed of the fiber, regardless of whether the motion is circular or uniform.

In a segment of uniformly moving fiber with a speed of v and a length of Δl, the travel-time difference is 2vΔl/c^2."

(https://image.ibb.co/cPs5vd/sagnac3.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/m86n8y/sagnac4.jpg)


Wolfgang Engelhardt, from the Max Planck Institute of Physics, made an even more profound discovery: STR does not apply at all to the Sagnac effect.

http://aflb.ensmp.fr/AFLB-401/aflb401m820.pdf

By applying correct relativistic formula composition law for velocities, formula (7) of his paper, the well known infinitesimal time increments formula, used by all relativists,  formula (8 ), and the correct derivation of formula (10) (he even provides three well known references on this formula), the author does show that STR does not predict the Sagnac effect.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 25, 2017, 06:28:40 AM
SAGNAC EFFECT IX

The Sagnac effect proves the existence of ether.

It also proves geocentrism.

The experiment shows a certain substance, the ether, to be in movement against the surface of the Earth.

Heliocentrists will state that there are two choices:

(a) a rotating Earth in a fixed ether, or

(b) a rotating ether above the surface of a fixed Earth


The reason that (a) must be excluded is the missing orbital Sagnac effect: if one claims that the Earth is rotating in a fixed ether, then in order to account for the four seasons, one must also say that the Earth is also revolving around the sun.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1846721#msg1846721

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1846706#msg1846706


The Sagnac effect is a direct proof not only of the existence of ether, but also of the fact that the Earth is stationary.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 07, 2017, 01:24:30 AM
THE ALLAIS EFFECT VIII

An overview of the Allais effect (parts I - VII):

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1676115#msg1676115 (the Black Sun and the laevorotatory subquarks)


Dr. Maurice Allais report to NASA:

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

pages 35R - 43R

1. – Periodic structure of the month-long series of observations of
the asymmetrical paraconical pendulum with anisotropic support

a – The seven month-long series of observations of the
asymmetrical paraconical pendulum with anisotropic support
are characterized by a very remarkable periodic structure

c – Analysis together with 13 periods from the harmonic
analysis used in the theory of tides was particularly suggestive

The same periodicities as in the theory of tides appeared
to be significant in the movements of the paraconical pendulum,
but their coefficients of amplitude were very different.


FOR THE PARACONICAL PENDULUM WITH ISOTROPIC
SUPPORT, THE RATIO OF THE COMPONENT OF 24H 50M TO
THE COMPONENT OF 24H IS ABOUT 14 TIMES LARGER,
THAN WITH THE THEORY OF TIDES (4.12/0.294=14.01)

2. – Periodic structure of the month-long series of observations of
the paraconical pendulum with isotropic support

A remarkable periodic structure appeared here as well.

The significant periodicities which appear are the
same as those of the theory of tides, but their relative
amplitudes are quite different.

c – One may well ask oneself why, when it occurs, the near
alignment of the Moon and the Sun does not generate the same
effects as a total eclipse.


In fact, the importance of the monthly sidereal period of
27.322 days shows that these effects exist. But they can only
really be perceived over a period of several months.

Overall, it was the harmonic analysis of the various series
of observations of the paraconical pendulum with
anisotropic support and of the series of observations of the
paraconical pendulum with isotropic support which made
me absolutely certain of their periodic structure as far as
the orders of magnitude of the components of 24h 50m,
24h, 12h 25m, and 12h are concerned, and of the
impossibility of explaining them by the theory of
gravitation, whether or not completed by the theory of
relativity.


Seen overall, the harmonic analysis of the month-long
series of observations of the paraconical pendulum with
anisotropic and isotropic supports disclosed a very remarkable
underlying periodic structure.

This makes it clear why experiments for a few hours with
a Foucault pendulum have always been notable for inexplicable
anomalies.

• Particularly, my experiments with the paraconical
pendulum with isotropic support marked a fundamental stage in
my researches, and they enabled me to obtain results of
exceptional importance.

In fact, the periodic structures which were brought to light
exhibited great underlying coherence, particularly as far as
their phases were concerned.

The existence of anomalies in the movement of the
paraconical pendulum has become absolutely certain.

FOR THE LUNI-SOLAR WAVE OF 24H 50M, IN THE CASE OF
THE PARACONICAL PENDULUM WITH ANISOTROPIC
SUPPORT, THE EFFECTS OBSERVED ARE ABOUT TWENTY
MILLION TIMES GREATER THAN THOSE CALCULATED.

IN THE CASE OF THE PARACONICAL PENDULUM WITH
ISOTROPIC SUPPORT, THE RATIO BETWEEN THE
OBSERVED EFFECTS AND THE CALCULATED EFFECTS IS
ABOUT A HUNDRED MILLION.

THESE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE CALCULATED
VALUES AND THE OBSERVED VALUES ARE ENORMOUS,
AND WITHOUT ANY EQUAL IN THE LITERATURE.


V –TOTALLY INEXPLICABLE OBSERVATIONS IN THE
FRAMEWORK OF CURRENT THEORY

1. – Orders of magnitude incompatible with current theory

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 discrepancies discovered are enormous, and, as far
as I know, unmatched in the literature.

http://ether-wind.narod.ru/Allais_1997/Allais_1997_1.pdf (L'Anisotropie de L'espace, in French)


The Allais effect is direct consequence of the Black Sun passing in front the Sun (during a solar eclipse) thereby activating the ether strings/subquark telluric currents to a higher degree than usual, and causing the antigravitational effects recorded during the experiments carried out over the past 60 years.

The correlation between the movements of the paraconical pendulum and the periodicities as in the theory of tides means that the SAME force is at work, a force exerted by the pressure of the ether waves which does cause the tidal waves.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1486127#msg1486127 (tides and radio waves)



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 10, 2017, 01:25:09 AM
9 REASONS WHY THE ROSETTA COMET LANDING WAS A HOAX

When the European Space Agency (ESA) allegedly landed the Philae spacecraft on the 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko comet which is reportedly traveling 84,000 MPH, you may have been thinking, wait, what, really!? Are you serious!? If so, you weren’t alone.

Aside from the fact that the comet landing was strait out of the Hollywood movie “Armageddon” (1998) (see trailer) starring Bruce Willis and Ben Affleck, there are far too many anomalies surrounding the historic event not to scientifically reevaluate exactly what us Earthlings are being asked to believe.

After all, neither NASA nor the ESA has put a man on the relatively stationary Moon since 1972 (allegedly) and its only 249,000 miles away from Earth. Conversely, the 67P comet is some 310,000,000 miles away from Earth and moving at 23.6 miles per second. Therefore, the likelihood that a 10-year old spacecraft landed on the comet first try around is highly improbable to say the least.

Considering that landing on a flying space rock had never been executed let alone attempted in the history of mankind, the ESA either had a severe case of “beginner’s luck”, or the incident was an elaborate hoax. After reading the evidence depicted herein, chances are you will agree with the latter.



1. No Video Footage
According to Rosetta’s Wikipedia page, “Information gathered by [Rosetta’s] onboard cameras beginning at a distance of 24 million kilometers (15,000,000 mi) were processed at ESA‘s Operation Centre to refine the position of the comet in its orbit to a few kilometers.” However, to date, no “live” footage of the comet landing has ever been produced. Instead, the EAS released a 7:56:35 video which contains a lot of computer models, speeches and scientific cheerleading but no actual footage of the event. Since Rosetta and Philae are state-of-the-art spacecraft, the lack of video footage is highly suspect and suggests the ESA has something to hide.

2. No Real-Time Communication
Philae’s alleged landing on the 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko comet was reportedly executed from ESA Mission Control at ESOC in Darmstadt, Germany. Considering that the comet in question is approximately 310,000,000 miles away from Earth, any real-time communication with Philae in respect to its navigation and precision landing on the comet which is traveling 84,000 MPH (23.6 miles per second) would have had to occur faster than the speed of light (i.e., 671,000,000 miles per hour). Even if the ESA was able to communicate with Rosetta and Philae at the speed of light (which they cannot), there would be an approximant 25-27 minute lag between operational maneuvers emanating from Germany and real-time maneuvers in deep space (i.e., this is calculated by dividing 310 million by 671 million). In short, it’s an impossible feat. For lack of a better analogy, it would be like driving a race car at 84,000 miles per hour with a 25 minute delay in respect to the road ahead. Needless to say, a fiery crash would be in short order.

3. No Aerodynamic Shape
Considering that real comets such as Halley’s Comet are flying through space at an extremely high rate of speed, they tend to become rather aerodynamic over time due to the cosmic dust and cosmic rays (i.e., high-energy radiation) the encounter while careening though space. This is clearly not the case with the 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko comet which exhibits a rather odd boot or lion-like shape. In short, the comet is very un-comet like which suggests that its entire likeness was fabricated, most likely in an advanced form of Photoshop.

4. No Stars
In up-close Rosetta-based photos of the 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko comet from August 3, 2014, and September 19, 2014, there are no visible stars in the background. Outside the range of the Sun, stars are extremely bright yet there are none to be found whatsoever. Rosetta-based photos of the 67P comet from August 2, 2014 and August 29, 2014 depict a plethora of stars in the background, suggesting that the up-close photos of the comet were created in Photoshop.

5. No Fiery Glow
In up-close Rosetta-based photos of the 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko comet from August 3, 2014, and September 19, 2014, shadows are being cast on comet from the northeast. Considering that a flash was not used and the comet is roughly 310,000,000 miles away the Sun, the source of the faint light is highly suspect and remains a mystery. Conversely, in a Rosetta-based photo from August 29, 2014, the 67P comet is bright as the sun, dispelling the notion of an exterior light source. Needless to say, the ESA cannot have it both ways. Realistically speaking, the photos of the comet should either be white as the Sun or black as night due to the lack of sunlight. Anything in between is highly suspect.

6. No Vapor Trail
As depicted in the Rosetta-based photos of the 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko comet from August 3, 2014, and September 19, 2014, no visible vapor trail of hot gasses are emanating from the comet. In comparison to Halley’s Comet, a known comet, the lack of a vapor trail is highly suspect. In a Rosetta-based photo of the 67P comet from August 2, 2014, a radiant white glow is emanating from the comet, something which is curiously missing in the aforementioned photos.

7. No Space Sheer
Considering that the 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko comet is allegedly traveling at 84,000 MPH, it’s extremely unlikely that a 220 pound spacecraft that’s only a few feet tall (3.3 x 3.3 x 2.6) would be able to withstand the white hot gasses erupting from the comets fiery surface. In other words, the Philae spacecraft would never be able to get close to the speeding comet let alone attach itself for an extended period of time. According to report dated November 13, 2014, Philae was only able to get two of its three legs in contact with the comet yet it had no problem staying upright or attached. A household chair cannot stand on three legs yet this spacecraft is standing on two while traveling through space?

8. Suspicious Names
The Rosetta space probe and the Philae lander spacecraft were allegedly launched by the ESA on March 2, 2004, by an Ariane 5 rocket, reaching the 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko comet on August 6, 2014. Whether this event occurred in reality is not known, but the name Rosetta was evidently chosen because of its likeness to Rosetta Stone, an international language-based software company. Because the name Rosetta automatically invokes Rosetta Stone, it makes the notion of the Rosetta spacecraft landing on a flying stone in space seem all the more plausible. Considering that “Ph” often constitutes an “F” sound in the English language (e.g. Joseph, Phat, Pharaoh, etc.), the name “Philae” can also equate to “Filae” or “Fool” as vowels in English are ambiguous at best. Considering that comet landing appears to be a hoax, the name of its primary spacecraft was appropriately named “Fool” for billions have succumbed to its fakery.

9. Technological Contradictions
If reports are to be believed, Rosetta and Philae are now “Tweeting” from deep space. We can barely get reliable cellular and Wi-Fi service on Earth yet these spacecraft are Tweeting in real time from 310,000,000 miles away? Even stranger, it was reported on November 15, 2014, that Philae is “asleep” after its batteries ran out. One would think that the ESA would have installed batteries that last longer than 72-hours but clearly that’s not the case. Chances are it’s a convenient way of ending the conversation about the highly improbable comet landing before it even gets started. Needless to say, the technological contradictions surrounding the mission are red flags which suggest that the event never transpired in reality.

David Chase Taylor


Electric Comet Theory:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1619877#msg1619877
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 14, 2017, 02:11:54 PM
TURIN SHROUD/SFUMATO TECHNIQUE: BALL LIGHTNING LASER PRECISION

In the new radical chronology of history, the group of persons who created both the Turin Shroud and the paintings attributed to Leonardo Da Vinci lived some 250 years ago.

https://www.shroud.com/scavone.htm (L. Da Vinci was not responsible for manufacturing the shroud)

http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/sorensen.pdf

https://shroudstory.com/2015/09/04/what-do-we-really-know-about-volckringer-patterns/


There is only one way that the image featured on the Turin Shroud could have been created: radiation. But this method would involve using laser pulses on the shroud.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2076443/Turin-Shroud-created-flash-supernatural-light.html

http://www.sindone.info/DILAZZA3.PDF (very well documented)


Radiation on the shroud caused by the presence of ball lightning:

https://books.google.ro/books?id=xe75CQAAQBAJ&pg=PA29&lpg=PA29&dq=turin+shroud+ball+lightning+radiation&source=bl&ots=vTkX0FMNKK&sig=nDlHUkh7bCM3OP4ERZmLLC_fU5A&hl=ro&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj0gvi0zqTTAhWH0RQKHfxVBl8Q6AEINTAB#v=onepage&q=turin%20shroud%20ball%20lightning%20radiation&f=false

https://shroudofturin.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/science_and_religion_meet_in_shroud_research-1.pdf


Earlier in this thread, it was shown that a ball lightning device was used to transport and levitate the colossal blocks of granite found at Baalbek.


But all the researchers into the Turin Shroud phenomenon have not noticed that other artistic creations, belonging to the same period of history, also cannot be explained at all: the sfumato technique attributed to Da Vinci, featured in the Mona Lisa and John the Baptist paintings (the amazing details unmatched by any other painter/artist).

https://phys.org/news/2010-08-x-ray-fluorescence-spectroscopy-unveils-da.html

But the sfumato technique cannot even begin to be explained:

https://books.google.ro/books?id=uGHOqR6zpMgC&pg=PA51&lpg=PA51&dq=da+vinci+sfumato+laser&source=bl&ots=LF_EbL3SVX&sig=GMOhQfFHV4Z7TP7CXnNJzzxu2Qg&hl=ro&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiO6f_30qTTAhWDDCwKHZYpCpsQ6AEIeDAN#v=onepage&q=da%20vinci%20sfumato%20laser&f=false

Because the thickness of the layers applied to create these paintings measures one to two microns each (50 times thinner than a human hair): obviously some kind of a laser precision instrument was used to apply the colors of the paintings.

http://www.esrf.eu/news/general-old/general-2010/new-light-on-leonardo-da-vinci2019s-faces

http://www.cnrs.fr/fr/pdf/cim/CIM19.pdf (page 8 )




https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1683424#msg1683424 (five consecutive messages: Pompeii and Herculaneum were destroyed at least after 1750 AD)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1673763#msg1673763

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1674108#msg1674108

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1619746#msg1619746

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 02, 2017, 09:11:47 PM
DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX III

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1723400#msg1723400 (part I)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1724215#msg1724215 (part II)


Now, the complete demonstration that indeed there will be two forces acting on boat X, and two forces acting on boat Y.

Two boats on lake, boat X and boat Y, are being pulled toward each other using a single rope by the two men on each boat.


The force applied by the first man is force A.

The force applied by the second man is force B.

They are of different magnitude to start with, A does not equal B.


Here is how the RE analysis goes, reaching a most profound contradiction:

The net force on boat x is -A.
The net force on boat y is -B.
The net force on the string is A+B.
As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.

The net force on boat x is -A.
The net force on boat y is A.
The net force on the string is A-A=0.


By the very hypothesis, A DOES NOT EQUAL B.

A cannot equal B.

Yet, by using the twisted RE logic, using only a single force acting on boat X (respectively on boat Y), the analysis reaches a point where the absolute value of A equals the absolute value of B. A most direct contradiction of the hypothesis.


The RE analysis leads to a total disaster, where the basic requirement is this |A|=|B|.

Which can NEVER be the case.

Force A can never equal force B.

Even if we had, as an example, force A = 100.000,000,000,021 N and force B = 100.000,000,000,034 N, it would still NOT satisfy the RE requirement which is this: |A|=|B|.

The RE analysis leads directly to the ONLY case which can never be experienced in reality.


Here is the correct FE analysis.

Two boats pulled toward each other on a lake.

Man from boat X is pulling with force A, directed to the left.

Man from boat Y is pulling with force B, directed to the right.

Forces A and B are, of course, of different magnitude.


What are the forces acting on boat X?

To the left we will have a negative direction.

Boat X will be acted upon by TWO FORCES: A (the reaction force on the action force -A) and B.


What are the forces acting on the left end side of the rope?

-A and -B.


What are the forces acting boat Y?

To the right we will have the positive direction.

Boat Y will be acted upon by two forces: -B (the reaction force on the action force B) and
-A.


What are the forces acting on the right end side of the rope?

A and B.


Net force on boat X: A + B

Net force on boat Y: -A - B


Net force on the string: [-A - B] + [A + B]



The string/rope will not move: [-A - B] + [A + B] = 0


All forces balance out perfectly.

But they include TWICE THE FORCES NEEDED in the Newtonian system.

The man in boat X is pulling on the rope, while at the same time boat Y is pulling on that same rope with force B. The correct analysis must take these facts into account.

A perfect demonstration that there are indeed two forces acting on boat X, respectively on boat Y: the equations work out in total balance, no wild substitutions are to be made, no contradiction is to be reached at all.



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 09, 2017, 01:54:35 AM
TACHYONIC NEUTRINOS = BOSONS FROM THE SUBQUARKS

The carrier of light is the boson (what modern science calls a photon).

A subquark (tachyon/magnetic monopole) consists of billions of bosons and antibosons arranged in double torsion strings.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1615813#msg1615813


Now, this same modern science has come to the conclusion that actually tachyonic neutrinos do exist:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1408.2804.pdf

http://mason.gmu.edu/~rehrlich/Tachyon_papers.pdf

What it describes to be a tachyonic neutrino, is actually the boson.


The Higgs boson with a mass of 126 GeV/c^2, discovered on 4th July 2012, can also be regarded as a tachyon.

Accordingly, the other flavours, muon and tau neutrinos, might also be considered to be tachyons.

If the electronic neutrino were a tachyon, the universe would be embedded in a homogeneous tachyonic field.



It is this ether field that produces the variations observed in the radioactive decay rates.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092765050900084X

And it also proves that the Earth does not orbit the Sun, since the existence of the ether (subquark) field means that the variations are due to the changes in the density of this ether field.

http://creation.com/radioactive-decay-rates-and-solar-activity

Since the discovery of tachyonic neutrinos can no longer be denied, the papers published against the theory that there is a neutrino field which does cause the changes in the radioactive rates, have to be examined again:

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0810/0810.3265.pdf


ORBITAL SAGNAC EFFECT/RUDERFER EXPERIMENT:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1846721#msg1846721
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 12, 2017, 10:55:32 PM
DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX IV

The universal "law" of gravitational attraction tells us that the force exerted for each body, the Earth - Moon system, must be exactly the same.

Moon attractive force for Earth:

Fmn = 2.1096 x 1019 kgf

Fmn = [(G x Mmn)/d2] x Me

Earth attractive force for Moon:

Fe = 2.1096 x 1019 kgf

Fe = [(G x Me)/d2] x Mmn


Mmn = 7.349 x 1025 gm

Me = 5.9736 x 1027 gm

d = 3.7633 x 1010 cm


If a single counterexample could be found which defies the equation F=GMm/r 2, then that would mean that the forces exerted by the Earth and the Moon on each other, in the Newtonian mechanics context, must be different from one another.


DEPALMA SPINNING BALL EXPERIMENT:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg753387#msg753387

The law of universal gravitation totally defied: FOR THE SAME MASS OF THE STEEL BALLS, AND THE SAME SUPPOSED LAW OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITY, THE ROTATING BALL WEIGHED LESS AND TRAVELED HIGHER THAN THE NON-ROTATING BALL.


BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1852363#msg1852363


NIPHER EXPERIMENT:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1852840#msg1852840


LAMOREAUX EXPERIMENT:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1616174#msg1616174


ALLAIS EFFECT:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg760382#msg760382


TOTAL DEMOLITION OF STR/GTR:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg769750#msg769750


Hence, we have a most direct proof of the double forces of attractive gravitation paradox.

In the two boats on a lake example, connected by a rope, the forces exerted on each of end of the rope, forces A and B, will ALWAYS be different, which means that the balance of forces equation will include TWICE  the forces needed in the Newtonian system.

Net force on boat X: A + B

Net force on boat Y: -A - B


Net force on the string: [-A - B] + [A + B]



By contrast, the analysis based only on a single force being transmitted through the rope, leads to a most direct contradiction: |A|=|B|. But forces A and B can never be exactly the same.


Earth attracts the Moon, BUT ALSO an equal Earth anchored “attraction” force is pulling the Earth toward the Moon.

The Moon attract the Earth, BUT ALSO this Moon seated force is equally pulling the Moon toward the Earth.
 
There are FOUR FORCES INVOLVED HERE.

"All attraction models" produce twice the force that is required to balance the centrifugal forces of orbit!
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 14, 2017, 12:52:50 AM
DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX V

The double forces of attractive gravitation paradox leads directly to the following conclusion: F=GMm/r2 is a fake formula.

Since it is completely wrong and erroneous, it means that the figures listed in it for the Earth - Sun system are also wrong: the mass of the Sun, the mass of the Earth, and of course the Earth - Sun distance values, as they are being used in the heliocentrical context, are false.

We are being told that the supposed complete orbit around the sun occurs every 365.256 days (1 sidereal year), during which time Earth travels 940 million kilometers.

And that the distance at the aphelion is 152.10×10^6 km (94.51×10^6 mi; 1.0167 AU) while the distance for at the perihelion is 147.10×10^6 km (91.40×10^6 mi; 0.98329 AU).

But the listed Earth - Sun distance used in the F=GMm/r2 formula is completely false.

Which means that the Earth could not possibly orbit the Sun at all: there would be no way to account for the four seasons.


Thus we can infer how the fairy tales of space missions (Nasa, Esa, Mir) have been completely made up.

We can understand how tidal waves have nothing to do with the gravitational influence exerted either the by the Sun or by the Moon; how the works attributed to Copernicus, Galilei and Kepler were all faked to start with; why the acceleration of the rate of precession cannot be solved at all in the Newtonian mechanical context; the Perseid meteor shower mystery; the missing orbital Sagnac effect, and much more.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1486127#msg1486127 (tidal waves and radio waves)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1643860#msg1643860 (N. Copernicus, a fictional character invented much later in time)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1638725#msg1638725 (the fake Gregorian calendar reform)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1776670#msg1776670 (how Nova Astronomia was completely faked/forged, part I)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1776680#msg1776680 (part II)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1776082#msg1776082 (acceleration of the rate of precession paradox, part I)

 https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1776108#msg1776108 (part II)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1775758#msg1775758 (Perseid meteor shower paradox, followed by parts II and III)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1782182#msg1782182 (orbital motion Sagnac effect paradox)


Now, we can understand why the orbital equations of motion lead directly to mathematically spurious results:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1774581#msg1774581


Or why we have been left certain clues along the way, from the group of people who wrote the works attributed to Newton and Huygens, which point out the sheer fallacy of the law of universal gravitational attraction:

“That gravity should be innate, inherent, and essential to matter, so that one body can act upon another at a distance through a vacuum without the mediation of anything else, by and through which their action and force may be conveyed from one to another, is to me so great an absurdity that I believe no man, who has in philosophical matters a competent faculty of thinking, can ever fall into it.

Huygens dismissed the attraction concept:

”Concerning the cause of the flux given by M. Newton, I am by no means satisfied [by it], nor by all the other theories that he builds upon his principle of attraction, which to me seems absurd, as I have already mentioned in the addition to the Discourse on Gravity. And I have often wondered how he could have given himself all the trouble of making such a number of investigations and difficult calculations that have no other foundation than this very principle."

Or why "Newton" gave the following example without fully understanding the balance of forces involved here:

"If a horse draws a stone tied to a rope, the horse (if I may so say) will be equally drawn back towards the stone: for the distended rope, by the same endeavour to relax or unbend itself, will draw the horse as much towards the stone, as it does the stone towards the horse, and will obstruct the progress of the one as much as it advances that of the other."

Even here there will be two forces acting on each end of the rope.

X end of the rope: horse is pulling with force -A, force A reacting on the horse, the stone is exerting through the rope a force B on the horse.

Forces acting on the rope at the X end: -A and -B (reaction forces)

Y end of the rope: -B, while the horse is pulling with force -A

Forces acting on the rope at the Y end: A and B


Double the forces needed in the Newtonian description of mechanics.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 17, 2017, 10:36:23 AM
GLOBAL COSINE/ARCCOSINE/EXPONENTIAL/LOGARITHM/ARCTANGENT FUNCTIONS

(http://www.zaimoni.com/grafx/UnitCircleW_InscribedRgtTri.gif)

The hypothenuse is labeled as c (which unites points A and C), side a is located on the x axis (which unites points A and B), and we also have side b. Angle θ is located between sides c and a (cos θ = a/c).

Point D will be the intersection of the circle with the positive x axis.

We first calculate the value of segment CD, in terms of a, b and c: (2c2 - 2ac)1/2

We then succesively bisect the chord CD, and each hypothenuse thus obtained (if we divide CD in half the midpoint will be E, and the intersection of the segment AE with the circle will be labeled as F; then we calculate this new hypothenuse CF in terms of the values obtained earlier, and so on, aiming to get as close to the value of s [arc length of CD] as possible], into smaller and smaller equal segments, calculating each succesive value in terms of a, b and c, in order to obtain a very close approximation of s (the arc length between points C and D); since s = rθ, where r = c = 1, by acquiring an exceptional figure for s, we correspondingly then get the value of θ.

Letting c = 1, we finally obtain:


COS θ =  1/2 x (({ [( (2 - θ2/2N)2 - 2)2...]2 - 2}2 - 2))    (n/2 + 1 evaluations)

COS-1 θ =  2n x {2 - ((2 + {2 + [2 + (2 + 2θ)1/2]1/2}1/2...))}1/2   (n + 1 evaluations)


The cosine formula is a GLOBAL formula; by contrast the Maclaurin cosine series is a local formula:

(http://www.petervis.com/mathematics/maclaurin_series/maclaurin_series_for_cosx/maclaurin_series_for_cosx_4.gif)

My global cosine formula is the SUM of the Maclaurin cosine expansion.


We know that the Maclaurin hyperbolic cosine expansion is:

cosh x = 1 + x2/2! + x4/4! + ...

Therefore, by just changing the sign in the global cosine formula, we obtain immediately the GLOBAL hyperbolic cosine formula:

COSH V =  1/2 x (([(({[(2 + V2/2n)2 - 2]2} - 2))2...-2]2 - 2))   (n/2 + 1 evalutions)

This is the global hyperbolic cosine formula which is the sum of the corresponding local Maclaurin power series expansion.


We then immediately obtain the GLOBAL natural logarithm formula:

LN V =  2n x ((-2 + {2 + [2 + (2 + 1/V + V)1/2]1/2...}1/2))1/2   (n+1 evaluations)


By summing the nested continued square root function, we finally obtain:


LN V = 2n x (V1/2n+1 - 1/V1/2n+1)

This is the first explicit global formula for the natural logarithm, which can be used immediately to find LN V without resorting to logarithm tables, or calculators which feature the logarithm key: all we need is a calculator which has the four basic operations and the square root key. It links algebraic functions with elementary and higher transcendental functions.

For a first approximation,

LN V = 2n x (V1/2n - 1)

First results appear for n = 8 to 12, all the remaining digits for n = 19 and higher...

Example: x = 100,000        LN x = 11.5129255

with n = 20 the first approximation is LN x = 11.512445 (e11.512445 = 100,001.958)


We also can get the corresponding arctangent formula:

ARCTAN V =  2n x ((2- {2+ [2+ (2+ 2{1/(1+ V2)}1/2)1/2]...1/2}))1/2 (n+1 parentheses to be evaluated)


ERROR ANALYSIS

Here is the Maclaurin expansion for ex:

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/math/f/9/8/f98fd1cf18b61436b3adf73e1be3e6fc.png)

Let us obtain a remainder form for the Maclaurin expansion for ex (Lagrange remainder):

Rn(x) = f(n+1)(c)[xn+1]/(n+1)! , where c is between 0 and x

f(n+1)(c) = ec


An approximation is said to be accurate to n decimal places if the magnitude of the error is less than 0.5 x 10-n.

e1 to four decimal place accuracy:

Rn = ec/(n+1)!

since c<1, then ec < e

since e<3, then Rn < 3/(n+1)!

then, for n=8 we will obtain four decimal place accuracy.


Local formulas are difficult to use because of their very slow convergence.


By contrast, my formula is a GLOBAL formula, which rapidly converges to the result, even for large x.


Cosh v = (ev + e-v)/2 =~ 1/2ev = 1/2 x (({[( ( (2 + v2/2n)2) -2)2] -2)2 ...-2}2 -2))       (n/2 +1 evaluations)

We can turn this formula into an exact formula for ev by simply substituting y for ev, and then solve the quadratic equation for y.

One might ask, could you not use Taylor expansions to obtain cosh 10 (as an example)? No, because you would need some other value to start with, cosh 9.5 or cosh 9.8 or cosh 10.3, to apply Taylor series.

With my global formula, no such approximations are needed, we can start directly with the value v = 10.

My formula also has a built-in remainder approximation estimation: the term v2/2n.

That is, we can estimate the accuracy from the very start: this is the power of a global formula.

The higher the value of n, the better the approximation that we will obtain.


Example:

COSH 10 = 11013.233

102/220 = 0.00009536

Using the global hyperbolic cosine formula with n = 20, we get: 11012.762

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 18, 2017, 10:56:24 AM
DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX VI

In the official chronology of history, Newton simply copied all of the results from calculus and mechanics attributed to him from the Naya Vaiseshika Sutra and other works from Vedic advanced mathematics:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1574605#msg1574605


The force on a body is the resultant of gravity and the work done against it. V.S 5.1.13

In the absence of all other forces gravity exists. V.S 5.1.7

Action is opposed by an equivalent opposite reaction - V.S 5.1.16-18

Newton's laws of motion copied from the Naya Vaiseshika Sutra.

Suppose that the mass of an object is 'm' and in time interval 't', the velocity of the object changes from 'u' to 'v' due to the force acting on it. Then,

Initial momentum = mu
Final momentum = mv
Change in momentum = m(v-u)

Therefore, the rate of change of momentum = m(v-u)/t = ma (from Kanada's first law)

From Kandas second law,
force is proportional to the rate of change of momentum.
Or, p k ma
Or, p = kma (where k is a constant)

If m=1 and a=1, then
1 = k*1*1 or k = 1
Or, p = ma

Therefore, unit force is the one that produces unit acceleration in an object of unit mass.


Having simply copied these laws of mechanics without having a clue as to how they should be properly and correctly applied, Newton (or the group of people who forged the works attributed to Newton) also had to replace the correct context in which these laws were discovered/invented: gravity is a push and not a pull.

Here is the original meaning of the third law of motion as it was written down in the Naya Vaiseshika Sutra:

http://manojvakkeel.blogspot.ro/2014/07/rishi-kanad-s-law-of-motion.html


This is the reason why Newton failed to properly apply the third law of motion to the horse which draws a stone tied to a rope example: he simply copied down the text without having a proper understanding as to how it was to be applied to real life situations.

And precisely why the incorrect way of applying the third law leads to a most direct contradiction: |A|=|B|, which can never be the case.

The correct manner in which the third law is to be applied to the two boats connected by a rope example, leads to the double forces of attractive gravitation paradox.




Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 20, 2017, 11:21:35 PM
SUBQUARK SHAPIRO TIME DELAY

The Shapiro time delay has nothing to do with spacetime/GTR:

http://www.extinctionshift.com/SignificantFindings06B.htm

The Shapiro delay is essentially a transit-time effect which is due to the physical characteristics of a space of an electron density profile that governs the propagation of microwaves.

This "density profile" however is the effect of ether (subquark strings) upon the microwave signal.


Aether frame dragging:

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

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

http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0502/0502007.pdf

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

https://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Relativity%20Theory/Download/7149


Dr. Yuri Galaev ether drift proofs:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1722791#msg1722791


The density of ether causes what is being described as "gravitational lensing".

What we see is the effect of the density of ether on the speed of light.

https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2015/11/26/lensing-by-refraction-not-gravity/


Ether redshift theory:


https://web.archive.org/web/20060607031454/http://itis.volta.alessandria.it/episteme/ep3-17.htm

"The late Walther Nernst was one of the the most eminent and interesting scientists with whom I came into contact. His scientific instinct was truly amazing - apart from a masterly acquaintance with a vast amount of facts that he could always readily bring to mind, he also possessed a rare command of methods and experimental findings which he excelled in ... "

A. Einstein describing the work published by W. Nernst

What Walther Nernst did was to discover a huge, humoungous, catastrophic error in Hubble's calculations on the interpretation of the red shift.



"if redshifts are not primarily due to velocity shift … the velocity-distance relation is linear, the distribution of the nebula is uniform, there is no evidence of expansion, no trace of curvature, no restriction of the time scale … and we find ourselves in the presence of one of the principle of nature that is still unknown to us today … whereas, if redshifts are velocity shifts which measure the rate of expansion, the expanding models are definitely inconsistent with the observations that have been made … expanding models are a forced interpretation of the observational results"

E. Hubble


And as far as expansion is concerned, Hubble concluded with the following statement:

" … the results do not establish the expansion as the only possible interpretation of redshifts. Other data are available which, at the moment, seem to point in another direction."

" … redshifts are evidence either of an expanding universe or of some hitherto unknown principle of nature …

E. Hubble

That unknown principle of nature is the ETHER.

Nernst's Interpretation

Hubble made two mistakes, as has been seen.

The first one lay in choosing to research an interpretation of redshift that was exclusively within the field of Einsteinian relativity.

The second lay in the hypothesis that his "law" was "clearly linear", thus ignoring a fact that is well-known to any physicist, even an amateur one, namely that for small z values (redshift) a straight line constitutes a good "first approximation" of a logarithmic curve.

These mistakes did not happen by chance.

The first was almost certainly due to the influence of Tolman, the relativistic theorist whose aid was sought by Hubble to "interpret" redshifts. Despite the results of the work he did in 1936, Hubble was never able to completely shake off Tolman's influence.

His second mistake was caused in the same way by the influence of Einsteinian relativity. A logarithmic law may be deduced from a normal "classical" effect of exponential decay of energy in photons; this, however, really does postulate the existence of the "intergalactic and interstellar mean" that is "in principle" denied by Relativity.


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 21, 2017, 02:28:19 AM
SAGNAC EFFECT X

http://www.anti-relativity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=37842#p37842

Let Δt o= the sagnac correction for the earth's orbital path

Let Δt r= the sagnac correction for the earth's rotational path

RE claim: Δto/Δt r= 1/365

[4Aoωo/( c² - vo²)] / [4Arωr/( c² - vr²)]
[Aoωo/( c² - vo²)] / [Arωr/( c² - vr²)]

Obviously, ( c² - vo²) and ( c² - vr²) are very close to the same number, so let's lave them off.

Aoωo/ Arωr
Ao = πRo²
Ar = πRr²

So, πRo² ωo / πRr² ωr

Ro² ωo / Rr² ωr.


http://anti-relativity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=34935#p34935

Earth's radius = 6357 km; r² = 40411449

Earth's orbital radius = 150,000,000 km r² = 22500000000000000

∆t = 4πR²ω/(c²-v²)
or

I use the linear velocity.

∆t = 4πRv/( c² - v² ), where v is the linear velocity.

For the earth's rotation, it is 0.4638333 km/ sec and the orbit v = 30km/sec.

∆t = 0.62831852628 for the earth's orbit.
Total path of the orbit is 2πr=2π(150,000,000 km) = 942,477,780km

Hence, the sagnac effect for a 1 km path, that means light source in the center and two receivers placed at .5km is:
0.62831852628 / 942,477,780km = 6.6666667 e-10 sec / km

Now, for the earth's rotation.
∆t = 4.1170061 e-7 seconds
Total path of the rotation is 2πr=2π(6357 km) = 39942.21 km


4.1170061 e-7 seconds / 39942.21 km = 1.0307407 e-11 sec / km


The sagnac effect for the earth's orbit is greater than that of the rotation.



The orbital Sagnac, though much larger than the rotational Sagnac, is not being registered by GPS satellites.


The equation for the sagnac is:

4Aω/( c² - v²)

One must calculatate the area swept out by the path and that is A = πR², where R is measured from the Sun to the center of the Earth (radius of the orbital path loop).




http://qem.ee.nthu.edu.tw/f1b.pdf

This is an IOP article.

The author recognizes the earth's orbital Sagnac is missing whereas the earth's rotational Sagnac is not.

He uses GPS and a link between Japan and the US to prove this.

In GPS the actual magnitude of the Sagnac correction
due to earth’s rotation depends on the positions of
satellites and receiver and a typical value is 30 m, as the
propagation time is about 0.1s and the linear speed due
to earth’s rotation is about 464 m/s at the equator. The
GPS provides an accuracy of about 10 m or better in positioning.
Thus the precision of GPS will be degraded significantly,
if the Sagnac correction due to earth’s rotation
is not taken into account. On the other hand, the orbital
motion of the earth around the sun has a linear speed of
about 30 km/s which is about 100 times that of earth’s
rotation. Thus the present high-precision GPS would be
entirely impossible if the omitted correction due to orbital
motion is really necessary.


In an intercontinental microwave link between Japan and
the USA via a geostationary satellite as relay, the influence
of earth’s rotation is also demonstrated in a high-precision
time comparison between the atomic clocks at two remote
ground stations.
In this transpacific-link experiment, a synchronization
error of as large as about 0.3 µs was observed unexpectedly.


Meanwhile, as in GPS, no effects of earth’s orbital motion
are reported in these links, although they would be
easier to observe if they are in existence. Thereby, it is evident
that the wave propagation in GPS or the intercontinental
microwave link depends on the earth’s rotation, but
is entirely independent of earth’s orbital motion around
the sun or whatever. As a consequence, the propagation
mechanism in GPS or intercontinental link can be viewed
as classical in conjunction with an ECI frame, rather than
the ECEF or any other frame, being selected as the unique
propagation frame. In other words, the wave in GPS or the
intercontinental microwave link can be viewed as propagating
via a classical medium stationary in a geocentric
inertial frame.


The author actually present a local-ether model (MLET, Modified Lorentz Ether Theory) in order to account for the MISSING ORBITAL SAGNAC EFFECT.


Calculations performed at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center.

https://arxiv.org/vc/arxiv/papers/0912/0912.3934v1.pdf

Please note the theoretical orbital sagnac shows up in these calculations, but is not picked up/registered/recorded by GPS satellites.

Motion of the Earth-Moon system in orbit around the Sun would average out in a two-way measurement, and only appear as a small (∼3 m/s) second-order residual.

Because of the two-way averaging, the orbital Sagnac effect registered is smaller than usual, however it is not 1/365 of the rotational Sagnac effect, in fact even in the diluted form permitted by the two-way averaging calculation, it represents a significant percentage of the rotational Sagnac effect.


Even in the official version of heliocentricity, the Earth's orbit around the Sun is assumed to be nearly circular.

The radius of the earth very nearly circular orbit around the sun is 1.50⋅10^11 m.

THE GPS SATELLITES' ORBIT AROUND THE EARTH IS ALSO NEARLY CIRCULAR, YET THE SAGNAC EFFECT IS CALCULATED PRECISELY USING THE KNOWN FORMULA:

4Aω/( c² - v²)

https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ato/service_units/techops/navservices/gnss/faq/gps/

The orbits are nearly circular.

http://www.navipedia.net/index.php/GPS_Space_Segment

Orbits are nearly circular.


Eccentricity of Earth's orbit around the Sun (official science information):

Earth's orbit has an eccentricity of 0.0167.

Eccentricity of GPS satellites orbit around the Earth:

Orbits are nearly circular, with eccentricity less than 0.02.

The orbital eccentricity of an astronomical object is a parameter that determines the amount by which its orbit around another body deviates from a perfect circle. A value of 0 is a circular orbit, values between 0 and 1 form an elliptical orbit.



In addition, the orbital solar gravitational potential is not being registered either by the GPS satellites' clocks.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1846706#msg1846706


Thus, the hypotheses of the Ruderfer experiment are totally fulfilled:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1846721#msg1846721

Why is there no requirement for a Sagnac correction due to the earth’s orbital motion? Like the transit time in the spinning Mossbauer experiments, any such effect would be completely canceled by the orbital-velocity effect on the satellite clocks.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 27, 2017, 12:49:44 PM
BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT IN FULL VACUUM: NEW VIDEO


(vacuum test performed by Gravitec, increasing the voltage from 15kv to 18 kv, clear movement/thrust of the capacitor can be seen; near the end the power is switched off, and then turned on again, and we can the visible thrust of the capacitor for a second time)


The first video supplied by Gravitec in 2003:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1852363#msg1852363 (vacuum test #1, Biefeld-Brown effect part I, contains the experiments performed by T. Brown in oil)





One of the best videos which exemplifies the Biefeld-Brown effect in vacuum:

https://web.archive.org/web/20050216062907/http://www-personal.umich.edu/~reginald/liftvac.html


Gravitons are not electrically neutral.

The force which opposes terrestrial gravity is that supplied by the laevorotatory subquarks (gravitons/magnetic monoples), and which can be activated by using sound (cymatics), double torsion (DePalma experiment), and high electrical tension (Biefeld-Brown-Nipher effect).

Electrogravity means that once the laevorotatory subquarks are activated by using a high electrical tension, they will form a double torsion tornado together with the dextrorotatory subquarks around the capacitor, meaning that the effects of terrestrial gravity (the pressure supplied by the action of the dextrorotatory subquarks on the capacitor itself) can be minimized.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1830644#msg1830644 (implosion of the atom)


Thomas Townsend Brown:

You have asked several questions which I shall try to answer. The experiments in vacuum were conducted at "Societe Nationale de Construction Aeronautique" in Paris in 1955-56, in the Bahnson Laboratories, Winston-Salem, North Carolina in 1957-58 and at the "General Electric Space Center" at King of Prussia, Penna, in 1959.

In the Paris test miniature saucer type airfoils were operated in a vaccum exceeding 10-6mm Hg. Bursts of thrust (towards the positive) were observed every time there was a vaccum spark within the large bell jar.

These vacuum sparks represented momentary ionization, principally of the metal ions in the electrode material.

The DC potential used ranged from 70kV to 220kV.

Condensers of various types, air dielectric and barium titanate were assembled on a rotary support to eliminate the electrostatic effect of chamber walls and observations were made of the rate of rotation. Intense acceleration was always observed during the vacuum spark (which, incidentally, illuminated the entire interior of the vacuum chamber). Barium Titanate dielectrique always exceeded air dielectric in total thrust. The results which were most significant from the standpoint of the Biefeld-Brown effect was that thrust continued, even when there was no vacuum spark, causing the rotor to accelerate in the negative to positive direction to the point where voltage had to be reduced or the experiment discontinued because of the danger that the rotor would fly apart.

In short, it appears there is strong evidence that Biefeld-Brown effect does exist in the negative to positive direction in a vacuum of at least 10-6 Torr. The residual thrust is several orders of magnitude larger than the remaining ambient ionization can account for.

In subsequent years, from 1930 to 1955, critical experiments were performed at the Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC.; the Randall-Morgan Laboratory of Physics, University of Penna., Philadelphia; at a field station in Zanesvill, Ohio, and two field stations in Southern California, of the torque was measured continuously day and night for many years. Large magnitude variations were consistenly observed under carefully
controlled conditions of constant voltage, temperature, under oil, in magnetic and electrostatic shields, not only underground but at various elevations. These variations, recorded automatically on tape, were statistically processed and several significant facts were revealed.

There were pronounced correlations with mean solar time, sideral time and lunar hour angle. This seemed to prove beyond a doubt that the thrust of "gravitors" varied with time in a way that related to solar and lunar tides and sideral correlation of unknown origin. These automatic records, acquired in so many different locations over such a long period of time, appear to indicate that the electrogravitic coupling is subject to an extraterrestrial factor, possibly related to the universal gravitational potential or some other (as yet) unidentified cosmic variable.

The experiments performed in Paris several years later, proved that ion wind was not entirely responsible for the observed motion and proved quite conclusively that the apparatus would indeed operate in high vacuum.

Later these effects were confirmed in a laboratory at Winston-Salem, N.C., especially constructed for this purpose. Again continuous force was observed when the ionization in the medium surrounding the apparatus was virtually nil. In reviewing my letter of April 5th, I notice, in the drawing which I attached, that I specified the power supply to be 50kV. Actually, I should have indicated that it was 50 to 250kV DC for the reason that the experiments were conducted throughout that entire range. The higher the voltage, the greater was the force observed. It appeared that, in these rough tests, that the increase in force was approximately linear with voltage. In vaccum the same test was carried on with a canopy electrode approximately 6" in diameter, with substantial force being displayed at 150 kV DC.


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 11, 2017, 01:42:15 AM
SAGNAC EFFECT XI

The missing orbital Sagnac effect proves that the Earth is completely stationary.

What is the center of rotation for the orbit of the earth?

Here is the equation.

∆t = 4πRv / ( c² - v²) = 4Aω / ( c² - v²)

Where A = πR² and v = ωR

So, it is easy to calculate the orbital sagnac is more than 60 times that of the rotational.

But, A is based on R and according to mathpages, "circular loop of radius R".

http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s2-07/2-07.htm

Mathpages says one must use the center of rotation which is the sun.

It is a loop and the earth is moving along the loop in its orbit around the sun.

If light travels at one speed c, then as the earth supposedly moves in it's revolution loop at 30k/s, while light moves c through space, the unit at the equator at noon would move with the earth' rotation and the earth's revolution cutting the distance the signal must travel to meet the unit.


"Let's say the unit is at the equator and the satellite is low on the horizon in the east at noon.

That means the unit is traveling at the orbital speed of the earth at 67,000 MPH.

The satellite emits at one speed c in space. While the light travels through space toward the unit at c, the unit moves with the earth at 67,000 MPH. The unit cuts the distance that the light must travel.

This is not being seen by any experiements nor GPS."

Yet, this same logic applies and works with the earth's supposed rotation.


Published by the BULLETIN OF THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY, one of the most prestigious journals in the world today.

C.C. Su, "A Local-ether model of propagation of electromagnetic wave," in Bull. Am. Phys. Soc., vol. 45, no. 1, p. 637, Mar. 2000 (Minneapolis, Minnesota).

http://www.ee.nthu.edu.tw/ccsu/

(https://image.ibb.co/g4fu5d/sa1.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/mAOgkd/sa2.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/cEyxQd/sa3.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/htkoWJ/sa4.jpg)


Both the rotational and the orbital motions of the earth together with the orbital
motion of the target planet contribute to the Sagnac
effect. But the orbital motion of the sun has no effects
on the interplanetary propagation.
On the other hand, as
the unique propagation frame in GPS and intercontinental
links is a geocentric inertial frame, the rotational motion
of the earth contributes to the Sagnac effect. But the orbital
motion of the earth around the sun and that of the
sun have no effects on the earthbound propagation.
By
comparing GPS with interplanetary radar, it is seen that
there is a common Sagnac effect due to earth’s rotation
and a common null effect of the orbital motion of the sun
on wave propagation. However, there is a discrepancy in
the Sagnac effect due to earth’s orbital motion.
Moreover,
by comparing GPS with the widely accepted interpretation
of the Michelson–Morley experiment, it is seen that
there is a common null effect of the orbital motions on
wave propagation, whereas there is a discrepancy in the
Sagnac effect due to earth’s rotation.


Based on this characteristic of uniqueness and switchability of the propagation frame,
we propose in the following section the local-ether model
of wave propagation to solve the discrepancies in the in-
fluences of earth’s rotational and orbital motions on the
Sagnac effect
and to account for a wide variety of propagation
phenomena.


Anyway, the interplanetary Sagnac effect is due to
earth’s orbital motion around the sun as well as earth’s
rotation.
Further, for the interstellar propagation where
the source is located beyond the solar system, the orbital
motion of the sun contributes to the interstellar Sagnac
effect as well.

Evidently, as expected, the proposed local-ether model
accounts for the Sagnac effect due to earth’s rotation and
the null effect of earth’s orbital motion in the earthbound
propagations in GPS and intercontinental microwave link
experiments. Meanwhile, in the interplanetary radar, it accounts
for the Sagnac effect due both to earth’s rotation
and to earth’s orbital motion around the sun.


Based on the local-ether model, the propagation is entirely
independent of the earth’s orbital motion around
the sun or whatever and the velocity v for such an earthbound
experiment is referred to an ECI frame and hence
is due to earth’s rotation alone. In the original proposal,
the velocity v was supposed to incorporate earth’s orbital
motion around the sun. Thus, at least, v2/c2
=~ 10-8. Then the amplitude of the phase-difference variation
could be as large as π/3, when the wavelength is
0.6 µm and the path length is 10 m. However, as the velocity
v is the linear velocity due to earth’s rotation alone,
the round-trip Sagnac effect is as small as v2/c2∼ 10-12 which is merely 10-4 times that due to the orbital motion.



The Sagnac effect is a FIRST ORDER effect in v/c.

Even in the round-trip nature of the Sagnac effect, as it was applied in the Michelson-Morley experiment, thus becoming a second order effect within that context, we can see that the ORBITAL SAGNAC IS 10,000 TIMES GREATER than the rotational Sagnac effect.


Here is how to correctly calculate the orbital Sagnac effect:

Earth's radius = 6357 km; r² = 40411449

Earth's orbital radius = 150,000,000 km r² = 22500000000000000

∆t = 4πR²ω/(c²-v²)
or

I use the linear velocity.

∆t = 4πRv/( c² - v² ), where v is the linear velocity.

For the earth's rotation, it is 0.4638333 km/ sec and the orbit v = 30km/sec.

∆t = 0.62831852628 for the earth's orbit.
Total path of the orbit is 2πr=2π(150,000,000 km) = 942,477,780km

Hence, the sagnac effect for a 1 km path, that means light source in the center and two receivers placed at .5km is:
0.62831852628 / 942,477,780km = 6.6666667 e-10 sec / km

Now, for the earth's rotation.
∆t = 4.1170061 e-7 seconds
Total path of the rotation is 2πr=2π(6357 km) = 39942.21 km


4.1170061 e-7 seconds / 39942.21 km = 1.0307407 e-11 sec / km


The sagnac effect for the earth's orbit is greater than that of the rotation.



The orbital Sagnac, though much larger than the rotational Sagnac, is not being registered by GPS satellites.



The lunar laser ranging experiment is an astronomical version of the Sagnac experiment.

However, G. Sagnac used the fringe-shift method to measure indirectly light travel time;
while Dr. Daniel Gezari uses clocks to measure directly light travel time in both directions.

Shooting light to the moon has to do with the behavior of light like GPS.

The arrival time of light to a receptor is influenced by the motion of
the receptor relative to the earth: this is the basic discovery of G. Sagnac.

This fact has to be incorporated into the lunar laser ranging calculations.

Here is a basic reference which confirms this fact:

Ring-laser tests of fundamental physics and geophysics, G.E. Steadman, 1997, pg 15

(https://image.ibb.co/hvSJWJ/sa5.jpg)

One needs both the orbital and rotational Sagnac to calculate the correct timing, there is no way around that.


Dr. Daniel Gezari emitted a pulse of photons from a point on earth, bounced those photons off a reflector on the moon, and then recorded the photons’ arrival time at that same point on earth.


Please note the theoretical orbital sagnac shows up in these calculations, but is not picked up/registered/recorded by GPS satellites.

Motion of the Earth-Moon system in orbit around the Sun would average out in a two-way measurement, and only appear as a small (∼3 m/s) second-order residual.

Because of the two-way averaging, the orbital Sagnac effect registered is smaller than usual, however it is not 1/365 of the rotational Sagnac effect, in fact even in the diluted form permitted by the two-way averaging calculation, it represents a significant percentage of the rotational Sagnac effect.


THE SMALL (~3M/S) SECOND ORDER RESIDUAL IS THE ORBITAL SAGNAC.


For instance, the Earth’s full 30 km/s orbital velocity along the line-of-sight would produce a second-order residual velocity of only ~3 m/s, so we cannot preclude the possibility that some part of the 8.4 m /s difference between co and c measured here is a real second-order residual due to motion of the Earth-Moon system relative to an absolute frame.

THE 8.4 M/S DIFFERENCE IS THE ROTATIONAL SAGNAC.


Dr. Daniel Gezari:


For instance, the Earth’s full 30 km/s orbital velocity along the line-of-sight would produce a second-order residual velocity of only ~3 m/s, so we cannot preclude the possibility that some part of the 8.4 m /s difference


3/8.4 = 0.357

1/365 = 0.00274

0.357/0.00274 = 130.3

Now, because of the vast distance, if the RE were correct, we should see 1/365 of the rotational sagnac in the measurements and that will show up on this vast distance.

So, if they are correct, then we should see the 1/365 conclusions in the measurements. Guess what. We do not.

Dr. Daniel Gezari's calculations prove otherwise: even in the diluted two way averaging form, the orbital Sagnac amounts for a 3/8.4 = 0.357 (35.7%) percentage of the rotational Sagnac.


It is also of interest to note that the missing orbital Sagnac effect proves that the lunar missions never occurred in reality, that the lunar laser ranging is actually a small mirror (in the form of a minuscule satellite) orbiting above the flat surface of the Earth right in front of the Moon, using the Biefeld-Brown effect to stay in orbit.


More information on Dr. C.C. Su's paper on the orbital Sagnac effect.

His paper was also published by HARVARD UNIVERSITY:

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?2001EPJC...21..701S

See the headline at the top:

NASA ADS Physics/Geophysics Abstract Service



So far, Dr. C.C. Su's papers, which include the correct orbital Sagnac calculations, based on a circular loop with the center of rotation located at the Sun, have been published by:

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

BULLETIN OF THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY

EUROPEAN PHYSICAL JOURNAL

EUROPHYSICS LETTERS JOURNAL

JOURNAL OF ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVES AND APPLICATIONS

Further information here:

http://www.ee.nthu.edu.tw/ccsu/



Journal of Electromagnetic Waves and Applications:

http://www.ee.nthu.edu.tw/ccsu/qem/f3c.pdf

For the interplanetary propagation, earth’s orbital
motion contributes to the Sagnac effect as well. This local-ether model
has been adopted to account for the Sagnac effect due to earth’s
motions in a wide variety of propagation phenomena, particularly the
global positioning system (GPS), the intercontinental microwave link,
and the interplanetary radar.


The peer reviewers at the Journal of Electromagnetic Waves and Applications agree that the orbital Sagnac is larger than the rotational Sagnac, that it is missing, and that a local-ether model has to be adopted in order to account for this fact.



Faced with the missing orbital Sagnac effect, relativists have begun to renounce both STR/GTR and to rely on the local aether model (MLET, Modified Lorentz Ether Theory).


The solar gravitational potential effect upon the GPS clocks is also missing:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1846706#msg1846706


This means that the hypotheses of the RUDERFER EXPERIMENT are totally fulfilled:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1846721#msg1846721


The existence of aether, however, has several other implications:

It shows that the Moon could not possibly cause the solar eclipse (the Allais effect):

An overview of the Allais effect (parts I - VII):

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1676115#msg1676115 (the Black Sun and the laevorotatory subquarks)

ALLAIS EFFECT:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg760382#msg760382


The ether is DYNAMICAL and not static:

The most significant development since Miller has been the
experiments of Yuri Galaev of the Institute of Radiophysics and
Electronics in the Ukraine. Galaev made independent measure-
ments of ether-drift using radiofrequency and optical wave
bands. His research "confirmed Miller's results down
to the details".

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1722791#msg1722791

Yuri Galaev, Ph.D.; Senior research officer of the Institute for Radiophysics & Electronics National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, and corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences (RANS)

THE MEASURING OF ETHER-DRIFT VELOCITY AND KINEMATIC ETHER VISCOSITY WITHIN OPTICAL WAVES BAND Yu.M. Galaev The Institute of Radiophysics and Electronics of NSA in Ukraine


Both the BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT and the SPINNING BALL EXPERIMENT defy the "law" of attractive gravitation:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg759935#msg759935

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg753387#msg753387


New messages:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg789442#msg789442 (gases in the atmosphere paradox)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg819201#msg819201 (stationary atmosphere)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 14, 2017, 04:30:58 AM
ELECTROGRAVITY: THE SET OF ORIGINAL J.C. MAXWELL EQUATIONS

The original set of J.C. Maxwell's ether magnetricity equations unifies electromagnetism and terrestrial gravity: the ability to transform electromagnetic force field energy into gravitational potential energy, and vice-versa.

"A solution to the original/corrected Maxwell equations indicates that these equations are invariant under the Galilean transformation.

Consequently velocity vectors are additive, which means that the speed of light can be exceeded.

The common representation of Maxwell’s [modified] equations is valid only for static systems.

The physicists at the turn of the twentieth century were unaware of this limitation. They assumed that Maxwell’s [modified] equations were universally valid (i.e.: applicable to any inertial coordinate system) and tried to apply them to dynamic systems which led to inconsistencies. But instead of realizing and correcting the error (by modifying Maxwell’s equations; [i.e., using the original ether equations published by Maxwell in 1861) they introduced the Lorentz transformation which was the foundation of the flawed theory of relativity."

http://www.omicsonline.com/open-access/back-to-galilean-transformation-and-newtonian-physics-refuting-thetheory-of-relativity-2090-0902-1000198.pdf


"Maxwell’s [modified] equations are a brilliant formulation of the laws of electromagnetism. However, they were derived for static systems, i.e.; where there was no motion relative to the relevant coordinate system (RCS). At the turn of the twentieth century some scientists assumed that these equations pertain also to dynamic systems, wherefrom it follows that the speed of light is constant in all inertial coordinate systems. This in turn led to the Lorentz transformation and to Einstein’s theory of relativity.

The complete set of the EM (corrected Maxwell) equations is presented in chapter 1. It is shown that the notion of the speed of light being constant in all inertial coordinate systems stems from the wrong application of Maxwell's [modified] equations to dynamic systems. It is also pointed out that due to terms restored to the corrected Maxwell equations they do not equate under the Lorentz transformation rendering it, along with the theory of relativity which is based on this transformation, invalid."

Maxwell derived his original set of equations in conjunction with a very specific elastic mechanism that comprised a sea of molecular vortices, and any elastic disturbances propagated with the speed of light relative to that elastic medium.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1608815#msg1608815 (original set of J.C. Maxwell equations)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1615813#msg1615813 (more information)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1848776#msg1848776 (electrogravity)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1852073#msg1852073 (electrogravity and quaternions)

The scalar component of the quaternion, however, was the term which precisely captured the electrogravitational stress of the medium. By discarding this term, Heaviside (aided by Hertz and Gibbs) actually discarded electrogravitation, and the unified EM-G field aspects of Maxwell's theory. However, the theory and the calculations were greatly simplified in so doing, and this excision of electrogravitation provided a theory that was much more easily grasped and applied by scientists and engineers - even though they were now working in a subset of Maxwell's theory in which gravity and EM remained mutually exclusive and did not interact with each other.

Shortly before 1900, the vectorists' view prevailed, and the Heaviside version of Maxwell's theory became the established and universal "EM theory" taught in all major universities - and erroneously taught as "Maxwell's theory"! Though gravitation had been removed, the beautiful unification of the electrical and magnetic fields had been retained, and so the rise in applied and theoretical electromagnetics and electromagnetic devices began, ushering in the modern age."

(Maxwell's lost unified field theory of electromagnetics and gravitation, T. Bearden)


"Maxwell identified the cause of magnetic repulsion in terms of the centrifugal pressure arising in a sea of molecular vortices. He identified the mechanism for the force on a current carrying wire, and also for motionally induced EMF, in terms of differential centrifugal pressure in this sea of molecular vortices. He explained time varying electromagnetic induction on the basis that the tiny vortices in space are acting like fly-wheels.

There was another curl equation in Maxwell’s original list of 1864, but it does not appear in modern sets of ‘Maxwell’s Equations’. This very important curl equation,

curl A = μH (2)

which relates to the fly-wheel nature of the magnetic field, is played down nowadays in favour of the much less informative equation, div B = 0, which is obtained by taking the divergence of equation (2).

 The third curl equation, which appeared in both Maxwell’s original listing and in modern listings, is Ampère’s circuital law, and Maxwell is most famous for having extended it to include the concept of displacement current. The displacement current concept was purely Maxwell’s own idea, although Maxwell’s concept of it bears no relationship to the term which bears the same name in modern textbooks.

Therefore, contrary to what is taught in modern textbooks, Maxwell’s version of Ampère’s Circuital Law does not mean that a changing electric field induces a magnetic field. In the context of an electromagnetic wave, both of these two curl equations must refer to a situation in which the changing magnetic field of a primary circuit induces an electric field in a secondary circuit. The displacement in question, as Maxwell initially suspected, is an angular displacement, which takes place in the fine-grained electric circuits (rotating electron-positron dipoles) which fill all of space, and which press against each other with centrifugal force while striving to dilate. Every cubic picometre of space contains a two-pin electric power point (a rotating electron-positron dipole). These power points exist everywhere and they connect the universe to the source of its animation. Electromagnetic waves are a propagation of angular acceleration (or precession) through this electric sea of tiny aethereal vortices and the undulations correspond to oscillations in fine-grained centrifugal pressure. These pressure oscillations are caused by an excess outflow of aether from the positrons of the electric sea.”

BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT: EXPERIMENTAL PROOF OF THE ORIGINAL SET OF J.C. MAXWELL'S EQUATIONS:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1852073#msg1852073

F. NIPHER EXPERIMENTS: PROOF OF THE ORIGINAL SET OF J.C. MAXWELL'S EQUATIONS:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1852840#msg1852840



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 18, 2017, 12:11:41 AM
ELECTROGRAVITY: THE SET OF ORIGINAL J.C. MAXWELL EQUATIONS II

The original set of Maxwell equations is invariant under the Galilean transformation:

(https://preview.ibb.co/bRsS8y/omics1.jpg)
(https://preview.ibb.co/ffwyFd/omics2.jpg)

(https://www.omicsonline.com/articles-images/physical-mathematics-7-198-e062.png)

The common Maxwell’s equations are valid only for systems at rest (i.e.: static systems, V = 0 ). The application of these equations to dynamic systems, where V ≠ 0 , (often termed “the universal validity of Maxwell’s equations”) is the basis for the erroneous theory of relativity (see previous message).

“Whittaker, a leading world-class physicist himself, single-handedly rediscovered the "missing" scalar components of Maxwell's original quaternions, extending their (at the time) unseen implications for finally uniting "gravity" with the more obvious electrical and magnetic components known as "light."

In 1903-1904 E.T. Whittaker published a fundamental, engineerable theory of electrogravitation (EG) in two profound papers. The first (W-1903) demonstrated a hidden bidirectional EM wave structure in the scalar potential of vacuum, and showed how to produce a standing scalar EM potential wave -- the same wave discovered experimentally four years earlier by Nikola Tesla.

W-1904 shows that all force field EM can be replaced by interferometry of two scalar potentials, anticipating the Aharonov-Bohm effect by 55 years and extending it to the engineerable macroscopic world. W-1903 shows how to turn EM into G-potential and directly engineer the virtual particle flux of ether. W-1904 shows how to turn G-potential back into force-field EM, even at a distance.

E.T. Whittaker, "On the Partial Differential Equations of Mathematical Physics," Math. Ann., Vol. 57, 1903, p. 333-355 (W-1903)

http://www.cheniere.org/misc/Whittak/ORIw1903.pdf

E.T. Whittaker, "On an Expression of the Electromagnetic Field Due to Electrons by Means of Two Scalar Potential Functions," Proc. Lond. Math. Soc., Series 2, Vol.1, 1904, p. 367-372 (W-1904)

http://hemingway.softwarelivre.org/ttsoares/books_papers_patents/books%20papers%20patents%20(scientis/whittaker/whittaker%20et%20-%20on%20an%20expre.pdf

In his 1903 paper Whittaker showed that a standing scalar potential wave can be decomposed into a special set of bidirectional EM waves that convolute into a standing scalar potential wave.

The very next year, Whittaker's second paper (cited above) showed how to turn such G potential wave energy back into EM energy, even at a distance, by scalar potential interferometry, anticipating and greatly expanding the Aharonov-Bohm effect. Indeed, Whittaker's second paper shows that the entire present force-field electromagnetics can be directly replaced with scalar potential interferometry. In other words, scalar EM includes and extends the present restricted vector subset of Maxwell's original theory.
 
Specifically, any EM force field can be replaced by two scalar potential fields and scalar interferometry. The combination of this paper and the 1903 Mathematische Annalen paper not only includes the Aharonov-Bohm effect, but specifies a testable method for producing a macroscopic and controlled Aharanov-Bohm effect, even at large distances.

Maxwell's original EM theory was written in quaternions, which are an extension to the complex number theory and an independent system of mathematics. In short, since the quaternion is a hypernumber, Maxwell's theory was a hyperspatial theory -- not just the limited three-dimensional subset that was extracted and expressed by Heaviside and Gibbs in terms of an abbreviated, incomplete vector mathematics.

Maxwell's quaternion theory was in fact a unified theory of electromagnetics and gravitation, and that the scalar component of the quaternion was the electrogravitational part. That part was discarded by Heaviside and Gibbs, and so electrogravitation no longer appears in the electromagnetics that resulted from Heaviside's and Gibbs' surgery on Maxwell's quaternion theory.”

The set of original ether Maxwell equations expressed in quaternion form:

(https://image.ibb.co/gHGFvd/qu1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/e6G7ad/qu2.jpg)

Electric scalar potential - potential field from which electric force fields arise.

Magnetic vector potential - potential field from which magnetic force fields arise. It arises from the gradient in the scalar superpotential. The ether flow surrounding and being dragged along by an electric current is one example of the magnetic vector potential.

“Potential fields are less tangible and invariant than the physical force fields they may produce. If force fields are likened to the surface waves of the ocean, potential fields are more like the hidden underwater currents, while the superpotential represents the water itself.

The scalar superpotential is the substrate of physicality, the ether permeating and underlying the universe, from which all matter and force fields derive.”

Maxwell expressed electromagnetism in the algebra of quaternions and made the electromagnetic potential the centerpiece of his theory.


Aharonov-Bohm effect

“A new generation of physicists, also educated in the grand assumption that "Heaviside's Equations" are actually "Maxwell's," were abruptly brought up short in 1959 with a remarkable and elegant experiment -- which finally demonstrated in the laboratory the stark reality of Maxwell's "pesky scalar potentials" ... those same "mystical" potentials that Heaviside so effectively banished for all time from current (university-taught) EM theory.

In that year two physicists, Yakir Aharonov and David Bohm, conducted a seminal "electrodynamics" laboratory experiment ("Significance of Electromagnetic Potentials in Quantum Theory," The Physical Review, Vol. 115, No. 3, pp. 485-491; August, 1959). Aharonov and Bohm, almost 100 years after Maxwell first predicted their existence, succeeded in actually measuring the "hidden potential" of free space, lurking in Maxwell's original scalar quaternion equations. To do so, they had to cool the experiment to a mere 9 degrees above Absolute Zero, thus creating a total shielding around a superconducting magnetic ring [for a slightly different version of this same experiment; the oscillation of electrical resistance in the ring (bottom graph) is due to the changing electron "wave functions" -- triggered by the "hidden Maxwell scalar potential" created by the shielded magnet].

(http://www.enterprisemission.com/images/hyper/s_a-bohm.gif)

Once having successfully accomplished this non-trivial laboratory set up, they promptly observed an "impossible" phenomenon:

Totally screened, by all measurements, from the magnetic influence of the ring itself, a test beam of electrons fired by Aharonov and Bohm at the superconducting "donut," nonetheless, changed their electronic state ("wave functions") as they passed through the observably "field-free" region of the hole -- indicating they were sensing "something," even though it could NOT be the ring's magnetic field. Confirmed now by decades of other physicists' experiments as a true phenomenon, this "Aharonov-Bohm Effect" provides compelling proof of a deeper "spatial strain" -- a "scalar potential" -- underlying the existence of a so-called magnetic "force-field" itself.”

After the first precise experiment carried out by Tonomura and his team at Hitachi using electron holography followed by more experiments using superconducting shields, the Aharonov-Bohm effect is confirmed and that it is a genuine feature of the standard quantum mechanics.

Non-locality and the quantum entanglement phenomenon are the hallmark of ether waves (scalar waves).

Superluminal signals can easily be transmitted through scalar waves (subquark strings). Information can travel even faster through the aether itself, the medium which makes possible the propagation of ether waves.

The most essential requirement is that irrespective of frequency the wave or wave-train should continue for a certain period of time, which I have estimated to be not less than one-twelfth or probably 0.08484 of a second and which is taken in passing to and returning from the region diametrically opposite the pole over the earth's surface with a mean velocity of about 471,240 kilometers per second [292,822 miles per second, a velocity equal to one and a half times the "official" speed of light].

Tesla Patent/original paper:

http://www.classictesla.com/Patent/us000787412.pdf


https://teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla/articles/faster-light
https://teslauniverse.com/sites/default/files/article_files/19311100-01.pdf


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 20, 2017, 01:48:15 AM
ELECTROGRAVITY: THE SET OF ORIGINAL J.C. MAXWELL EQUATIONS III

“It appears that the union of gravitation and Maxwell’s theory is achieved in a completely satisfactory way by the five-dimensional theory (Kaluza-Klein).”

(Einstein to H. A. Lorentz, 16 February 1927)

“Kaluza's roundabout way of introducing the five dimensional continuum allows us to regard the gravitational and electromagnetic fields as a unitary space structure”

Einstein, A. & Bergman, P., On a Generalization of Kaluza's Theory of Electricity. In: Modern Kaluza-Klein Theories. Menlo Park: Addison-Wesley, p. 93.


"Hamilton's algebra of quaternions, unlike Heaviside's algebra of vectors, is not a mere abbreviated mode of expressing Cartesian analysis, but is an independent branch of mathematics with its own rules of operation and its own special theorems. A quaternion is, in fact, a generalized or hypercomplex number ..."

H.J. Josephs ("The Heaviside Papers found at Paignton in 1957," Electromagnetic Theory by Oliver Heaviside)


T. Kaluza, Zum Unitatsproblem der Physik, Sitz. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Phys.
Math. K1 (1921) 966

O. Klein, Quantentheorie und funfdimensionale Relativitatstheorie, Zeits.
Phys. 37 (1926) 895

In 1921, T. Kaluza showed that the gravitational and electromagnetic fields stem from a single universal tensor and such an intimate combination of the two interactions is possible in principle, with the introduction of an additional spacial dimension.

In 1926, Oscar Klein provided an explanation for Kaluza’s fifth dimension by proposing it to have a circular topology so that the coordinate y is periodic i.e., 0 ≤ y ≤ 2πR, where R is the radius of the circle S1. Thus the global space has topology R4× S1.

Kaluza-Klein compactification: although there are four space dimensions, one of the space dimensions is compact with a small radius.

Theodor Kaluza and Oscar Klein were able to recover four dimensional gravity as well as Maxwell’s equations for a vector field.

The extra space dimension somehow had collapsed down to a tiny circle "smaller than the smallest atom".

"Klein theorized that Kaluza's new dimension likely had somehow collapsed down to the "Planck length" itself -- supposedly the smallest possible size allowed by these fundamental interactions: 10-33 cm."

"Kaluza and Klein showed that this extra dimension would still have an effect on the space around us. In particular they showed that the effect of gravity in that very small fifth dimension would actually appear to us, from our larger-scale perspective, as electromagnetism."


The search for the Kaluza-Klein particle

https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2008/19nov_cosmicrays/

https://phys.org/news/2008-11-mysterious-source-high-energy-cosmic.html

(https://smd-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/science-pink/s3fs-public/styles/large/public/mnt/medialibrary/2008/11/18/19nov_cosmicrays_resources/counts_strip.jpg?itok=CrXOg8Ux)

ATIC high-energy electron counts. The triangular curve fitted to the data comes from a model of dark-matter annihilation featuring a Kaluza-Klein particle of mass near 620 GeV.

N. Tesla discovered the subquark structure of the cosmic rays, the very vehicle for the Kaluza-Klein particles, in 1932:

http://www.nuenergy.org/nikola-tesla-radiant-energy-system/

(the terminology of neutrons/neutrinos wasn't quite set in stone yet in 1932)

See also: http://www.rexresearch.com/deyo/TeslasRadiationsCosmicRays.pdf


Kaluza-Klein particles have the curious property (one of many) that they are their own anti-particle.

There is only one particle which fulfills the conditions set by the Kaluza-Klein electrogravitational theory: the boson.


"The scalar portion of the original Maxwell equations expressed in quaternions was discarded (by Oliver Heaviside) to form "modern" EM theory; thus also the unified field interaction between electromagnetics and gravitation was discarded as well.

The quaternion scalar expression has, in fact, captured the local stress due to the forces acting one on the other. It is focused on the local stress, and the abstract vector space, adding a higher dimension to it.

One sees that, if we would capture gravitation in a vector mathematics theory of EM, we must again restore the scalar term and convert the vector to a quaternion, so that one captures the quaternionically infolded stresses. These infolded stresses actually represent curvature effects in the abstract vector space itself. Changing to quaternions changes the abstract vector space, adding higher dimensions to it.

Quaternions have a vector and a scalar part and have a higher topology than vector and tensor analysis."


A solution to the original/corrected Maxwell equations indicates that these equations are invariant under the Galilean transformation.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg769750#msg769750 (total demolition of STR/GTR)

There are no higher dimensions: exactly as described by the Kaluza-Klein electrogravitational theory,  dimensions = subtler levels of boson strings in various geometric configuration, and not the higher dimensions pipe dreams conjured up by relativists.

Contrary to the modern quantum mechanics theory, it is the subquark which consists of some 14 billion bosons.

https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.3562


The boson fulfills perfectly the conditions set by the Kaluza-Klein particle theory.

Chadwick (neutron), Pauli (neutrino), Gell-Mann (quarks), Higgs (boson), ALL of these physicists COPIED their "discoveries" from a single source.

In fact, Gell-Mann did not even bother to modify the information concerning the quarks contained in that treatise.

The entire theory of strings was copied from the pages of this work.

Each and every element and isotope correctly described (in 1908) DECADES before they were even discovered: promethium (1945), astatine (1940), francium (1939), protactinium (1921), technetium (1937), deuterium, neon-22 nuclide (1913).

A clear description of strings, bosons, quarks, subquarks, positrons, DECADES before these concepts even came into existence.

https://web.archive.org/web/20120128042636/http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_09_4_phillips.pdf

Biography of Dr. Stephen Phillips:

DR STEPHEN PHILLIPS earned his Ph.D. at the University of California, where he also taught mathematics and physics. In 1979 one of his scientific papers was published, proposing a theory that unified particle interactions and predicted that quarks are not fundamental (as most physicists currently believe) but are composed of three more basic particles ('subquarks') which, may have since been detected at FermiLab, high-energy physics laboratory near Chicago in America. He has lectured on his research at the Cavendish Laboratory of Cambridge University.

OCCULT CHEMISTRY (1908) TABLE OF CONTENTS:

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/ocindex.htm

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr01.htm

Achievements of the Occult Chemistry treatise (subquark ether quantum physics):

Baryons, mesons, quarks and /subquarks/preons were described over 50 years before conventional science.

It stated that matter is composed of strings 80 years before string theory.

It described the existence of positrons 30 years before they were detailed.

It reported the Higgs field over 50 years before Peter Higgs.

It presented the existence of isotopes 5 years before their discovery.


A proton is made up of NINE laevorotatory subquarks - an electron is actually comprised of NINE dextrorotatory subquarks (called now preons).

However, modern science has mistakenly named a SINGLE dextrorotatory subquark as an electron and has ascribed THE TOTAL charge of the NINE corresponding subquarks as the total negative charge of a single electron, thus confusing the whole matter.

A boson = a neutrino = a photon and does have mass.

Let us remember that in one extension to the Standard Model, left- and right-handed neutrinos exist. These Dirac neutrinos acquire mass via the Higgs mechanism but right-handed neutrinos interact much more weakly than any other particles.

Aspden calls the neutrino ‘a figment of the imagination invented in order to make the books balance’ and says that it simply denotes ‘the capacity of the aether to absorb energy and momentum’.

The particles that make up the magnetic field are the subquarks (also called omegans, tachyons, preons).

Scalar wave vs. normal e/m wave (explained in terms of subquarks)

A normal electromagnetic wave is made up of two scalar waves (telluric currents, subquark strings) which travel in double torsion fashion: one of them has a dextrorotatory spin, the other a laevorotatory spin.

Whittaker’s 1903 discovery that sets of longitudinal waves are the actual basis of all electromagnetic waves: Whittaker showed that vectors can always be further broken down into more fundamental coupled scalar components.

A Hertzian wave is just a ripple in the sea of ether.

Ether = subquark strings = telluric currents

A telluric current is a transversal wave, through which flow/propagate longitudinal waves.

A non-Hertzian wave is just such a longitudinal wave, propagating through the transversal wave.

This is true wireless.

Tesla used exclusively non-Hertzian waves, and none of the Hertzian waves.

The speed of a radio wave is completely and absolutely linked to the density of aether in the atmosphere.


All space is permeated by a fluid Aether, containing an immense number of excessively small whirlpools. The elasticity which the Aether appears to possess, and in virtue of which it is able to transmit vibrations, is really due to the presence of these whirlpools; for, owing to centrifugal force, each whirlpool is continually striving to dilate, and so presses against the neighbouring whirlpools.

E.T. Whittaker

"Maxwell was quite clear about the fact that the speed of light is measured relative to an elastic solid (comprised of fluid vortices), and that it is most certainly not frame independent as is believed by relativists.

The fact is that Maxwell’s core ideas in electromagnetism had their origins in a sea of molecular vortices exactly along the lines of what Tesla and Sir Oliver Lodge were referring to.

Maxwell identified the cause of magnetic repulsion in terms of the centrifugal pressure arising in a sea of molecular vortices. He identified the mechanism for the force on a current carrying wire, and also for motionally induced EMF, in terms of differential centrifugal pressure in this sea of molecular vortices. He explained time varying electromagnetic induction on the basis that the tiny vortices in space are acting like fly-wheels."

In Part I of his 1861 paper, Maxwell proposed the existence of a sea of  molecular vortices which are composed of a fluid-like aether, whereas in  Part III, he deals with the elastic solid that these molecular vortices  collectively form.


These molecular vortices are the bosons, the Kaluza-Klein particles which forms the basis of the electrogravitational theory.

Bosons propagate through laevorotatory and dextrorotatory subquark strings.



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 21, 2017, 01:19:11 PM
ELECTROGRAVITY: THE SET OF ORIGINAL J.C. MAXWELL EQUATIONS IV

There is only one particle which fulfills the conditions set by the Kaluza-Klein electrogravitational theory: the boson.

https://www.slac.stanford.edu/pubs/slacpubs/10750/slac-pub-10882.pdf (Stanford University/Oxford University)

Published in the Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics:

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1475-7516/2005/07/001

Kaluza-Klein Dark Matter, being a boson, is not similarly suppressed and can annihilate directly to e+ e-, µ+ µ- and τ+ τ-, each of which yield a generous number of high energy electrons and positrons.

This theorized particle was of course discovered in 2008:

https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2008/19nov_cosmicrays/


The ether/subquark wave lattice can free a dextrorotatory subquark and a laevorotatory subquark, if it can absorb the required 1.02 MeV energy in any point of space.

"Absorption of this energy frees the pair out of bonds, making the freed particles appear to the detecting apparatus. When a free electron-positron pair is captured into bonds, the particles disappear from our detection, and their binding energy is emitted in at least two quanta of radiation (the bosons/photons which make up the subquarks)."

Electron = dextrorotatory subquark

Positron = laevorotatory subquark


Dark matter consists of KK particles:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0905.2801.pdf

https://archive.org/stream/arxiv-0902.0593/0902.0593#page/n0/mode/2up (published by the Fermi National Accelerator Lab)

https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-ph/0206071.pdf


Kaluza-Klein dark matter bosons which can generate subquarks:

http://140.122.144.95/tuCASA/USSP2012/ALMA2012-report_lin.pdf


Kaluza-Klein bosons:

https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0207125


Madala bosons, dark matter bosons:

https://phys.org/news/2016-09-scientists-boson-madala-dark.html


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1774536#msg1774536 (Journey inside a boson)

A dark boson is a boson which produces more aether than ether (more stillness/silence than sound), that is, the Queen's chamber is more active than the King's chamber in such a boson.

A boson which acts as a carrier of light will produce more ether/sound: light is a form of sound.

http://www.tesla-coil-builder.com/Articles/april_8_1934.htm

"Light cannot be anything else but a longitudinal disturbance in the ether, involving alternate compressions and rarefactions. In other words, light can be nothing else than a sound wave in the ether."

Dark matter is made up of bosons:

https://arxiv.org/abs/1610.08297 (Cornell University library)


The quanta of the scalar waves (ether strings) are bosons:

http://www.visioninconsciousness.org/Science_A06.htm


The Kaluza-Klein particle, the boson, is the carrier of the electrogravitational force.

When it propagates through the dextrorotatory subquark strings/scalar wave, the boson becomes the conveyor of the terrestrial gravitational force; when it is being transmitted through the laevorotatory scalar wave, it becomes the carrier of the electromagnetic force and light.


"The original quaternionic expression of Maxwell’s theory captured the ability to interchange electromagnetic and gravitational forces, literally turning one into the other. That ability was captured by the scalar part of the quaternion, precisely the part that Heaviside discarded and that most modem scientists have never examined or studied.

The Heaviside vector translation of Maxwell’s theory is a subset of the original  theory, and rigorously applies only to those situations in which gravitation and electromagnetics do not interact, but remain mutually exclusive. Specifically, in a zero vector resultant sum or product, the Heaviside-Maxwell theory does not capture the infolding of electromagnetic forces [inside vector zero resultant EM systems] to form structured electrogravitational stress.

We may say that Heaviside captured vector translation electromagnetics, but  discarded scalar electromagnetics; in short, he discarded electrogravitation."


Existence of magnetic monopoles (subquarks):

https://books.google.ro/books?id=lA8tgLMRu2kC&pg=PA273&lpg=PA273&dq=Barrett,+T.W.+(ed.)+and+Grimes,+D.M.+(ed.):+Advanced+electromagnetism&source=bl&ots=EPoPeakkVO&sig=qdOQcxKPZWcKTnxmKj2ZJsUpANA&hl=ro&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiCwvrUx87UAhXDuBQKHSiCAsgQ6AEINDAB#v=onepage&q=Barrett%2C%20T.W.%20(ed.)%20and%20Grimes%2C%20D.M.%20(ed.)%3A%20Advanced%20electromagnetism&f=false

G. Lochak, "The Symmetry Between Electricity and Magnetism and the Problem of the Existence of a Magnetic Monopole" pg. 105 - 148


https://books.google.ro/books?id=qsOBhKVM1qYC&pg=PA287&lpg=PA287&dq=Lakhtakia,+A.+(ed.):+Essays+on+the+Formal+Aspects+of+Electromagnetic+Theory&source=bl&ots=Htyx4NU3CC&sig=2owWDI-gaNqGMKsmn6-rl8qdjro&hl=ro&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjcm6zuyM7UAhXH7BQKHQA-B1gQ6AEIOjAC#v=onepage&q=Lakhtakia%2C%20A.%20(ed.)%3A%20Essays%20on%20the%20Formal%20Aspects%20of%20Electromagnetic%20Theory&f=false

T.W. Barrett, "Electromagnetic Phenomena Not Explained by Maxwell's Equations" pg 6 - 85


https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Terence_Barrett/publication/305636824_The_Ehrenhaft-Mikhailov_effect_described_as_the_behavior_of_a_low_energy_density_magnetic_monopole-instanton/links/57cad9f208ae3ac722b1ea2a/The-Ehrenhaft-Mikhailov-effect-described-as-the-behavior-of-a-low-energy-density-magnetic-monopole-instanton.pdf


http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0305-4470/18/14/014/pdf


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 24, 2017, 12:58:37 AM
ELECTROGRAVITY: THE SET OF ORIGINAL J.C. MAXWELL EQUATIONS V

“The major source of confusion surrounding Maxwell's actual theory, versus what Heaviside reduced it to, is its math — a notation system perhaps best described by H. J. Josephs:

"Hamilton's algebra of quaternions, unlike Heaviside's algebra of vectors, is not a mere abbreviated mode of expressing Cartesian analysis, but is an independent branch of mathematics with its own rules of operation and its own special theorems. A quaternion is, in fact, a generalized or hypercomplex number."

In 1897, Hathaway published a paper specifically identifying these hypercomplex numbers as "numbers in four-dimensional space." Thus, modern physics' apparent ignorance of Maxwell's nineteenth century success — a mathematically based, 4D "field- theory" — would seem to originate from a basic lack of knowledge of the true nature of Hamilton's quaternion algebra itself.

And, unless you track down an original 1873 copy of Maxwell's "Treatise," there is no easy way to verify the existence of Maxwell's "hyperdimensional" quaternion notation; for, by 1892, the third edition incorporated a "correction" to Maxwell's original use of "scalar potentials," thus removing a crucial distinction between four-space "geometric potential," and a three-space "vector field" from all subsequent Maxwellian theory — which is why modern physicists, apparently don't realize that Maxwell's original equations were, in fact, the first geometric four-space field theory, expressed in specific four-space terms — the language of quaternions.

Kaluza-Klein theory: the mathematical unification of the theory of gravity with Maxwell's theory of electromagnetic radiation via introduction of a fifth dimension.

Kaluza specified his additional spatial dimension as a fifth. In fact, this was the same spatial dimension as the four-space designations used by Maxwell in his theory over 50 years before.”


“…that we live in a curved four-dimensional space-time” where space and time are somehow fused together into a “fabric.”

Einstein, 1919

The original set of Maxwell equations is invariant under the Galilean transformation: the theory of relativity, based on the concept of space-time, is thus shown to be completely flawed and erroneous.

“Time is the most important and most enigmatic peroperty of nature. Time is not propagated like light waves; it appears immediately everywhere.” – Dr. Nikolai Kozyrev

"Dr. Nikolai Kozyrev, a respected Russian astrophysicist, announced almost fifty years ago that he had discovered a new force in physics that he called the “density of time.” He concluded that the rate at which time passes can be altered by other physical processes."

http://www.divinecosmos.com/start-here/articles/334-kozyrev-aether-time-and-torsion

http://www.divinecosmos.com/start-here/books-free-online/20-the-divine-cosmos/95-the-divine-cosmos-chapter-01-the-breakthroughs-of-dr-na-kozyrev

http://www.fountainmagazine.com/Issue/detail/revisiting-november-2014

“After years of careful experiments, Dr. Kozyrev and his colleagues found that in a left-hand rotating system the time flow is positive-it adds energy. In a right-hand system the time flow is negative. ... In Dr. Kozyrev's view our world is a left-hand system and it has a positive time flow that adds energy to our universe.

Time not only has a pattern of flow, says Dr. Kozyrev, but also a rate of flow. He calls "the rate of flow" the difference between cause and effect. "As the rate of the time flow through a substance changes, weight is lost," Dr. Kozyrev told us.”

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488624#msg1488624 (biochirality and terrestrial gravity/time and anti-time flow effect upon matter)

“Kozyrev theorized that the interaction of time with substance was responsible for the power generation of the stars in the universe. He observed that scalar energy was spiraling energy that was in itself a, “flow of time,” that acted upon the ether in order to generate power for the stars.

Kozyrev also demonstrated that a scalar energy force field had a direct effect upon the weight of objects leading him to conclude that scalar energy is the cause of gravity.”

Spinning Gyroscope Experiment

In order to verify his theory, N.A.Kozyrev conducted a series of experiments with spinning gyroscopes. The goal of these experiments was to make a measurement of the forces arising while the gyroscope was spinning.

N.A.Kozyrev detected that the weight of the spinning gyroscope changes slightly depending on the angular velocity and the direction of rotation. The effect he discovered was not large, but the nature of the arising forces could not be explained by existing theories.

Kozyrev torsion fields: http://www.soulsofdistortion.nl/tors1a.html

In the 1970s, in order to verify N.A.Kozyrev's theory, a major research of gyroscopes and gyroscopic systems was conducted by a member of Belarus Academy of Sciences, professor A.I.Veinik. The effect discovered earlier by N.A.Kozyrev was completely confirmed.

Dr. Kozyrev (see The Pendulum of the Universe article in the Sputnik magazine) made sure that his experiments were screened from any factors usually taken into account in such experiments: air currents, mechanical actions/causes, electrical fields, e/m fields.
Dr Kozyrev's experiments began in the 1950s and were conducted since the 1970s with the ongoing assistance of Dr V. V. Nasonov, who helped to standardise the laboratory methods and the statistical analysis of the results. Detectors using rotation and vibration were specially designed and made that would react in the presence of torsion fields.
It is important to remember that these experiments were conducted under the strictest conditions, repeated in hundreds or in many cases thousands of trials and were written about in extensive mathematical detail. They have been rigorously peer-reviewed, and Lavrentyev and others have replicated the results independently.

“It turns out that the time pattern of our world is positive in a laevorotary system of coordinates. From this, we are afforded the possibility of an objective determination of left and right; the left-hand system of coordinates is said to be that system in which the time progress is positive, while the right-hand system is one in which it is negative. Hence, time possesses not only energy but also a rotation moment which it can transmit to a system. There also exists a variable property which can be called the density or intensity of time. In a case of low density it is difficult for time to influence the material systems, and there is required an intensive emphasis of the causal-resultant relationship in order that force caused by the time pattern would appear.”

Dr. N.A. Kozyrev


Time is a torsion potential or a scalar wave.

Time is the dextrorotatory scalar wave (subquark string), or terrestrial gravity.

Anti-time is the laevorotatory scalar wave, or antigravity.

Space-time fabric is the aether (the medium) through which scalar waves propagate (ether), these scalar waves are called time and anti-time (terrestrial gravity and antigravity).

The flow of time and anti-time can cause matter to either increase or decrease in weight.

The external rays which disintegrate matter are telluric currents of dextrorotatory spin.

Tesla stated that if any radioactive element were to be shielded from these rays, the material would cease to be radioactive.

Radioactive materials are the dense targets of external energetic streams.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 09, 2017, 01:08:54 AM
D" PARAMETER: MOON'S ELONGATION PARADOX

The Moon's Acceleration

"Understanding the moon's orbit around Earth is a difficult mathematical problem. Isaac Newton was the first to consider it, and it took more than two centuries until the American mathematician George William Hill found a suitable framework in which to address this question.

The concern is with the acceleration, D'', of the moon's elongation, which is the angle between the moon and the sun as viewed from Earth. This acceleration D'' is computable from observations, and its past behavior can be determined from records of eclipses. Its values vary between -18 and +2 seconds of arc per century squared. Also, D'' is slightly above zero and almost constant from about 700 BC to AD 500, but it drops significantly for the next five centuries, to settle at around -18 after AD 1000. Unfortunately this variation cannot be explained from gravitation, which requires the graph to be a horizontal line.

Among the other experts in celestial mechanics who attacked this problem was Robert Newton from Johns Hopkins University. In 1979, he published the first volume of a book that considered the issue by looking at historical solar eclipses. Five years later, he came up with a second volume, which approached the problem from the point of view of lunar observations. His conclusion was that the behavior of D'' could be explained only by factoring in some unknown forces.

Newton's results can be interpreted similarly: if we exclude the possibility of mysterious forces, his graph puts traditional ancient and medieval chronology in doubt."

(https://image.ibb.co/kOHkBJ/dp1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/kC1HQd/dp2.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/ecjhrJ/dp3.jpg)

https://web.archive.org/web/20120323153614/http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/fomenko/dsec.htm

It is important for some computational astronomical problems to know the behaviour of D'' -- the second derivative of the Moon's elongation - as a function of the time, on a rather long segment of the time line. This problem, particularly, was talked about during the discussion organized in 1972 by the London Royal Society and British Academy of Sciences. The scheme of the calculation of D''  is as follows: we are to fix the totality of ancient observations of eclipses, then calculate. on the basis of the modern theory, when these observations were made, and then compare the results of the calculations with the observed parameters to evaluate the Moon's acceleration.

Newton: "The most striking feature of Figure 1 is the rapid decline in D'' from about 700 to about 1300 ... . This decline means (Newton, 1972b) that there was a 'square wave' in the osculating value of D''... . Such changes in D'', and such values, unexplainable by present geophysical theories ... , show that D'' has had surprisingly large values and that it has undergone large and sudden changes within the past 2000 yrs".

(https://web.archive.org/web/20120323153614im_/http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/fomenko/dsec1.gif)

D" parameter, new chronology of history:

(https://web.archive.org/web/20120323153614im_/http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/fomenko/dsec2.gif)


Dr. Robert Newton, Two Uses of Ancient Astronomy:

https://web.archive.org/web/20120531060430/http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/atext/newton2.htm

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Land. A. 276, 99-110 (1974)


Dr. Robert Newton, Astronomical Evidence Concerning Non-Gravitational Forces in the Earth-Moon System:

https://web.archive.org/web/20120531054411/http://www.pereplet.ru/gorm/atext/newton1.htm

Astrophysics and Space Science 16 (1972) 179-200


Each and every astronomical recording supposedly made in the period 700 BC - 1000 AD is proven to be false.

In the new radical chronology of history, each and every astronomical recording supposedly made in the period 1000 AD - 1750 AD is also proven to be false.


When was Ptolemy's Star Catalogue in 'Almagest' Compiled in Reality? Statistical Analysis:

https://web.archive.org/web/20131111204106/http://www.hbar.phys.msu.ru/gorm/fomenko/fomenko3.pdf


http://www.chronologia.org/en/es_analysis2/index.html

Appendix 2. When Was Ptolemy's Star Catalogue Really Compiled? Variable Configurations of the Stars and the Astronomical Dating of the Almagest Star Catalogue:

pages 346 - 375



The Dating of Ptolemy's Almagest Based on the Coverings of the Stars and on Lunar Eclipses:

https://web.archive.org/web/20131111203642/http://www.hbar.phys.msu.ru/gorm/fomenko/fomenko4.pdf


http://www.chronologia.org/en/es_analysis2/index.html

pages 376 - 381


https://web.archive.org/web/20131111203642/http://www.hbar.phys.msu.ru/gorm/fomenko/fomenko4.pdf (section 3: The Dating of the Lunar Eclipses and Appendix 2: The Table of the Almagest's Lunar Eclipses)


http://www.chronologia.org/en/es_analysis2/index.html (pages 382 - 389)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 24, 2017, 08:29:23 AM
PILLARS OF THE PAST

In the period 2003-2012, Charles Ginenthal published one of the most extraordinary works on ancient history, the four volume set Pillars Of The Past.

http://immanuelvelikovsky.com/Pillars-Vol1.pdf

http://immanuelvelikovsky.com/Pillars-Vol-II-(large).pdf

http://immanuelvelikovsky.com/Pillars-Vol-III.pdf

http://immanuelvelikovsky.com/Pillars-IV.pdf

A step by step demonstration, using hundreds of bibliographical references, and most unique historical and scientific insights, that the official version of modern history must start around 1,500 BC, and not some thousands of years earlier.

While validating some of I. Velikovsky's and G. Heinsohn's versions of the chronology of history, C. Ginenthal also brought forth some very interesting arguments against A. Fomenko's new chronology of history.

https://web.archive.org/web/20110517042728/http://www.specialtyinterests.net/heinsohn.html (Dr. Gunnar Heinsohn's best work, one of top archaeologists in the world, demonstrating that the assumed historical period 2,100 - 600 BC never existed)

Let us remember that in A. Fomenko's new chronology, the written history only goes back to 1,000 AD, and nothing is known, going back in time, beyond 800 AD.

Then, history was falsified starting with 1,500 AD.

Edwin Johnson proposes that nothing is known prior to 1,400 AD, and that history actually starts around 1,500 AD:

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm

C. Pfister is the pioneer of the new radical chronology of history: the Renaissance occurred around 1,750 AD, and all of history was falsified before 1,780 AD (see the Pfister archive posted on page 2 of this thread).

As we shall see in a moment, my version of the new radical chronology of history (all of history was falsified prior to 1,800 AD) comes to the rescue for A. Fomenko's new chronology of history.


C. Ginenthal offers four intriguing arguments against Fomenko's version of history: the El-Lahun papyri Sothic date for the late 12th Dynasty, a chronological key to dating Egyptian chronology (Dr. Lynn Rose’s analysis of the El-Lahun papyri which correlated the heliacal rising of the star Sirius with 34, out of 36 lunar festival data points for the documented material of the pharaohs in question, 34 were direct hits, now 37 lunar festival dates; see volume I of the Pillars Of The Past, pg. 73-107), the list of eclipses from the Annals of Ulster (contains from the years 496-884 AD, as many as 18 records of eclipses and comets which agree exactly even to the day and hour with the calculations of modern astronomers, and which were validated even by Dr. Robert Newton, one of the sets of eclipses in the period 500 - 1,100 AD which Dr. Newton believed to be correct, but which were seen to be part of a huge set of falsified data for the historical eclipses within that same period, see the previous message), the VAT 4956 data ( a cuneiform document located in the Near Eastern department of the Pergamon Museum in Berlin, it records the positions of the five planets visible to the naked eye as well as the Moon over a period of about one year, during the 37th regnal year of Nebuchadnezzar II and can be precisely retrocalculated to the year between 568 and the first month, Nisan, of 567 BC), and the 136 BC eclipse reference ( the most accurate and therefore reliable eclipse ever retrocalculated, from the clay tablets of the astronomical diaries of Babylon).


Given the fact that Dr. Anatoly Fomenko believes that the historical records starting with 1,500 AD are reliable/true, it becomes very difficult to defend the new chronology of history given the above arguments presented by Charles Ginenthal.

ONLY by using the NEW RADICAL CHRONOLOGY OF HISTORY can the arguments published by C. Ginenthal be debunked/refuted (volume four of the Pillars Of The Past, pg. 523-548).


The Babylonian cuneiform tablets were created over a period lasting several decades (1,780 - 1,850 AD) by the same group of people who also prepared Tutankhamon's tomb during the 19th century:

Howard Carter knew exactly where to dig back in 1922, as Tutankhamun's tomb had been prepared in a haste just a few decades earlier, in order to fool the entire world as to the antiquity of Egypt.

In fact, modern researchers were stunned when they investigated the tomb:

https://web.archive.org/web/20130924202815/https://www.mediaupdate.co.za/?idstory=55006

Visiting Tutankhamun’s tomb, Naunton and his team take in the ancient pharaoh’s haphazard burial site. With little decoration, modest size and absence of esoteric text, the tomb hardly feels fit for a king. Even more unusual, King Tutankhamun’s famous death mask seems to have been hastily fashioned from a woman’s headdress.

See also: http://thewaxconspiracy.com/pulp/the-tutankhamun-deception


Using the new mathematical tools available at the start of the 19th century, they were able to retrocalculate, using the conventional chronology of history, various solar/lunar eclipses, and thus include them in the faked/falsified Babylonian cuneiform set of tablets.

https://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~gent0113/babylon/babybibl.htm
http://members.westnet.com.au/gary-david-thompson/babylon1.html
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/12/history-eclipse/509891/
http://www.ancient.eu/cuneiform/


The El-Lahun papyri were planted by this same group of conspirators during the 19th century: again, using the new mathematical tools available, the retrocalculations were done very precisely.

http://hekint.org/the-el-lahun-gynecological-papyrus/


The Annals of Ulster/Bodleian Library were created at the end of the 18th century (the Gauss Easter formula applied to the Gregorian calendar reform tells us that the London Royal Society/Leonhard Euler/I. Newton claims regarding the number of days which were to be calculated in this context are totally wrong).

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg758652#msg758652

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1483598#msg1483598

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1483917#msg1483917


C. Pfister's analysis of the correct dating for the St. Gallen library:

http://www.dillum.ch/html/sankt_gallen_stiftsbibliothek_kritik.htm

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dillum.ch%2Fhtml%2Fsankt_gallen_stiftsbibliothek_kritik.htm&edit-text=



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 26, 2017, 05:50:17 AM
ORBITAL STABILITY OF THE HELIOCENTRICAL SOLAR SYSTEM

Using only Gauss' Easter formula as a guide, I clearly stated that the heliocentrical orbital equations of motion cannot predict the future beyond a time scale of some three hundred years.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1774581#msg1774581

THREE BODY PROBLEM PARADOX

Again, to put it bluntly: there is no way to predict anything pertaining to the heliocentrical solar system based on Newton's description of the orbit of the planets using a set of nonlinear differential equations.

The true sizes/masses of the planets and the Sun were modified in such a way AS TO TEMPORARILY FIT the set of ordinary differential equations.

This set of ordinary differential equations cannot predict anything relating to the future of the solar system even if we look at a time scale of some three hundred years from now; in the same manner, they cannot say anything about the past beyond the same three hundred year mark.

We have at our disposal the most formidable proof, the Gauss Easter formula, which does show that the entire history of the world, its very chronology, was faked/falsified at least after 1700 AD. (see page 1 of the present thread).


Now, the full mathematical proof of this statement: the interval of assured reliability for Newton's equations of gravitational motion is at most three hundred years.

Dr. Robert W. Bass

Ph.D. (Mathematics) Johns Hopkins University, 1955 [Wintner, Hartman]
A. Wintner, world's leading authority on celestial mechanics
Post-Doctoral Fellow Princeton University, 1955-56 [under S. Lefschetz]
Rhodes Scholar
Professor, Physics & Astronomy, Brigham Young University

Dr. W.M. Smart

Regius Professor of Astronomy at Glasgow University
President of the Royal Astronomical Society from 1949 to 1951


Dr. E.W. Brown

Fellowship, Royal Society
President of the American Mathematical Society
Professor of Mathematics, Yale University
President of the American Astronomical Society


Dr. Bass' basic discovery:

In a resonant, orbitally unstable or "wild" motion, the eccentricities of one or more of the terrestrial planets can increase in a century or two until a near collision occurs. Subsequently the Principle of Least Interaction Action predicts that the planets will rapidly "relax" into a configuration very near to a (presumably orbitally stable) resonant, Bode's-Law type of configuration. Near such a configuration, small, non-gravitational effects such as tidal friction can in a few centuries accumulate effectively to a discontinuous "jump" from the actual phase-space path to a nearby, truly orbitally stable, path. Subsequently, observations and theory would agree that the solar system is in a quasi-periodic motion stable in the sense of Laplace and orbitally stable. Also, numerical integrations backward in time would show that no near collision had ever occurred. Yet in actual fact this deduction would be false."

"I arrived independently at the preceding scenario before learning that dynamical astronomer, E. W. Brown, president of the American Astronomical Society, had already outlined the same possibility in 1931."

Dr. Robert Bass, Stability of the Solar System:

https://web.archive.org/web/20120916174745/http://www.innoventek.com:80/Bass1974PenseeAllegedProofsOfStabilityOfSolarSystemR.pdf

(https://image.ibb.co/demMES/bass1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/gkayuS/bass2.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/deARg7/bass3.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/dtvyuS/bass4.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/eRjPZS/bass5.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/ePj2M7/bass6.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/bPBMES/bass7.jpg)

The astronomers who rely upon Nekhoroshev's theorem regarding the stability of the solar system, must understand that the threshold value of the small parameter ε obtained from various statements of the theorem provide values which, when applied to
Solar System dynamics, are very small, and can be hardly compared to the existent perturbations.

Unfortunately, most attempts of application of Nekhoroshev results have turned to frustration. Indeed it is very hard to check if the conditions for the application of Nekhoroshev theorem are  fulfilled (in particular the one imposing the non-integrability parameter to be small enough), and to compute analytically the value of the stability time. The results are often unrealistic.

Moreover, any computer-assisted program designed to aid in the verification of Nekhoroshev's theorem does not take into account Professor Bass' basic discovery: observations and theory would agree that the solar system is in a quasi-periodic motion stable in the sense of Laplace and orbitally stable. Also, numerical integrations backward in time would show that no near collision had ever occurred. Yet in actual fact this deduction would be false.

D.G. Saari's theorem (1971) on the collisions in Newtonian gravitational systems suffers from a basic flaw: its very hypothesis stipulates that inverse square law of attractive gravitation plays a crucial role in the proof of the result.

A single counterexample to the attractive model (the Allais effect, the DePalma spinning ball experiment, the Kozyrev gyroscope experiment, the Biefeld-Brown effect) is sufficient to prove that the assertion that the force of gravity is attractive is false.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 29, 2017, 08:16:56 AM
FLAT EARTH GEOCENTRISM: THE ULTIMATE PROOF

One of the very few questions to which I. Velikovsky could not provide a clear answer was this:

One other question, of a like nature. I think it is generally accepted that the Great Pyramid of Gizeh was built before this close approach. The sides of the Great Pyramid are oriented—north, south, east, west—within, as I recall, about three minutes of arc, about the smallest angle one could expect the orientation to be if surveying was done with the naked eye. It seems a rather unusual coincidence that this north, south, east, west orientation could have come out of an Earth that had been thrown into such a chance disorientation by the close approach.

The other best known proponents of catastrophism in the Earth's history, Alfred de Grazia and Charles Ginenthal, also could not provide an answer to the fact that the almost perfect north-south orientation means that no tilt or change of poles has occurred since the Great Pyramid was constructed.


The fact that the Gizeh Pyramid is perfectly aligned to reveal the winter/summer solstices and the spring/autumn equinoxes as a calendar, also is a basic proof against past catastrophism, even though the proofs for the existence of a pole shift in the recent geological past are overwhelming.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1726000#msg1726000 (Gizeh pyramid calendar)




The extinction of the mammoth provides the most direct proof that indeed a massive pole shift must have taken place recently, in the heliocentrical context.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1635693#msg1635693

"The sudden extermination of mammoths was caused by a catastrophe
and probably resulted from asphyxiation or electrocution. The immediately
subsequent movement of the Siberian continent into the polar region is probably
responsible for the preservation of the corpses."

"It appears that the mammoths, along with other animals, were killed by
a tempest of gases accompanied by a spontaneous lack of oxygen caused by fires
raging high in the atmosphere. A few instances later their dying or dead bodies
were moving into the polar circle. In a few hours northeastern America moved
from the frigid zone of the polar circle into a moderate zone; northeastern Siberia
moved in the opposite direction from a moderate zone to the polar circle. The
present cold climate of northern Siberia started when the glacial age in Europe
and America came to a sudden end."

"Why did the glaciers of the Ice Age cover the greater part of North America and Europe, while the north of Asia remained free? In America the plateau of ice stretched up to latitude 40° and even passed across this line; in Europe it reached latitude 50°; while northeastern Siberia, above the polar circle, even above latitude 75°, was not covered with this perennial ice.

If we look at the distribution of the ice sheet in the Northern Hemisphere, we see that a circle, with its center somewhere near the east shore of Greenland or in the strait between Greenland and Baffin Land near the present north magnetic pole, and a radius of about 3,600 kilometers, embraces the region of the ice sheet of the last glacial age. Northeastern Siberia is outside the circle; the valley of the Missouri down to 39° north latitude is within the circle. The eastern part of Alaska is included, but not its western part. Northwestern Europe is well within the circle; some distance behind the Ural Mountains, the line curves toward the north and crosses the present polar circle. Now we reflect: Was not the North Pole at some time in the past 20° or more distant from the point it now occupies—and closer to America? In like manner, the old South Pole would have been roughly the same 20° from the present pole."


It is to be noted that both the proponents of catastrophism and the mainstream scientists who believe that astronomical/geological cataclysms did occur in the recent past have practically given up on the hypothesis that the velocity of the diurnal rotation of the Earth slowed down or that the direction of rotation was reversed as they could not explain how the Earth regained the same velocity of the diurnal rotation as before.

Pole Shift in the Heliocentrical Context Proofs

http://immanuelvelikovsky.com/Mammoth.pdf

The Extinction of the Mammoth represents a tremendous compendium of all the possible proofs/arguments which show that at least one pole shift must have occurred in the recent geological past, and which was responsible for the extinction of the mammoth.

"The mammoths and their bones, in their untold millions, all required sudden deep
burial and freezing. It is simply not credible to suggest that predominantly large animals
were buried by sudden landslides, but not smaller ones. Larger animals could more
easily extricate themselves from landslides than smaller ones. Burrowing animals are an exception, but most of the animals preserved were not of this burrowing type.

Furthermore, this destruction and extinction could not have occurred during the Ice Age
because the ground was frozen to great depth, and the remains of mammoths and trees, etc., are buried at great depth, often hundreds of feet deep. There is no uniformitarian method that will bury parts of animals or trees to these depths during the Ice Age in frozen ground or permafrost. What is required is soft, unfrozen ground to bury these relics to great depth. Both the type of organisms found in the ground—large ones—and the depth to which they may be buried, contradicts their gradual burial during the Ice Age.
 
Was the vegetation of the arctic that of a mosaic mammoth steppe, or an arctic tundra, or that of a much more temperate climate caused by a poleshift when the mammoth lived there? As will be disclosed below, the evidence from the flora and fauna is in complete disagreement with the mammoth steppe concept and also with that of an arctic tundra but in full agreement with a much more temperate climate.

According to Peter James, the "Vegetation in its [the mammoth's] stomach was of a type that now grows in latitudes some 20 to 30 degrees warmer than present-day Siberia."

In fact, in 1958 B. A. Tikhomirov found grasses that presently only grow well south of a site in northern Siberia in association with frozen mammoths. The incongruity of such clearly temperate flora together with animals he had concluded live only on tundra drove Tikhomirov to suggest the mammoth had traveled from the far south and somehow did not digest these temperate grasses.

Can anyone imagine a mammoth migrating for hundreds of miles keeping in its gut grasses it had eaten weeks or months earlier? This is clearly absurd, since it was shown in 1975 that elephants keep food in their alimentary canals for only about 12 hours.

In unmistakable terms it is shown that the mammoths did not live on a mammoth steppe nor did they inhabit an arctic tundra environment. In clear and undeniable terms, it has been demonstrated that the mammoths lived in an environment which contained grasses that only grow in "temperate climates."

"Ivory, being an animal substance, can both dry out and splinter, or rot, and the greater part of the mammoth ivory does one or the other."

"Tens of thousands of skeletons and individual bones of many kinds of animals have been discovered in the permafrost. Among them have been found the enormous numbers of mammoths' tusks. . . . To be of any use for carving, tusks must either come from freshly killed animals or have been frozen very quickly after the deaths of the animals and kept frozen. Ivory experts testify that if tusks are exposed to weather they dry out, lose their animal matter and become useless for carving (see Richard Lydekker, "Mammoth Ivory," Smithsonian Reports, (1899), pp. 361-366.)

Therefore, these great numbers of ivory tusks, taken from the vast frozen area of Siberia, could not have been deposited on tundra during the Ice Age because they would have been leached and destroyed by root acids in the frozen soil. If they had been deposited in temperate soil, they would rot.

But most significantly, useful ivory tusks, to survive, would have to have been buried
suddenly and frozen suddenly.


If it is extraordinary to expect that any of the ivory survived the hipsithermal, then
it is next to impossible to expect that the soft parts of mammoths in Siberia and Alaska,
and any of the other extinct mammals in the muck of Alaska, would have survived with
the flesh still undecayed with their red blood cells still intact. During the thousands of
years of warmth of the hipsithermal, almost all of the bones, ivory, and flesh in the
ground would have rotted and disappeared."

Paleontologists understood that the process necessary to create the carnage and splintered tree destruction found across the arctic could only be the result of great catastrophic elements and attributed it "to a great tidal wave that uprooted forests and buried the tangled carnage in a flood of mud. In the polar region this froze solid and has preserved the evidence in permafrost to the present."

On page 228, the proof concerning the drawing of a mammoth on a pharaonic tomb.

Starting with page 274, the proofs offered by phytogeography:  plant geography, related to the new climatic regime, should also be systematically and symmetrically arranged on the globe to fit this plate tectonic poleshift.

The climatic and plant geography of the entire Earth should exhibit a distribution that
would naturally follow if the rotational poles of the Earth were much more perpendicular
to the plane of the ecliptic, and this is is strongly corroborated by the evidence.

On pages 354-355, the notion of photoperiodic rhythm of trees constitutes another proof of the pole shift in the heliocentrical context.


https://web.archive.org/web/20160305043642/http://www.truthseekersministries.org/files/Velikovsky-Earth-in-Upheaval.pdf

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1644103#msg1644103

One of the very best written works on paleogeology which provides numerous proofs that the Earth must have undergone a pole shift in the recent past, in the heliocentrical context.

Chapter V, Tidal Wave, pg. 46

Chapter VI, Mountains and Rifts, pg. 65

Chapter VIII, Poles Displaced, pg. 99 (evidences the fallacies of the sliding shell/rotating crust and of the continental drift theories, among other subjects)

Chapter IX, Axis Shifted, pg. 118 (the cause of the Ice Age; pg. 131, the strength of the magnetization in the rocks)


Other works signed Charles Ginenthal:

http://bearfabrique.org/History/floods/mfloods.html

http://immanuelvelikovsky.com/Global%20Floods%20Evidence%20%28Veli-Jrnl%29.pdf


In the heliocentrical context, a massive pole shift must have taken place in the recent historical time; however, this fact is disproven by the north-south orientation of the Gizeh pyramid, not to mention its precise calendar of the solstices and of the equinoxes (the Gizeh pyramid was constructed, we are told, well before the time of the pole shift itself).

Moreover, the facts concerning the north-south orientation are even more startling.

"To understand why, we look at Livio Catullo Stecchini, who was a professor of ancient history at Paterson State Teachers College and wrote on the history of science, ancient weights and measures (metrology), and the history of cartography in antiquity.
Professor Stechhini is best known for his numerological theories about the dimensions of the Great Pyramid.

In the 1960’s Professor Stecchini wrote about the apparent inaccuracies detected in the north-south orientation of the Great Pyramid and how these were present with a purpose.

As Stecchini claimed, the alignment axis of the western side of the Great Pyramid was drawn first by its builders, then, the builders outlined the northern side so it could be perfectly perpendicular to the western side. The eastern side, however, was intentionally placed at a larger angle of 3 arcmins, resulting in a larger side.

In other words, the northeast corner should have been 90 ° 03 ’00 “, not 90 °. As for the southern side of the Great Pyramid, it was predicted to be half an arcminute larger than perpendicular, so that the southwest corner measured 90 ° 00 ’30.
However, Stecchini also studied a small line on the floor of the base of the Great Pyramid located near the center of the northern side. Some authors have assumed that this was the original north-south axis of the Great Pyramid.

The data shows that the axis line is located at 115.090 meters in the northwest corner, and 115.161 meters in the northeast corner, so it seems to be a bit off center. This variation was typically rejected as human error.

However, Professor Stecchini concluded that this was not a mistake. Rather, the north-south axis of the Great Pyramid was misaligned on purpose. Therefore, the apex was also misaligned on purpose by about 35.5 millimeters westward."


Only by taking into consideration a stationary Earth, can the posited pole shift/extinction of the mammoths (in the heliocentrical context) be fully explained.

"Billions of tons of ice would have fallen on the polar regions, flash-freezing everything in little more than an instant.
 
This, at last, would explain the mystery of the mammoths found frozen where they stood. The mammoth, contrary to belief, was not a cold region animal, but one which lived in temperate grasslands.
 
Somehow those temperate regions were frozen in a moment. Some mammoths have been found frozen in the middle of eating! There you are munching away and the next thing you know you’re an ice lolly. If this ionized ice did rain down, the biggest build up would have been nearest to the magnetic poles because they would have had the most powerful attraction. Again, that is the case. The ice mass in the polar regions is greater at the poles than at the periphery and yet there is less snow and rain at the poles to create such a build up."


A stationary Earth must have a flat surface in order to explain how four billion trillion liters of water would stay glued next to the outer surface of a fixed and spherical Earth (there is no such thing as attractive gravity).


The Gizeh pyramid was constructed some 350 years ago, the ultimate proof:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1834389#msg1834389 (four consecutive messages: the use of the arctangent series at Gizeh)

In the new radical chronology of history, the Great Flood occurred some 310 years ago, while the extinction of the mammoth took place some 250 years ago.






Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 02, 2017, 12:15:01 AM
DARK FLOW: THE PROOF OF THE EXISTENCE OF THE SECOND FLAT EARTH DOME

Dark flow has been described as taking a hammer and beating the living tar out of Einstein’s gravitational theory of the universe.

“Dr. A. Kashlinsky (PhD Cambridge, England), a senior staff scientist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, has been studying how rebellious clusters of galaxies move against the backdrop of expanding space. He and colleagues have clocked galaxy clusters racing at up to 1000 kilometres per second - far faster than our best understanding of cosmology allows. Stranger still, every cluster seems to be rushing toward a small patch of sky between the constellations of Centaurus and Vela.

So what is behind the dark flow? It can't be caused by dark matter, Kashlinsky says, because all the dark matter in the universe wouldn't produce enough gravity. It can't be dark energy, either, because dark energy is spread evenly throughout space. That, leaves only one possible explanation, he concludes: something lurking beyond the cosmic horizon is to blame.”

"I firmly believe that this is the effect of something outside of our universe."


One of the most disturbing and surprising discoveries of cosmology was made by Alexander Kashlinksy and his team at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. According to Francis Reddy and Rob Gutro:

“Using data from NASA’s Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) scientists have identified an unexpected motion in distant galaxy clusters. [The two types are ball-shaped clusters filled primarily with elliptical galaxies made up of mostly old supergiant red stars and more open shaped clusters (not necessarily ballshaped) made up of spiral galaxies with mostly younger white, yellow-blue white stars.] The cause [of this unexpected motion], they suggest, is the gravitational attraction of matter that lies [about 32-34 billion light years away] beyond the observable universe [that is outside the 13.7 billion light year Universe].

“Kashlinsky calls the collective motion . . . ‘dark flow’ in the vein of more familiar cosmological mysteries: dark energy and dark matter. The [even] distribution of matter in the observed universe cannot account for this motion,’ he says . . .

“In 2000, Kashlinsky and Fernando Atrio-Barandela from the University of Salamanca, Spain, showed that astronomers could, in essence, amplify the [kinematic Sunyaev-Zel’dovich effect] SZ term [a minute shift of microwave background’s temperature which indicates the direction the cluster is actually moving]. The trick, they found, is to study large numbers of clusters.

“The astronomers teamed up with Dale Kocevski, at the University of California, Davis and Harold Ebeling . . . to identify some 700 X-ray clusters that could be used to find the subtle spectral shift. This sample included objects up to 6 billion light-years – or nearly half of the observable universe – away.

“. . . The astronomers detected bulk cluster motions of nearly 2 million miles per hour. The clusters are heading toward [or away from] a 20-degree patch of sky between the constellations of Centaurus and Vela.

“What’s more, this motion is constant out to at least a billion light-years.

‘Because the dark flow already extends so far, it likely extends across the visible universe,’ Kashlinsky says.

“The finding [that only galaxy clusters moving toward or away from a point between Centaurus and Vela] flies in the face of predictions from standard cosmological models, which describe such motions . . .

“All large-scale motion [in the universe] should show no preferred direction. . .”

“Kashlinsky and his team suggest that their [galaxy] clusters are responding to the gravitational attraction of matter that was . . . far beyond the observable universe. . .”

According to Amanda Gefter, these “galaxy clusters [are] racing at up to 1,000 kilometers [620 miles] per second – far faster than our own understanding of cosmology allows.

Stranger still, every cluster seems to rush toward a small patch of sky between the constellation of Centaurus and Vela.” The implications for the Big Bang theory are staggering, as Gefter shows, according to:

“Luciano Pietronero, of La Sapienza University, in Rome, Italy, and Francesco Sylos Labini, of the Enrico Fermi Center of Rome, Italy . . . the standard [Big Bang] cosmological model is wrong, and that a different model might explain the motion of galaxy clusters that Kashlinsky found. ‘This is just another element pointing toward the fact that the standard picture of galaxy formation is not correctly describing what is going on in the real universe,’ Pietronero says.”

According to the Big Bang theory, inflation caused the matter in the Universe to be very evenly distributed throughout it. The Cosmic Microwave Background radiation indicates that matter in the Universe – including Dark Matter – was generally quite evenly distributed everywhere. Therefore, there is nothing in the known universe that will gravitationally pull only galaxy clusters to or away from it. This attractor must, therefore, lie beyond the known Universe.

According to the Big Bang theory, the Universe is about 13.7 billion years old; yet the gravitational attractor, tugging only on galaxy clusters, is some 32-34 billion light years away. Additionally, this gravitational force is unique and selective in its action; only affecting galaxy clusters, but not everything else. Gravity undoubtedly must affect the motion of all massive bodies and, therefore, since it is pulling the galaxy clusters, it should be pulling everything else to it, not just galaxy clusters, based on Newtonian Law.

In terms of Einstein, the identical problem exists. A massive object outside the Universe has warped space to cause galaxy clusters to move toward or away from it; that warping of space should do the same for all matter in the Universe. In terms of Dark Energy, all galaxies are supposedly moving away from each other and, therefore, would not also, at the same time, permit only galaxy clusters to not follow this expansion, but move to or away from a preferred area. If Dark Energy existed, these galaxy clusters should also be moving away from one another in different directions.
These clear-cut findings defy the Big Bang theory and, thus, have made the Dark Flow evidence very unwelcome for many cosmologists.

(C. Ginenthal: Newton, Einstein, Velikovsky)


Dr. Kashlinsky explains the concept of dark flow:



starts at 21:50


Probing the Dark Flow signal in WMAP 9 yr and PLANCK cosmic microwave background maps:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1411.4180.pdf


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1828839#msg1828839 (ether CMBR)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1824970#msg1824970 (fake Andromeda galaxy photographs)

As evidenced by the statements attributed to Newton, there are two gravitational forces at work: terrestrial gravity (a force of pressure) and planetary/stellar gravity (a rotational force).

Newton believed that there are TWO GRAVITATIONAL FORCES AT WORK:

1. Terrestrial gravity

2. Planetary/stellar gravity

Newton still thought that the planets and Sun were kept apart by 'some secret principle of unsociableness in the ethers of their vortices,' and that gravity was due to a circulating ether.

Isaac Newton speculated that gravity was caused by a flow of ether, or space, into celestial bodies. He discussed this theory in letters to Oldenburg, Halley, and Boyle.
Here is a letter from Newton to Halley, describing how he had independently arrived at the inverse square law using his aether hypothesis, to which he refers as the 'descending spirit':

....Now if this spirit descends from above with uniform velocity, its density and consequently its force will be reciprocally proportional to the square of its distance from the centre. But if it descended with accelerated motion, its density will everywhere diminish as much as the velocity increases, and so its force (according to the hypothesis) will be the same as before, that is still reciprocally as the square of its distance from the centre'

4. When two bodies moving towards one another come near together, I suppose the aether between them to grow rarer than before, and the spaces of its graduated rarity to extend further from the superficies of the bodies towards one another; and this, by reason that the aether cannot move and play up and down so freely in the strait passage between the bodies, as it could before they came so near together.

5. Now, from the fourth supposition it follows, that when two bodies approaching one another come so near together as to make the aether between them begin to rarefy, they will begin to have a reluctance from being brought nearer together, and an endeavour to recede from one another; which reluctance and endeavour will increase as they come nearer together, because thereby they cause the interjacent aether to rarefy more and more. But at length, when they come so near together that the excess of pressure of the external aether which surrounds the bodies, above that of the rarefied aether, which is between them, is so great as to overcome the reluctance which the bodies have from being brought together; then will that excess of pressure drive them with violence together, and make them adhere strongly to one another, as was said in the second supposition.

Therefore, a barrier/dome must exist to separate these two forms of gravitational forces, this barrier consists of a very dense layer of aether and ether.

The second gravitational force, which is a force of rotation, must also be enclosed in a dome in order for its flow to account for the orbits of the stars and of the planets.

Dr. Kashlinsky has simply discovered the existence of the edge of our universe, the second flat earth dome.


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 03, 2017, 12:47:52 AM
QUASARS REDSHIFT: GALAXY NGC 7319

The Picture that Won’t Go Away

"Only in the rarest instances has a single picture altered the direction of a scientific discipline. But in the case of the galaxy NGC 7319 and the "misplaced" quasar in front of it, the message is inescapable: its presence threatened to shatter one of the most cherished themes of mainstream astronomy, the Big Bang.

The rationale for the Big Bang rests substantially on an interpretation of a well-known phenomenon called “redshift”. The term refers to the shift of light from distant galaxies toward red on the light spectrum.

Many years ago, astronomers decided that redshifted objects must be moving away from the observer, stretching out their lightwaves. This “Doppler interpretation” of redshift enabled astronomers, based on the degree of redshift, to calculate both the distances and velocities of the objects. From these calculations, certain conclusions were inescapable. If all redshifted objects are moving farther away, the universe must be expanding. If the universe is expanding, the expansion must have had a starting point—an unimaginable explosion producing a universe of galaxies receding in every direction from the observer.

Then came the Hubble photograph, taken on October 3, 2003. The picture showed a galaxy (NGC 7319) known for its dense clouds that obstruct all objects behind its core. In front of the galaxy's core is a strongly redshifted quasar. In fact, under the prevailing assumptions, the redshift of the quasar would put it more than 90 times farther away from us than the big galaxy behind it."

(http://electric-cosmos.org/NGC7319quasarLabeled.jpg)

A higher magnification image of the quasar shows a "jet" of matter extending out from the center of NGC 7319 toward the quasar:

(http://electric-cosmos.org/NGC7319quasar2.jpg)


http://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/archive/newsrel/science/mcquasar.asp


The Discovery of a High Redshift X-Ray Emitting QSO Very Close to the Nucleus of NGC 7319:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0409215.pdf


Published in the Astrophysical Journal

Geoffrey Burbidge, a professor of physics and astronomer at the University of California at San Diego’s Center for Astrophysics and Space Sciences

"The quasar was found embedded in the galaxy NGC 7319 only 8 arc sec from its centre. According to the Hubble law the galaxy NGC 7319, with a redshift of 0.022, is at a distance of about 360 million light-years. Therefore these objects could not be physically connected to each other if this was true."


At the meeting of the American Astronomical Society held in Texas in 2004, Professor Margaret Burbidge presented a paper that she had co-authored with Arp and several other leading astronomers, including her husband [subsequently published in the Astrophysical Journal]. It detailed the discovery of a high redshift quasar close to a low redshift galaxy. This time, though, the alignment was different in every significant way.

This time, no one could argue. You see, the high redshift [more distant] quasar lay in front of the [less distant redshift] galaxy NGC 7319! There was no longer occasion to debate the veracity of [Arp’s] matter bridge [connecting galaxies with quasars]. The quasar was in the foreground [the galaxy in the background]. In that impressive gathering of astronomy’s who’s who, you could have heard a pin drop. It was a deafening silence.”

“The significance of this discovery is huge. We have direct, irrefutable, empirical evidence that the Hubble law stands on feet of clay, that the observational justification of an expanding Universe is fatally flawed.”

Hilton Ratcliffe


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1795032#msg1795032 (Sirius - Earth distance, less than 50 km)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 03, 2017, 08:23:16 AM
QUASARS REDSHIFT II: THE KARLSSON EFFECT

If there is evidence that, in the observable physical universe, where bodies are moving with respect to one another through space, show light coming from these bodies that also exhibit clear quantum levels, then the basis upon which Bohr and the entire quantum establishment bases their case is false. The fact of the matter is that it was shown that this is actually the case, as long ago as 1976. Halton Arp explains:

In 1976, William Trifft, of the Seward Observatory reported a long, careful series of measurements of binary galaxies. These are galaxies so close together and of such similar redshifts [that determines their distances] that they are accepted as being physically associated, presumably orbiting around each other. The startling part of his report, however, was that the differences in redshifts between members of these pairs of galaxies were quantized in steps of 72 km/s [the galaxies were receding from the Earth in whole steps of velocities of 72 kms per second] . . .

Trifft was on sabbatical in Italy and happened to be lecturing on the quantization result when a skeptical member of the class said, ‘Here is a new list of more accurate redshifts from radio measurements of hydrogen; I am sure you won’t find periodicity in here.’

Not only did the quantization appear in this independent set of very accurate double galaxy measurements, but it was the most clear cut obviously significant demonstration of the effect yet seen."

“It would seem difficult, to put it mildly, to have an object with a redshift, which is due to velocity [moving away in space], and then to have this object disappear or dematerialize [like an electron which can only be at either points A, B, etc., without traversing the intervening space] when it [the galaxy] is not traveling at 72 km/s or some multiple [interval] thereof. The quantization, in itself, therefore, establishes the existence of redshifts which are not caused by velocity.

Although distant galaxies are supposedly receding from one another or at different distances from the Earth, they could not be receding at only specific intervals of velocity. Cars on the highway are traveling at various velocities. If they were doing so in quantum amounts, as do galaxies, they would say be moving at say speeds of 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, etc. miles per hour or kilometers per hour and not at 15, 23, 36, 41, 58 miles or kilometers per hour and that they “simply disappear or dematerialize, or tunnel through time when not traveling at these intervals, as the electron cannot disappear or dematerialize when at different points in the atom. Trifft’s work was added to thereafter by William Napier and his co-worker, B. N. G. Guthrie, who continued along the line where Trifft left off, according to D. F. Roscoe:

“Napier began by using Monte Carlo methods to establish than an essential precondition for a rigorous analysis of the type proposed was the availability of a sufficiently large sample of redshifts, each with formal accuracy better than 5 km/s; anything less would result in a real signal a ≈ [approximately] 36 km/s being washed out by measurement errors.

“Napier’s co-worker, Guthrie, performed a very detailed literature search to assemble a sample of 97 redshift measurements of the required accuracy – taking care to reject any that had been used by Trifft in any of his claims. This sample formed the backbone of subsequent Napier – Guthrie analyses . . .

“Since redshift determinations are routinely given in the solar frame of reference, this amounted to the need to correct the redshift in the sample for the Sun’s motion [around] . . . the galactic center. At the time, 1989, the solar vector determinations resided in a very large error box, and so Napier’s analysis had a lot of slack associated with part of it. Even so, it quickly became apparent that a very strong quantization effect emerged for estimated solar vectors anywhere inside the error box . . . Extensive Monte Carlo simulations give a probability of ≈10-8 for a signal like that . . . to have arisen by chance alone [about 1 chance in a billion].

“Subsequent to this initial publication, the satellite [spacecraft] Hipparchus, has been laundered which has resulted in very refined conventional determinations of the solar vector error box . . . These [were also found to] lie wholly inside the Hipparchus error box determinations.

“This analysis has been repeated on independent (although less accurate) samples . . . with similar results. Napier and Guthries’ parallel analysis of claims for 72 km/s for differential redshifts between galaxies in groups has been similarly successful, and has equally bizarre implications.

“To summarize, Trifft’s original claims have been strongly and independently substantiated by the Napier-Guthrie analysis; this latter analysis has appeared in the mainstream literature and stands increasingly secure as Hipparchus observations continue to tighten the solar error box. Any serious thought about these two effects soon convinces one that the implications for cosmology are profound . . .”

D. F. Roscoe, “Astrophysics in the Dark: Mach’s Principle Lights the Way,” Advances in Chemical Physics Modern Nonlinear Optics, Myron W. Evans ed., (NY 2001), pp. 301-303

Not only does this quantum relationship hold for the redshift of galaxies, but was also
found for quasars, to be discussed below. It is called the Karlsson Effect, named for K. G. Karlsson, who discovered it. Ratcliffe explains:

“If the energy levels of cosmological light are really just a function of remoteness [of bodies in distant space] given the big bang postulates, a smooth distribution of matter in the expanding universe, then we would expect that redshift values should [be] present without digital breaks. The tabulated values would appear randomly, reflecting the suggested patternless distribution of light sources in the cosmos. If, on the other hand, redshift relates somehow to the internal energy of the source . . . , then we might expect something entirely different. Speculation aside, the [standard model of cosmology] does not accommodate periodic redshifts. Are they observed?

“The Karlsson Effect refers to certain values in redshifts of cosmological objects that appear more commonly than others. Preferred values in quasar redshifts were first detected by Margaret and Geoffrey Burbidge in 1967. Four years later, K. G. Karlsson confirmed the effect and derived a formula that constrained the periodicity. That earned him the honor of having his name pinned to an observed effect that was, in the words of [Halton] Chip Arp, ‘one of the truly great discoveries in cosmic physics.’

“Three decades later, with far more comprehensive catalogues of [cosmic object] data to work from, Doctors Burbidge and Napier published a summary of the by now overwhelming evidence for redshift periodicity entitled ‘The Distribution of Redshifts in New Samples of Quasi-Stellar Objects [Quasars]’ . . .

“In 2009, Martin Lopez-Corredoria presented a summary of quasar [quantum] anomalies . . .

“The periods do exit in the SDSS ( Sloan Digital Sky Survey) data if the base value taken is the host galaxy’s redshift and not Z = 0 [redshift = 0] as used by the studies that [previously] found no unusual preferred [quantized redshift] values . . .

New Scientist, for September 16, 1971, page 612, reports the following regarding the
Karlsson Effect:

“Some astronomers have claimed that the redshifts of quasars are not uniformly spread out but instead tend to cluster about certain values. It now looks as if the workers who ‘found these periodicities’ were right . . .

“Dr. K. G. Karlsson, of Uppsala University, has found no less than five [quantum] peaks at particular redshifts. These critical values at which quasar redshifts congregate form a geometric series [one level double, triple, etc. that of a certain value] and it is particularly interesting that the most recently determined redshifts lie close to one or other of these peaks (Astronomy and Astrophysics, Vol. 13, p. 333).

“However, if Karlsson is right, and it certainly looks that way, he has found a relation between the more common quasar redshifts, particularly around [two values] . . . This can only imply a link between quasars and galaxies, because objects with redshifts as low as 0.06 are galaxies, not quasars. His results suggest strongly that redshifts are an intrinsic property of quasars and do not necessarily indicate their distance from us. Moreover, in peculiar galaxies, at least the same sort of effect occurs.”

(C. Ginenthal: Newton, Einstein, Velikovsky)



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 03, 2017, 09:26:53 AM
QUASARS REDSHIFT III: THE KARLSSON EFFECT II

The Karlsson Effect: the redshift is systematically quantised in discrete values along preferred peaks.

In 1967, Burbidge and Burbidge detected what appeared to be a quirky statistic in the redshifts of quasars: A preferred value of z = 1.95. In 1971, by which time the quasar database had expanded significantly, J. G. Karlsson established that quasar redshifts do indeed have preferred peaks, given by the formula (1 + z2)/(1 + z1) = 1.23, and tend to fall into the series z = 0.061, 0.30, 0.60, 0.91, 1.41, and 1.96.

This phenomenon was verified by W. G. Tifft in a series of studies from 1976 to 1997,
referenced in the supporting paper Discrete Components in the Radial Velocities of ScI
galaxies by Bell, Comeau, and Russell.

Burbidge and Napier found in 2000 in their paper The Distribution of Redshifts in New
Samples of Quasi-Stellar Objects that:

“The redshift distributions of the samples are found to exhibit distinct peaks…identical to
that claimed in earlier samples but now extended out to higher redshift peaks…predicted by the formula but never seen before.”

In March 2006, M. B. Bell and D. McDiarmid of the National Research Council of Canada published a paper entitled Six Peaks Visible in Redshift Distribution of 46,400 Quasars. They find, “The peak found corresponds to a redshift period of Δz = ~0.70. Not only is a distinct power peak observed, the locations of the peaks in the redshift distributions are in agreement with the preferred redshifts predicted by the intrinsic redshift equation.”

Most recently (2008), Arp and Fulton published their findings The 2dF Redshift Survey II: UGC 8584 – Redshift Periodicity and Rings:

“UGC 8584 was selected by a computer program as having a number of quasars around it that obeyed the Karlsson periodicity in its reference frame…9 of the nearest 10 quasars turned out to be extremely close to the predicted values.”

Hilton Ratcliffe


Bruce Guthrie and William Napier from the Royal Observatory in Edinburgh used the most accurate hydrogen line redshift data. By the end of 1991 they had studied 106 spiral galaxies and detected a quantization of about 37.5 km/s, very close to Tifft's quantum multiple of 36.2 km/s [Schewe & Stein, 1992a, No.61]. By November 1992, a further 89 spiral galaxies had been examined in which a quantization of 37.2 km/s emerged [Schewe & Stein, 1992b, No. 104]. In 1995 they submitted a paper to Astronomy and Astrophysics with the results from a further 97 spiral galaxies showing a 37.5 km/s quantization. Because the prevailing wisdom said the quantization only appeared because of small number statistics, the referees asked them to repeat their analysis with another set of galaxies. This Guthrie and Napier did with an additional set of 117 other galaxies. The same 37.5 km/s quantization was plainly in evidence in this 1996 data set, and the referees accepted the paper [Matthews, 1996, p.759; Corliss, 1996, No. 105, Arp, 1998, p.199-200]. A Fourier analysis of all 399 data points showed a huge spike at 37.5 km/s with a significance of one in a million. The measurement error was about 1/10th the size of the quantization. One comment on the redshift quantization plot stated: "One can see at a glance how accurately the troughs and peaks of redshift march metronomically outward from 0 to over 2000 km/s." [Arp, 1998, p.199].

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 03, 2017, 10:17:52 PM
QUASARS REDSHIFT IV

Einstein: equations of special relativity suggested that the faster objects accelerate, the slower time goes. This can be tested by observation of quasars. Quasars rotate and their light curves exhibit a regular oscillation. Therefore, quasars at the same distance from the Earth, with the same or closely similar light oscillations, compared with quasars in accelerating space farther away, will tick faster than the more distant ones.

In both cases, the speed of light is constant. The more distant quasars should be ticking more slowly than closer ones. This is comparable to the two ultra-quantum logic-clocks, except the experiment/observation was carried out on almost 900 quasars.

“Since the universe is expanding – and the distant quasars are racing away from us – a clock placed in one of the distant galaxies should be running slower than a clock we have on Earth. Therefore, the effect of time dilation for distant objects can be measured if we can observe the ticking clock in the distant galaxy.

“[Mick] Hawkins [of the Royal Observatory, Edinburgh] took advantage of the fact that quasars blink. This blinking, or variability, can be viewed as a ‘ticking clock.’ He used data from [almost 900] quasars monitoring programs stored on the photographic plates to measure the time scales of the blinking. Looking at the time scales for two groups of quasars, [six billion light years away] and the other even farther, [ten billion light years away], there was no measurable difference that meant no time dilation: meaning that for both groups of quasars, the clocks were [ticking] the same.

“Either the Universe isn’t expanding, as Einstein required, or time dilation, as Einstein suggested, is false.”

This is a direct contradiction to relativity theory. If the universe is expanding and
accelerating, as general relativity demands, then the ticking quasars are not experiencing time dilation, and special relativity is invalid and fails. One has to give up general relativity in order to keep special relativity. But if the Universe is expanding and accelerating and time dilation is not being experienced by quasars, special relativity is invalid and fails. One has to give up special relativity in order to keep general relativity.

(C. Ginenthal: Newton, Einstein, Velikovsky)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 03, 2017, 10:19:25 PM
QUASARS REDSHIFT V

However, if there are direct contradictions to the concept that redshifts are proof of
recession, then those contradictions invalidate redshifts as proof of recession. In this regard, Ratcliffe, citing P. J. E. Peebles standard textbook, The Principles of Physical Cosmology, (Princeton NJ 1993), page 71, that redshifts are not to be found for galaxies that are members of the Local Group of galaxies writes:

“The expansion of the universe means that the proper physical distance between a well-separated pair of galaxies is increasing with time [because the space between them is expanding], that is, the galaxies are receding from each other. A gravitationally bound system [is held together by gravity and is not expanding] such as the Local Group . . . the homogeneous expansion law refers [only] to galaxies far enough apart for these irregularities to be ignored.”

Carl Sagan echoes this concept: “What we see . . . is almost exclusively redshifts, no
matter what distant objects beyond the local group we point our telescope to.”

Therefore, because the Local Group of galaxies, which includes the Milky Way, is tied together by gravity, it could not and should not be able to break those connections. Ratcliffe, however, explains the contradiction:

“We all know that the postulated expansion of space does not occur locally, and ‘local’ includes the Virgo clusters . . . the standard [redshift expansion] theory alludes to a threshold for expansion at around 10 Mpc [megaparsecs] from the Earth, meaning that for the first 350 million light years or so, space does not expand.

Any perceived pattern in these data cannot indicate expansion, in terms of the Big Bang Theory [nor in terms of Einstein’s theory of general relativity]. [Finding a redshift for the Local Group] . . . would be an utter train smash for the Hubble law if only I could find proof in the form of a published data table or graph.

“It wasn’t hard to find. It’s [also] right there in black and white on page 86 of Peebles’ book. Figure 5.4 bears the caption, ‘Test of Hubble’s law using Tully-Fisher distances.’ . . .

“The plot of the diagram shows the Hubble relationship established in the supposed redshift-distance for a sample of galaxies in the vicinity of an object popularly identified as the Great Attractor . . . it has been invoked to explain the peculiar streaming motion of galaxies [toward it] in the neighborhood. A team led by Lydon-Bell discovered in 1988 that peculiar velocities in this region are puzzlingly large around 600 km sec-1 for the entire Local Group, and this could only be explained by the presence of an extremely massive object somewhere in the direction they were headed...

“The crucial significance of this geographical location is twofold: Firstly, it is local . . . and secondly, the presence in this local of a structure massive enough to divert entire clusters of galaxies [away] from the mooted Hubble [expansion] flow is in defiance of the cosmological Principle [that the large-scale Universe is homogenous and isotropic or the same everywhere], and [this unique flow away from the direction of all other expanding galaxies in space] therefore rules out Hubble expansion in the region being observed. Despite the fact that all parties agree that the galaxies represented in the graph [of the Local Group] occupy a volume of space that is definitely not expanding.

Peebles is quite clear in his conclusion . . . ‘We see that even with the anomaly [of galaxies moving] in the direction of Centaurus [beyond which lies the great attractor], Hubble’s law is quite a good description of the redshift relation.’”

Here is what this means: In the Local Group of galaxies, gravity will not allow expansion, thus it must be static. But at the very same time Hubble’s law of redshifts shows these galaxies are streaming away. That is, in the Local Group, which is static, one can find redshifts.

That is, static space can show redshifts, a complete contradiction to Hubble’s law. Since there are redshifts in the static Local Group of galaxies, then the very same must also apply to distant galaxies. They are also static – not moving apart – but also display redshifts, just like those observed in the Local Group. Ratcliffe puts it this way: “There you have it. Bingo! The Hubble law shows up in nonexpanding space, and would, therefore, manifest itself in a static Universe.”

Or to put it oxymoronically, cosmologically throughout the Universe, we have static shiftless redshifts.

(C. Ginenthal: Newton, Einstein, Velikovsky)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 03, 2017, 10:27:38 PM
QUASARS REDSHIFT VI

We come to the redshift problem of T Tauri stars that are almost always blueshifted.

The problem is outlined by John Bally and Bo Reipurth.

“The key to understanding T. Tauri stars is the recognition that they are surrounded by disks. . . . Among other things, it was noted that when spectra of T. Tauri stars shows signs of high velocity [stellar wind] shocks associated with outflows, the emission is usually blueshifted, that is [the outflow] is turned toward the observer, whereas redshifts are rare. These shocks are likely to be generated by material moving equally towards or away from the observer, and therefore such a [blueshift] preference should not exist. But if T. Tauri stars are surrounded by disks, the [stellar wind] shocks moving away from the observer will be partly hidden, while the approaching [blueshift] shocks will remain unobstructed.”

John Bally, Bo Reipurth, Birth of Stars and Planets, (Cambridge, UK / NY et al. 2006), p. 95

The problem is that the disks are at the rotational equator of the star and will rarely be
directly in the plane of sight. These disks will be tipped at an angle to the observer, or even perpendicularly to him and, therefore, both the outgoing materials moving away or toward the observer will very rarely interact with the disk material to give either a redshift or blueshift.

“As a final example of the current state of the art in celestial mechanics; let me show you a specific example from The Encyclopedia of the Solar System, a recent book [1999] published by NASA and the Jet Propulsion Lab with the cooperation of many of the top universities in the country. To tie the Sun to a solar disk, we are given evidence from T. Tauri stars . . . of roughly solar mass and they have what appear to be disks, or, to be more precise, they have a lot of dust around them.

There is enough dust to obscure the stars, but it doesn’t. Why? Because it is confined to the disc and isn’t in our plane of sight. So far so good. To confirm this, we look at the emission lines created by a stellar wind. We find that these emission lines are [almost] always blue-shifted. And this is where it gets silly. For the book tells us: ‘This observation is explained if the red-shifted lines that would be associated with gas flowing away from the observer were obscured by the circumstellar disc.’ Anybody see the problem here? There are actually two problems. The first is that if the disc is not in our plane of sight, then it can’t be the cause of any obscuring of shifts, red or blue. The second, [and most important] problem is that the gas flows away from the observer is on the far side of the star [that can’t be seen]. If light from the star goes through it in order to make any emission lines then the light must be [redshifted because it is] going in the opposite direction of Earth. We can’t possibly see it. This whole theory is a comedy of basic logical errors.

“It is not the exception, either, it is the rule. A mistake like this cannot be assigned to [a] single person. This book was edited by a large committee of topflight physicists . . . mistakes like that are nothing less than shocking.”

(C. Ginenthal: Newton, Einstein, Velikovsky)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 03, 2017, 10:48:42 PM
QUASARS REDSHIFT VII

Let us nail down this question of non-expansion by assuming that quasars are at these great redshift distances, à la general relativity and the Hubble law, but that their sideward/lateral motion must be constrained by special relativity, not exceeding the speed of light. Both are Einsteinian concepts. Here, Ratcliffe reports:

“The illusion of remoteness can be further illustrated by examining the lateral motion of quasars projected by their redshift distances. The results are startling and must surely give grey hairs of those keenly promoting the authenticity of the Special Theory of Relativity. Y. P. Varshni, of the University of Ottawa, did the sums for three examples of quasars with well-established redshift values. . . .

“Just to clarify the point, three well-known quasars . . . are found to have lateral motions that are, respectively, 760 times, 5,200 times, and 2,300 times the speed of light . . . Surely this alone renders the redshift-distance idea worthless? The final nail in the coffin of quasar redshift-distance (as if we needed another nail) is the measurement of the speed of jets [of gas and dust coming out of quasars]. This, too, is proper [or, in a sense, lateral] motion, and is, therefore, a real effect. Over a period of 5 years, from 1979 to 1984, John Biretta, of the Space Telescope Science Institute, measured the ejection [speed] of material from the quasar 3C 345. The increase in angular separation is directly observed and measured. To translate angular separation trigonometrically into linear distance, distance from Earth to 3C 345 is required.

“ . . . Let me reiterate that there is nothing peculiar about these measurements. These are first-order data, presented without modification . . . applying redshift distance to 3C 345, . . . all hell breaks loose. It turns out that 3C 345 should be around five-and-a-half billion light years away, if redshifts are to be believed. That number applied to the measured rate of angular departure means that the system is allegedly expanding transversely at a physical rate of seven times the speed of light.

It matters not a whit whether we agree with the theoretically imposed absolute speed limit of [light] C; the fact of the matter is that those who propose redshift distance do so on the basis of Einstein’s Relativity, and are therefore bound to bow before the absolute barrier imposed by light speed. They cannot have their cake and eat it. At redshift-given remoteness, 3C 345 surpasses the speed of light many times over. In terms of its own founding principles, the Hubble law is unambiguously falsified by Figure 24. [not presented here] . . .

“This is but one of several examples in this book. Isn’t it strange, therefore, that the ostriches of cosmology can continue to bury their heads in the sand of abject denial? In 1999, Halton Arp told the world, “‘Of course, if one ignores contradictory observations, one can claim to have an “elegant” or “robust” theory. But it isn’t science.’”

One can, of course, agree that space is expanding and that these quasars are not moving beyond the speed of light, but why are the jets emanating from them filled with gas and dust, and the jets expanding only in a lateral direction, doing so at seven times the speed of light? If the space in the jets was expanding at seven fold light speed, not only would they expand laterally away from the quasar, they would be expanding in every other direction and over time the jets would not only lengthen laterally, but also vertically and in every other direction. In order to make space expand inside the jet, it must have the unique quality of only expanding in one linear direction and in no other direction. In essence, to try to salvage an expanding universe, space must expand outward in all directions, except in quasar jets, where it only expands laterally. Not only are astronomers, cosmologists and physicists curving space à la Einstein, causing it to expand outward in all directions to fit the Big Bang theory, but then somehow contort its outward expansion in all directions and have it expand in only a lateral direction in quasar jets.

All these different forms of evidence from Hubble’s own work with nebulae, to the Local Group of galaxies which are static but exhibit redshifts to Trifft’s evidence that redshifts are quantized, to Burbidge and Arp’s evidence that a quasar of great redshift is in front of galaxy NGC 7319, to the evidence that T Tauristars, where redshifts are interpreted by light on the opposite side of the stars moving away, which cannot be observed, is actually creating blueshifts as it passes through the disc of gas surrounding it, to Russell’s evidence from Virgo clusters that some of its spiral galaxies are approaching the Milky Way, while others are receding from it, dismantle the Hubble redshift law.

It only takes one well-verified, well-observed contradiction to Hubble’s law to invalidate it, and yet, our sample above, we have five, and these are not confined to just these instances. There are other galaxies, other Local Groups other T Tauri stars, other clusters of galaxies like the Virgo cluster throughout the Universe that have the same constituents in them that deny the Hubble redshift law. That is, untold billions of examples exist that contradict established redshift wisdom. About all this evidence, Ratcliffe argues:

“Isn’t it strange how energetically devoted theoreticians tackle the problem of taming [redshift] anomalies? With whips, trowels, and dollops of fudge, it seems they can get any wayward, prodigal observation back into the fold, and without raising a sweat, realign dissident interpretations with their preferred model. In their hands, square pegs and round holes are raised to an art form. Despite the clear warning of Hubble himself, astronomers succumbed to the urgent need for a way to establish remoteness in space of celestial objects, and the even sexier imperative to drive the exciting new expanding-universe model forward. Consequently, the redshift-gives-distance idea was carved into the wall of astrophysical law.

“From an independent objective point of view, the accepted explanation doesn’t even get to first base. Let me say it again – the only reason, and I mean the only reason, that such a blatantly improbable theory has seen the light of day is because the Standard Model [of the cosmology of the Universe and Einstein’s General Relativity Theory] requires it . . . whatever we decide to do, it is clear at the very least that redshift is not demonstrably proportional to distance – or recessional velocity – in all cases . . .

The Hubble law and attendant redshift-based expansion are a myth. We might even dare, in this age of . . . pseudoscience, call it a Convenient Untruth.”

(C. Ginenthal: Newton, Einstein, Velikovsky)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 04, 2017, 12:55:59 AM
QUASARS REDSHIFT VIII

“As more distant regions of space were probed and the redshift magnitudes continued to increase, other astronomers also began to have their doubts as to whether the spectral shifts were really produced by motional effects. For example, when Hubble and Humason published their 1931 results, which projected galaxy recessional velocities as high as 7 percent of the speed of light [25,000 miles per second], they began to refer to these as ‘apparent’ [rather than real] velocities, with the idea that the phenomenon might be due to some other cause than the Doppler effect.

“In 1935, with the apparent velocities reaching 13 percent of the speed of light [44,000 miles per second], Edwin Hubble and Richard Tolman coauthored a paper comparing tired-light and expanding-universe hypotheses on the basis of galaxy number count. They suggested that some mechanism other than expansion might be responsible for producing the cosmological redshifts, although they did not entirely rule out expansion as a possibility. A year later, armed with a much better set of galaxy number count data, Hubble wrote a follow-up paper that came out decidedly in favor of tired light.”

Hubble remained steadfastly unconvinced that the Doppler Effect correctly explained his observations and he was at pains to declare it quite emphatically.

Why did Hubble stick to his guns on this question? He wrote an article for Scientific American in April 1942, offering this explanation:

“Since the corresponding velocity of recession is the same fraction of the velocity of light, the nebulae in the most distant cluster observed, if they are actually receding, will appear 13 percent fainter than they would appear if they were stationary. The difference is small but, fortunately, the measures can be made with fair accuracy. The results may be stated simply. If the nebulae are stationary the law of redshifts is sensibly linear; redshifts are a constant multiple of distances. In other words, each unit of light path contributes the same amount of redshift. On the other hand, if the nebulae are receding, and the dimming factors are applied, the scale of distances is altered, and the law of redshifts is no longer linear [but quadratic].”

That is, the light of the most distant nebulae should appear 13 percent fainter or dimmer if they are actually moving away. However, Hubble discovered that they are not 13 percent fainter, meaning that with respect to the Earth, they are stationary. Five years later, in 1947, he wrote:

“. . . it seems likely that red-shifts may not be due to an expanding Universe, and much of the speculation on the structure of the Universe may require reexamination.”

To get around Hubble’s own evidence that the redshifts, if linear, required a static
Universe; Michael Strauss and Daniel Koranyi presented a paper which attempted to show, contrary to Hubble, an expanding Universe did not require a linear dimming of distant nebulae, could also be explained as a quadratic relationship.

What they said was “in effect by treating the entire galaxy luminosity function . . . as a distance indicator, equivalently we can compare flux density . . . with predictions under different redshift-distance cosmologies . . .”

The problem is that “They test the redshift law using redshift law-derived data. The galaxy luminosity and flux density used in this exercise are [both entirely] redshift functions. That’s blatantly circular. No test of the Hubble, completely independent of the same law, has ever been done, to the best of my knowledge.”

Put into other terms, Louis Marmet explained that even cosmologist Allan Sandage, who also tried to discredit Hubble’s linear analysis, as it relates to Richard Tolman’s
requirements to test Hubble, was flawed by the same circular reasoning.

“Sandage explains that the Tolman test should be independent of cosmology, but a calculation of the absolute magnitude [brightness] of the galaxies is required to be able to classify them . . . So although the surface brightness is an absolute quantity, the identification of the galaxies (and, therefore, their absolute luminosities and diameters) is dependent on their cosmology.”

In order to know the absolute luminosities and the diameter of distant galaxies, one
must know their actual distances, not their classified redshift distances. One cannot know either their absolute luminosities and diameter until one knows the galaxies’ distances from Earth. What cosmologists like Michael Strauss, Daniel Koranyi, and even the great Alan Sandage did was use Hubble cosmological redshifts to determine the distance and then claimed these distances to the galaxies only made scientific sense if the Universe was expanding, as per Hubble. The fact of the matter is that since cosmological redshifts was data based on a classification that accords with certain cosmological assumptions about its value, the interpretation of the absolute magnitude [or brightness of the distant galaxy] and also its diameters was an artifact of the classification which was, in reality, still an interpretation. It was a circularly reasoned analysis.

Worse still, is the fact that Hubble’s data did not correlate redshifts to galactic distance,
as Ratcliffe points out:

“The premises established by Edwin Hubble in 1927 . . . are arguably one of the root causes of cosmology’s rampant delinquency. It seems that he was anxious to support what amounted to a foregone conclusion. In his book, The First Three Minutes, Professor Steven Weinberg is most succinct: ‘Actually,’ a look at Hubble’s data leaves me perplexed [as to] how he could reach such a conclusion – galactic distances seem almost uncorrelated with their [redshift] distance . . . It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that . . . Hubble knew the answer he wanted to get.

(C. Ginenthal: Newton, Einstein, Velikovsky)


"Hubble felt that the data was in better agreement with light having a loss of energy to the  intervening medium proportional to the distance it travels through space by what he called "a new principle of nature" (Hubble 1937).

Ether redshift theory:


https://web.archive.org/web/20060607031454/http://itis.volta.alessandria.it/episteme/ep3-17.htm

"The late Walther Nernst was one of the the most eminent and interesting scientists with whom I came into contact. His scientific instinct was truly amazing - apart from a masterly acquaintance with a vast amount of facts that he could always readily bring to mind, he also possessed a rare command of methods and experimental findings which he excelled in ... "

A. Einstein describing the work published by W. Nernst

What Walther Nernst did was to discover a huge, humoungous, catastrophic error in Hubble's calculations on the interpretation of the red shift.



"if redshifts are not primarily due to velocity shift … the velocity-distance relation is linear, the distribution of the nebula is uniform, there is no evidence of expansion, no trace of curvature, no restriction of the time scale … and we find ourselves in the presence of one of the principle of nature that is still unknown to us today … whereas, if redshifts are velocity shifts which measure the rate of expansion, the expanding models are definitely inconsistent with the observations that have been made … expanding models are a forced interpretation of the observational results"

E. Hubble


And as far as expansion is concerned, Hubble concluded with the following statement:

" … the results do not establish the expansion as the only possible interpretation of redshifts. Other data are available which, at the moment, seem to point in another direction."

" … redshifts are evidence either of an expanding universe or of some hitherto unknown principle of nature …

E. Hubble


The Universe is NOT expanding.

The redshift theory cannot be used to date anything at all pertaining to the age of the Universe.

The only two astronomical methods which can be used to date the age of the Universe are the Faint Young Sun Paradox and especially the Comets' Tails Rate of Dissipasion of Matter.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1707290#msg1707290 (faint young sun paradox)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1640735#msg1640735 (comets' tails dating)

The age of the Solar System must be less than the estimated upper age of comets.

Comet Halley, as well as other comets, may have only been orbiting in its present orbit for only a few thousand years.

Comet Halley may have been in its current orbit for as little as 3,000 years.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 05, 2017, 12:25:05 AM
FLAT EARTH GEOCENTRISM: THE ULTIMATE PROOF II

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1936055#msg1936055 (part I)

"The mammoth and other megafauna that inhabited the circumpolar regions did not live
there during the Ice Age when that vast expanse of territory was either covered by an ice sheet or was mostly a frozen tundra desert.

They lived there during an exceedingly warm period.

In this period, the vegetation provided food for all these massive animals, so they could thrive there, and that it ended with a pole shift (in the heliocentrical version).

If the pole prior to the last great cosmic upheaval  was only tilted slightly, say about nine to ten degrees, much less than the 23 ½ degrees tilt today, this would have expanded the temperate zone both northward and southward by about 8.5 degrees in each direction and the plants that could grow in these regions would reflect this by growing and being found there."

If the flat earth theory is right,  then the remains of temperate plants will be found growing about nine to ten degrees farther north and south of their present-day habitats. There would have been a great expansion of the temperate zones north and south and a compression of the torrid and arctic/antarctic zones. Therefore, plants that can only now grow in the temperate zones would have been able to migrate by seed dispersal farther north and south, in order to account for the heliocentrical theory.

It should be noted that the ice rain theory which accounts for the extinction of the mammoths is valid ONLY in the flat earth version: had there been no pole shift, with an ice rain falling in the heliocentrical context, the areas in question would have been exposed immediately to the same amount of sunlight, the snow/ice would have melted in a matter of hours (during the summer), or in a matter of weeks (during the winter).

A pole shift in the heliocentrical context immediately invalidates this very hypothesis (heliocentricity):  the Gizeh Pyramid is perfectly aligned to reveal the winter/summer solstices and the spring/autumn equinoxes as a calendar, the Gizeh pyramid was constructed, we are told, well before the time of the pole shift itself (see part I).

If the flat earth theory is right, temperate plants dated to the hypsithermal will be found around 1,000 miles north of their current global distribution, and other temperate plants’ remains or still living plants will be found about 1,000 miles south of their current global distribution. There are certain types of plants that cannot live well above the Arctic Circle today, even under far warmer conditions with the present orientation of the poles. This is not an assertion or assumption or argument based on words alone, but on well-established botanical, scientific facts.


"E. C. Pielou explains the botanical science behind the fact as to why certain plants cannot nor could not move far beyond their present boundary distribution well north of the Arctic Circle.

“An apparent obstacle to long northward and southward migration of plants is the phenomenon of photoperiodism. As is well-known, many species of plants are genetically programmed to flower only when there are appropriate daylight hours during the twenty-four our day. There are so-called long-day plants and short-day plants . . . They cannot flower until spring advances into summer, the length of the day’ (that is, the number of daylight hours) has reached the required minimum . . . Even when spring is abnormally warm, they cannot be hurried.”

Given the present axial tilt, the periods of light and darkness on the Earth are rigidly fixed and supposedly have remained so for billions of years. Along these same lines, Paul S. Sears, of Yale University, reports:

“No single species of plant or animal . . . can transgress very far beyond its characteristic climate range unless it undergoes evolutionary changes that in turn set new limits. For this phenomenon, there are good and sufficient reasons to be found in physiology which finds for each species its range of tolerance in respect to factors of climate [photoperiodism factor], but their combination and rhythmic patterns.”

Specifically, one of the plants that does not and cannot grow far north of the Arctic
Circle because it produces flowers that give rise to berries from spring to summer and because it needs specific photoperiodic amounts of light at these times is the black crowberry bush or Empetrum nigrum. J. V. Bell and J. H. Tallis’ paper, “Biological Flora of the British Isles,” Journal of Ecology, Vol. 61, no. 1 (1973), page 291, have presented the range and distribution of this flowering plant. All are south of the Arctic Circle except at a tiny point above it in Scandinavia. For this bush to grow about 1,000 miles north of the Arctic Circle, even during hypsithermal when it was much warmer – requires a pole shift.

Nevertheless, this was just what was found by J. B. Charlesworth’s The Quaternary Era, vol. II (London 1957), pages 1484-1485, as I pointed out:

“Presented evidence that a bush, the Black Crowberry, Empetrum nigrum, was found in situ on one of the Spitsbergen islands located about 1,000 miles north of the Arctic Circle. The plant had ripe berries and Charlesworth admitted that these plants ‘no longer ripen in these northern lands.’ This plant was about 15° north of the Arctic Circle and had gone through the process of sexual reproduction to generate flowers in spring, then fruit with seeds during the summer months, which would later fall to the Earth to germinate and reproduce a new plant. But above the Arctic Circle these plants today reproduce by asexual means. Yet Charlesworth claimed that the Black Crowberry found in situ had fruit and seed or ‘ripe fruit stones,’ this plant had to live in an environment/biome with temperate zone seasons of different lengths of daylight and night. Significantly, Charlesworth was talking about the Hypsithermal period the time claimed that the poles were more perpendicular before a pole shift occurred.”

The indisputable scientific, botanical fact, as opposed to the celestial mechanical
equations that have been presented as unmovable evidence for the stability of the pole is quite clear. This plant could not have grown on Spitsbergen and have flowers, fruits and ripe seeds unless, and only unless, there was a major pole shift or plate tectonic movement or both to allow this. What proponents of the stable pole concept cannot do is make this interdisciplinary scientific, botanical evidence fit their paradigm. However, it correlates, corroborates and is congruent with the pole shift hypothesis.

Nevertheless, this is not the only interdisciplinary scientific, botanical fact that contradicts the axial stability equations; large trees have also been found in situ with their roots in the ground well north of the Arctic Circle, and this, like the Black Crowberry, is a botanical impossibility with the present orientation of the poles. On this point, Edith Taylor, paleobotanist at Ohio State University, specifically states:

“The first thing we paleobotanists do is look for something in the modern records and there are no forests growing at that [polar] latitude today. We can go to the tropics and find trees growing in a warm environment, but we can’t find trees growing in a warm environment with a light regime these trees had: 24 hours of light in summer and 24 hours of dark in winter.”

Savelli V. Tomirdiaro states that trees also grew on the islands of the Arctic Ocean several hundred miles north of the Arctic Circle: “Thus, the forest growth of the Hypsithermal spread not only across the plains of Yakutia, but as far north as the northernmost islands [in the Arctic Ocean] of Novosibirsk [New Siberian Island]
Archipelago . . .”

G. H. Denton’s The Last Ice Sheet (NY 1981), cited by D. S. Allen and J. B. Delair tells us that some 200 miles north of the Arctic Circle “near Disko Bay . . . last century an ancient tree with a trunk ‘thicker’ than a man’s body, was found still standing erect on a hill at an elevation of 1,080 feet (332m) by Capt. Inglefield.”

Some may say 200 miles isn’t significant, but for this tree to grow there, it still had to live in a regime of 24 hours of daylight and 24 hours of night, where such trees could never grow.

Astronomers must somehow explain how they grew there with the present tilt of the Earth. However, this is not the only such finding. We also have evidence of a tree rooted in the soil some 630 miles north of the Arctic Circle reported in 1857:

“Capt. Sir Edward Belcher, who in lat[itude] 75° 30’ longitude 92° 30’ observed on the east side of Wellington Channel the trunk of a fir tree standing vertically and which being cleared of surrounding Earth [etc.] . . . was found to extend its roots into what we supposed to be was soil. [Since this finding is impossible given the stability of the polar axis]. If from the observation we should be led to imagine that all the innumerable fragments of timber found in these polar latitudes belonged to trees that grew upon the spot and on the ground over which they are now distributed, we should be driven to adopt the anomalous hypothesis that, notwithstanding physical relations of land and water similar to those which now prevail . . . trees of such size grew on such terra firma within a few degrees of the North Pole! – a supposition I consider to be wholly incompatible with the [gravitational stable axis] data in our possession, and at variance with the isothermal lines [temperature regime of 50° F annual average necessary for large trees to live].”

That tree was growing during the Hypsithermal some 630 miles above the Arctic
Circle, again something scientifically, botanically impossible with the present position of the polar axis. Again, this is a “scientific fact,” again not just words alone. This is a mere drop in the ocean of evidence about trees growing in the Arctic region."

(C. Ginenthal: Newton, Einstein, Velikovsky)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 05, 2017, 01:09:30 AM
FLAT EARTH GEOCENTRISM: THE ULTIMATE PROOF III

(continued from part II)

"Furthermore, if the pole was far less tilted, the temperate zone would have also moved
south of its present position by about 1,000 miles.

Allessandra Nibbi pointed to the Professor P. Quezel in:

“His study of core samples from a limited area confirmed what many scientists have been saying for some time. At the [Hypsithermal] time of this highest precipitation, the Mediterranean climate moved southward into North Africa for approximately 1250 miles [2000 kilometers] thus bringing the Mediterranean vegetation in the Sahara as far south as Hoggar and Tibesti.”

She further claims the botanical evidence for this climate condition is dated well after the Sahara dried up supposedly. In addition, a giant olive tree is still living in the south central Sahara dated to between three to four thousand years ago as pointed out by Robert Silverberg’s The Challenge of Climate (NY 1969), pp. 156-157. Of significance is the fact presently that Egypt’s climate is not suitable . . . for the development of olive [trees], and thus [to have them grow there] it was necessary to acclimatize the crop [that grows there].”

This means that for olive trees to have migrated down into the south central Sahara, the climate had to be identical to that in the Mediterranean region so olive trees would not have to be acclimated to live there If any living trees grow well outside oases, they would also have to date to around that period (hypsithermal) to receive the photoperiodic signals and water necessary to live. If the Sahara dried up before that period, as textbooks and authorities claim, then the desert would have been too dry for seeds to germinate. Nevertheless, there was found a grove of living cypress trees in the Sahara far from any source of water for seeds to germinate. According to naturalist, David Attenborough: “Judging from the number of rings in their trunks, they are between 2000 and 3000 years old."

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1640735#msg1640735 (dating methods of the past: isotopes vs. comets)

"That is, the vegetation in the Arctic moved about 1,000 miles above the Arctic Circle,
while in the Mediterranean region, it moved about 1,000 miles south during the very same period, the Hypsithermal. This is thoroughly in agreement the pole shift theory.

That being the case, in between these two regions, I was able to show that the trees growing below the Arctic Circle and across and above the desert belts of the northern hemisphere, which today are generally treeless with only very sparce vegetation, were lush with trees, grass, etc. In the treeless tundra of Canada, Pielou tells us, during this period “much of what is now tundra was forested . . . true forest of spruce, not merely scattered trees.”

P. Borisov states: “Forest extended right up to the Berents Coast and [temperate trees] such as oak, linden and filbert reached the shores of the White Sea. The information available warrants the assumption that on the European continent, the tundra and [stunted tree] forests – tundra zones disappeared completely [replaced by temperate forests].”

Chester Chard, speaking of Siberia, shows that around 2,500 B.C. “the climate was warmer than today, and the vegetative zones spread north of their present limit. On the lower Lena [River near the Arctic Ocean], for instance, spruce and pine pollen several hundred kilometers north of its present range and trunks of birch trees of normal size, have been found in peat deposits.”

Therefore, with the present orientation of the polar axis, the entire ring of lands surrounding the Arctic Circle was far colder than at present, and these forests could not have existed there, with the mammoth, etc. Yet, in the permafrost throughout this region, mammoths are found with the shattered remains of trees. If the mammoth died off before these forests grew, it would have been impossible to place all this timber in the permafrost without melting it and destroying all the fossil remains of the Pleistocene animals. In order for the forests to grow, the ground had to be warm enough for roots to penetrate into the soil. That is just what was seen and reported for the tree still standing on an island on the east side of Wellington Channel described above. But mammoths are generally found in the top layers of the permafrost of that region, as is well-known. Their carcasses and bones are found just at or below the surface. So if the forest grew after these Pleistocene animals became extinct and thereafter buried near the surface, the mammoth tissues would have been destroyed by bacteria and none of them would still be preserved. On the other hand, for the forests to grow and then work their way down into the permafrost with these animals, the permafrost must again melt to permit this, and again, mammoth tissues would not survive. That requires that the forest grew when these Pleistocene forms were alive and both were buried at the same time. That is, these Pleistocene fauna lived in these Arctic regions when it was warm enough for them, and photoperiodic periods allowed these trees to grow, and this again is in line with and corroborates with the pole shift scenario.

What of the other non-polar desert regions than the Sahara? These are presently deserts or sparsely covered by trees. For example, in the Tarim Basin of Chinese Turkestan, William Ryan and Walter Pitman show that Sven Anders Hedin says:

“stumbled upon ‘a dead forest of sun-bleached, wind-scoured tree stumps protruding through the sand.’ At the edge of the forest were structures crafted not of stone or mud-brick, but of hand-hewn [wooden] posts and walls of reeds . . . The pictures [there] included nautical scenes of boats sailing on a vast inland lake. Further digging revealed docks for the boats and wood for their keels.

Hedin wrote that this lost world “‘. . . was one of the most unexpected discoveries that I have made throughout the whole of my travels in Asia . . . who would have imagined that in the interior of the dreaded Desert of Gobi, and precisely in that part of it which in dreariness and desolation exceeds all other deserts on the face of the Earth, actual cities
slumbered under the sand . . .’”

What, then, of the desert of Eastern India, present-day Pakistan? Nigel Calder shows:

“Discoveries of fossil pollen that an area in north-west India at the edge of the Harappan region, which is arid, was formerly a land of rich vegetation.

“An expert in fossil pollen, Gundip Singh, from the Institute of Paleobotany in Lucknow, investigated salt lakes in north-west India and found that they were formerly fresh-water lakes [as that in the Gobi Desert], in the midst of richly vegetated land. The most interesting of the lakes in Lunkaransar near Bikaner is keep in the Great Sand of Rajasthan. Here, today, the hot, moist wind of summer monsoon delivers scarcely any rain; instead it piles up drifts of sand dunes . . . The vegetation is sparse. But dig just a few feet through the salt of Lunkaransar and you come to neat layers of mud, laid down when the lake carried fresh water four thousand years ago. And in the layers, Singh found pollen of bulrushes and sedges.

The lake collected from the surrounding land pollen of grass, jamun trees, mimosa and many other species. Jamun trees need at least 20 inches of rainfall a year.”

What then of the Mediterranean region, especially the areas that are extremely arid today and have very few trees growing there, let alone forests. For example, Crete is a very barren island and researchers have strongly denied the possibility of forests growing there. A. T. Grove and Oliver Rackham explain this with which I strongly agree:
“A sure route to pseudo-history lies in ignoring the [ecological] behavior of plants and animals. Historians gather ancient allusions to people cutting down trees, and assume these add up to a record of deforestation, as if depleting a forest by cutting down trees were the same as destroying it.”

They go on to show:

“There are two prehistoric pollen profiles in Crete, Agia Galini – a hot, dry area near the south coast – had deciduous oak, hazel, alder, elm and lime. [The other site] Tersana on the NW coast, also now a dry site, had oaks, lime, hazel and Ostyra Hazel, alder and lime are now extinct in Crete and rare in most of Greece [to the north]. The southern limits of vegetation in effect moved at least 500 km [310 miles or 4.5 degrees] northward since the early Holocene.”

If, indeed, as the establishment scientists insist, the Ice Age ended and both the northern regions of America and Europe warmed when the ice sheet disappeared, animals that lived below the limits of the ice sheet would ecologically move northward into the new, warmer regions of these continents, especially warmth-loving species. As the vast ice sheet melted, they would all, as naturally expected, migrate northward into the vast regions of North America once frozen, where they would find the same, warmer habitat that suited their ecological needs and nature before the ice disappeared. In no case should warmth-loving animals move southward if the pole remained in the same position. However, in North America, instead of migrating north into the warming areas of the continent which were heating up, the animals, in complete contradiction to their zoological and ecological nature and requirements, migrated southward! Tim Flannery specifically informs us that in the Americas:

“Species as diverse as armadillos, tapirs, jaguars, speckled bears, llamas, ocellated turkeys and peccaries, all moved southward. This is quite a surprising pattern, for all these warmth-loving species were withdrawing from the north of the continent just as it was heating up. Just why they survived in South and Central America, while becoming extinct in the northern margins of their range is an intriguing question.”

This is not so much an “intriguing question” as a scientific, biological, zoological
contradiction to the stable pole hypothesis. The only reason for warmth-loving species to migrate south is that the climate did just the opposite of what proponents of a stable pole require to explain, support and corroborate, that mathematical, astronomical paradigm that North America warmed instead, it had to get cooler when the Ice Age ended. Ice sheets do not melt away where the climate becomes cooler. If there was a stable pole, at the end of the Ice Age, all the warmth-loving animals would migrate north. The established stable pole theory cannot be upheld unless one is prepared to throw both the sciences of botany and zoology out the window. If this theory was right, then we would have armadillos tapirs, jaguars, speckled bears, llamas, oscillated turkeys and peccaries living in Mexico and well into the United States.


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 05, 2017, 01:27:56 AM
FLAT EARTH GEOCENTRISM: THE ULTIMATE PROOF IV

There is also scientific, zoological evidence that certain temperate zone species that
inhabited Alaska and Canada during the Ice Age also went extinct there, but migrated and/or survived much farther to the south This is particularly relevant to the black-footed ferret and the badger. According to R. Dale Guthrie, “Both badgers and ferrets lived in Alaska and the Yukon Territory during the Pleistocene.” R. Dale Guthrie, Frozen Fauna of the Mammoth Steppe: The Story of Blue Babe (Chicago 1990), p. 249. In his book, he presents a map of North America that shows this distribution during the Pleistocene. But today, these species thrive far to the south from the north central United States down to Mexico. Since they lived in Alaska and the Yukon during the Ice Age, and with the end of the Ice Age the land there warmed up, they should have survived there or migrated farther north to the tundra regions along the Arctic Ocean. Instead of migrating or surviving in the north, they survived or moved 1,000 to 2,000 miles south, like the armadillos, tapirs, jaguars, etc.

The identical condition pertains to the horse and bison. They also lived in Alaska with
the mammoth during the Ice Age apparently in great herds. Guthrie speaks of “thousands of fossils collected from Alaskan Pleistocene deposits . . . [and] found more than 95 percent were from bison, horse and mammoth.”

While the horse became extinct in America, the bison survived and, like the black-footed ferret, the badger, and armadillo, tapirs, jaguars, etc., bison thrive well to the south
of the tundra regions of the Arctic. If, as assumed, the pole did not change its position and the land only warmed as the ice sheet receded, bison should still be living around the edge of the Arctic Ocean. Since they could live in these regions during the Ice Age, and it is warmer now, then surely vast herds should be living in these regions. The zoological and ecological facts are unequivocal.

In essence, the various Pleistocene species that survived the Ice Age in America did
not migrate north as the land warmed up with its end. They moved or survived thousands of miles farther to the south, in many cases, the exact opposite of what zoological ecology demands and thus denies that the pole was stable.

In Europe and Siberia, we encounter the opposite situation, this time with the coldloving
reindeer. In Europe, the reindeer lived as far south as the Pyrenees Mountains. As Bjorn
Kurter explains: “The fact remains, nevertheless, that reindeer migrated in winter as far south as the Pyrenees at the height of the last glaciation, so that conditions can hardly have been so very different on the whole from those of Lapland in summer today.”

Along these same lines is the otter, wolverine and lynxes that also lived further south
in Europe and Siberia prior to the end of the Ice Age. They lived in refuges far south of their present day habitats which are far to the north. Thus, we are told, that presently:
“Otters, wolverines and lynxes [live] in northern Europe, most likely as a result of an
expansion out of one southern refuge at the end of the last glacial maximum.”

But when the Ice Age ended, they moved about 1,500 miles north to the edge of the Arctic Ocean. This would only make sense if instead of Europe and Siberia warming after the Ice Age, they cooled so these coldloving animals moved north to inhabit the same climatological environment they had in central western Europe and southern Siberia Thus, Siberia became more Arctic – that is, colder. Therefore, reindeer, otters, wolverines and lynxes, being cold-loving animals, would migrate ever farther north after the Ice Age ended via a pole shift. In the Americas, the warm-loving species, armadillos, tapirs, jaguars, speckled bears, llamas, ocellated turkeys, peccaries badgers ferrets, etc., moved south, not because the climate warmed, but because it cooled, because of a pole shift. In Europe and Siberia, the cold-loving animals – reindeer, otters, wolverines, lynxes – moved north not because the climate cooled as in the America, but because it warmed. In Europe and Siberia, just the opposite happened, it became far cooler. The reindeer and other cold-loving animals would therefore move as far north as possible to inhabit the biomes suited to them. That is, they not only live in Siberia, but over 1,000 miles north of the Arctic Circle on the New Siberian Islands and even further north: “Even today, reindeer reach these islands across the ice from the main body of the New Siberian Islands farther south.”

That is, today cold-loving reindeer live over 3,000 miles farther north than their
European ancestors. They moved as far north as possible to inhabit the biome suitable for them.

In the Americas, warmth-loving species moved south not because the hemisphere warmed, but because it cooled. In Siberia, cold-loving reindeer moved as far north as possible not because the hemisphere cooled, but because it warmed.

This is indisputable evidence that there was a pole shift and is evidenced by both plant biogeography and animal biogeography. Botany and zoology prove there was a pole shift contrary to the equations of astronomy and/or physics!"

The science of botany and zoology, as these apply to ecology, contradict the stable pole
concept based on mathematics, and fully correlate, corroborate and are congruent with
Velikovsky’s pole shift. No amount of math can change these scientific facts. If the stable mathematical pole theory is correct, as the land warmed after the Ice Age, then all the warmth-loving species should have moved north everywhere. That we have a whole suite of warmth-loving and temperate-loving species moving south in the Americas is massive scientific evidence against the stable pole theory. Scientific facts are facts; astronomy cannot change them, nor have astronomers the right to claim their science is superior to botany or zoology.

If the Earth’s axis had not moved, then with the end of the Ice Age, when these regions in North America warmed, the flora and fauna should have migrated north. There would still be badgers and ferrets in Alaska and the Yukon living even farther north.

(C. Ginenthal: Newton, Einstein, Velikovsky)



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 05, 2017, 09:45:49 AM
VENUS’ ARGON-36 AND ARGON-40 AGE

In the new radical chronology of history, Venus was a former satellite of Jupiter, and is only some hundreds of years old. Its size is much smaller than that assumed by current astronomical calculations: it has a diameter of some 25-30 meters, see:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1786946#msg1786946

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1787025#msg1787025

"The Argon-36 age of Venus’ atmosphere indicates that it was produced very recently, no more than in the last few thousand years.

On the other hand argon-40 is also an indication that Venus’ atmosphere is young. Argon-40 is a decay product of radioactive potassium-40. Therefore, over time argon-40 should increase in amount to levels comparable to the argon-40 levels found on the Earth if Venus is as old as the Earth. But, interestingly this is not the case. Billy P. Glass in Introduction to Planetary Geology, (NY 1982), p. 314 informs us that,

“the ratio of the mass of radiogenic 40 Ar [Argon-40] to the mass of Venus is smaller by amount, a factor of 15 than the value for the Earth. Since 40 Ar within a planet increases with time due to radioactive decay of 40 K [potassium-40] the amount of 40 Ar should be higher if the primary degassing took place late in the planet’s history.”

That Venus has both too much argon-36 and too little argon-40 are clear indications pointing to an extraordinarily young age for Venus. If Venus were as old as the Earth, its argon-36 would have decayed to only a tiny fraction of its present amount. If Venus were an old planet, its argon-40 would have increased in amount to that contained in the Earth.

The problem with Venus’ atmosphere is argon-36. Argon-36 is a primordial product from ancient times. “The atmosphere of Venus contains as much argon-36 as you would expect to find in the planet’s original atmosphere” (according to M. McElroy, Pioneer experimenter in the Washington Post, Dec. 11, 1979, p. A6). If Venus were 4.6 billion years old, its Argon-36 would have decayed to a level comparable to that found on the Earth. Venus has hundreds of times as much Argon-36 as the Earth. In fact, it has what appears to be exactly the amount of Argon-36 that Venus would have if it were born in the last few thousand years.


If the scientists’ theory that Venus is as old as the Earth and Mars, it should have comparable amounts of argon-36.

According to Pete Gwynne writing in New Scientist:

“So surprisingly large are the amounts of this gas in the atmosphere of Venus by comparison with the Earth’s, that planetologists are NASA Ames Research Center were trying to puzzle out how both planets could have formed at the same time – the current scientific theory. ‘This finding will force us to rethink the whole process of planet formation,’ said Thomas Donahue of the University of Michigan.

“The Argon detection, . . . overseen by John Hoffman of the University of Texas at Dallas, indicated that the Venusian atmosphere contains more than 100,000 parts per trillion of Argon-36. Earth’s atmosphere, by contrast, contains about 35 parts per trillion of the isotope and Mars’ about two hundred times less than that.”"

Jupiter also has a great abundance of argon-36 and that is just the case.

"In “Atmospheric Abundance for Jupiter,” “Argon-36” is at a ratio with that of the sun that “2.5 ± 0.5.”

Erik Gregerser, The Outer Solar System: Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune and the Dwarf Planets (NY 2010), p. 96

As reported in the The Washington Post, McElroy, a Pioneer Venus experimenter, gives us this stunning fact: THE ATMOSPHERE OF VENUS CONTAINS AS MUCH ARGON-36 AS YOU WOULD EXPECT TO FIND IN THE PLANET’S ORIGINAL ATMOSPHERE.”

The second form of argon found in Venus’ atmosphere is argon-40. This gas is created
when potassium-40 breaks down over time. Again, because the scientists maintain Venus is an ancient planet, it was a very reasonable and scientific idea that, whatever potassium it originally had would, over time, be outgassed into Venus’ atmosphere and would be found in amounts comparable to that of the Earth. However, if Venus is a newborn planet, its potassium-40 would not have had sufficient time to produce argon-40 gas in amounts comparable to the Earth. Again, contrary to what the scientists expected, large amounts of argon-40 in Venus’ atmosphere has an extraordinarily tiny amount off this gas compared to Earth. Glass informs us that: “The ratio of the mass of radiogenic Ar40 to the mass of Venus is smaller by a factor of 15 to the value for the Earth.”

This simply means that Venus has over a trillion times less argon-40 than the Earth. This, of course, makes no scientific sense, as Eric Burgess tells us: "... an initial shortage of potassium cannot be the reason for less {Venusian] argon-40 today.”

The planetologists are caught in a double bind because of these two forms of argon gas
in Venus’ atmosphere. If, for some unknown reason, Venus outgassed much less argon-40, it barely might explain the trillion times shortage of it in the atmosphere. However, if we stop argon- 40 from escaping to the surface to explain its low fraction, we also have to stop argon-36 from escaping. But, as we know, there is 100,000 parts per trillion on Venus’ atmosphere, whereas there are only about 35 parts per trillion in the Earth’s atmosphere. No matter what one does to speed up or slow down the gas emissions from Venus, this problem cannot be resolved. As a matter of fact, there are approximately equal amounts of argon-36 and argon-40 in Venus’ atmosphere.

Since, according to McElroy above, Venus contains as much argon-36 as you would expect to find in the planet’s original atmosphere,” the amount of argon-40 is also the amount you would expect to find in Venus’ original atmosphere! The possibility, or rather, impossibility, that argon-36 would equal potassium-40’s breakdown product, argon-40 is too impossible a coincidence, unless, and only unless Venus is a newborn planet endowed with these gases in their original, primordial amounts.

As Zdenek Kopal explains, "36Ar comes mainly from the deep interior of a planet."

Zdenek Kopal, Realm of the Terrestrial Planet, (New York, 1979), pg. 41

So Venus' argon–36 would have to have been derived from its interior by volcanism.

"None of the theories [of the origin and evolution of Venus' atmosphere] discussed above is free of serious deficiencies in explaining the origin of Venus' atmosphere, particularly when called upon to account for the volatiles on Earth and Mars, models in which the planets grew in a gas–rich environment naturally account for the gradient in . . . Ar abundance with distance from the sun, although this is not clearly the case for gaseous protoplanets. . . . [T]hey have a fundamental problem in explaining the overall depletion of noble gases relative to other volatiles and the departure of the abundance ratios of the noble gases, and, in some cases, of isotopic ratios from the solar pattern on all planets. . . . It also has a problem in explaining how argon can be more efficiently lost than carbon and nitrogen, or why the argon to krypton and argon to xenon ratios become more nearly solar the closer the planet is to the sun."

T. M. Donahue, J. B. Pollack, "Origin and Evolution of the Atmosphere of Venus." Venus, ed. D. Hunten, et al., (Tucson, 1983), p. 1013

(C. Ginenthal: Newton, Einstein, Velikovsky)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 06, 2017, 12:07:26 AM
VENUS’ CARBON DIOXIDE AGE

Carbon dioxide is not stable in the presence of ultraviolet radiation from the Sun. Ultraviolet rays break carbon dioxide down into carbon monoxide, CO and oxygen molecules, O2. Once these molecules of carbon monoxide and O2 form, they do not combine again easily. Therefore, one would expect to find a great deal of carbon monoxide in the upper and middle layers of Venus’ atmosphere if Venus is billions of years old. U. von Zahn et. al., in a paper titled “The Composition of Venus’ Atmosphere” in the book Venus, published by the University of Arizona, deals with this problem. They write:

“Photochemistry of CO2. The central problem of the photochemistry of Venus’ middle atmosphere is to account for the exceedingly low abun­dance of CO [carbon monoxide] and O2 [molecular oxygen] observed at the bottom of the middle atmosphere. In fact, O2 has not been detected even at 1 ppm [part per million] level. Due to low abundances of O2 and O3 [ozone, which absorbs ultraviolet radiation]…solar ultraviolet of suffi­cient energy to photolyse [breakdown by light action] CO2…penetrates down to 65 km [or 39 miles above the surface of Venus]…

“The 3-body [3 elements or compounds] recombination reaction with a rate constant kb [based on temperature] is, however, spin forbidden. Consequently at typical temperatures of the Venus middle atmosphere (200k) this [recombination] reaction has a very small rate … [But at this temperature] … oxygen is converted to molecular oxygen…with a rate constant kc which is 5 orders of magnitude higher than kb.

Neglecting for a moment the effect of trace gases in Venus’ atmosphere, CO2, CO, and O2 are nonreactive with each other and we therefore expect a fairly rapid transition (on geologic time scales) of the CO2 atmosphere to one dominated by CO and O2. CO2 would disappear from the upper atmosphere within a few weeks, and from the entire middle atmosphere in a few thousand years. [emphasis added]

“Indeed, these arguments describe the situation correctly for the upper atmosphere of Venus, provided we take into account also the various dynamic processes exchanging gas between the upper and middle atmosphere. The above arguments, however, fall short in explaining the observed composition of the middle atmosphere which at least close to its lower boundary is characterized by an extreme dearth of CO2 photolysis [break down], that is CO and O2.”

There is at present no observed and delineated process to save the situation. For the abundance of carbon dioxide to persist in the middle atmosphere of Venus, the planet must be only a “few thousand years” old.


Carbon dioxide, which is 96.5 percent of Venus’ atmosphere, is not stable in the presence of solar ultraviolet radiation. Ultraviolet rays photodisassociate (breakdown) carbon dioxide into the products of carbon monoxide CO, and oxygen O2. Once molecules of carbon monoxide and oxygen form, they do not readily recombine to reform as carbon dioxide. This action would take place in the upper and middle atmosphere of Venus where ultraviolet radiation is most prevalent and thus would photodisassociate carbon dioxide there most rapidly. Therefore, if, as the scientific establishment’s paradigm that Venus is an ancient planet, the carbon dioxide there would be completely photodisassociated and the upper and middle Venusian atmosphere would long ago have been converted to carbon monoxide and oxygen.

Eric Burgess asks: “The big question is why the carbon dioxide atmosphere of Venus
should be so stable. It was expected that ultraviolet radiation from the Sun would convert carbon dioxide into carbon monoxide and oxygen. Once formed, carbon monoxide and oxygen should not combine again easily.”

John S. Lewis and Ronald G. Prinn point out that because of this process:
“We might expect a pure CO2 atmosphere to evolve slowly into a predominantly CO – O2 atmosphere. The time required is roughly given by dividing the total amount of CO2 on Venus. . . by the CO2 column photodissociation rate . . . and is about 5 x 10^6 years [50 million years] . . . This striking problem has long been known.”

That is, the middle atmosphere of Venus should have lost all its carbon dioxide in a
few thousand years. But it has not! Furthermore, the entire atmosphere of Venus should have been changed from one dominated by carbon dioxide to one dominated by carbon monoxide and oxygen in 50 million years! That is, if Venus is billions of years old, its atmosphere would be primarily composed of carbon monoxide and oxygen. But the evidence clearly indicates its atmosphere is only as U. Von Zahn, et al. tells, only a “few thousand years” old.

(C. Ginenthal: Newton, Einstein, Velikovsky)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 06, 2017, 03:08:34 AM
VENUS’ NEON KRYPTON AGE

If Venus was formed at the same time as the Earth, it would have experienced a fairly
similar development. It would have inherited certain primordial gases, especially neon and krypton – noble gases – that do not interact with other gases. They are stable, in that respect, and remain inert throughout the history of the planet. These are light gases and can be easily removed from a hot atmosphere by the solar wind. The closer a planet is to the sun, the stronger the solar wind becomes. This is especially important in the early period of the Sun’s evolution when it goes through a hot T Tauri stage and blows away light gases from a planet’s atmosphere. Therefore, Venus, if it was born at the same time as the Earth, would have much smaller amounts of neon and krypton than the Earth, but just the opposite situation exists; Venus has more of these primordial gases than the Earth, something that is impossible to explain if Venus was the same age as Earth.

John and Walter Gould specifically state:

“Pioneer Venus showed that the atmosphere as a whole consists of about 98% carbon dioxide, 1-3% nitrogen with a few parts per million . . . of helium, neon, krypton and argon. Although the amounts of neon, krypton, and argon are small they indicate very much greater amounts of primordial neon, krypton, and argon than those found in the Earth’s atmosphere. This is currently raising problems concerning the established view of the origin of the solar system.”

Anthony Feldman further informs us in this general context:

“A recent discovery about the composition of the Venusian atmosphere has cast doubt on the popular theory accounting for the formation of the solar system. The theory suggests that the Sun and planets formed at the same time [4.6 billion years ago].

“The inner planets – Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars – are thought to be small because the Sun drew their lighter constituents away. If this idea is correct, the closer a planet is to the Sun, the less likely there is to be lighter gases in its atmosphere. But in the atmosphere of Venus, the opposite is true. In particular, there seems to be 500 times as much argon gas and 2,700 times as much neon as in the atmosphere of Earth.

“So far, scientists cannot explain why these gases were not drawn away from the planet during the birth of the solar system . . . Further discoveries about Venus may soon force a revision of the most basic ideas about how the Sun and planets formed.”

In terms of their noble gases – neon, krypton and argon, Venus is unique. While a
stable solar system, wherein if Venus was born in its present orbit, it should have less of these gases than the Earth. It has 2,700 times as much neon and krypton exhibits a similar tendency.293

There is no explanation in terms of a stable solar system that accounts for the ratios of these noble gases.


It should also be noted that, as with carbon dioxide, sulfuric acid is also broken down by ultraviolet rays. Therefore, in a rather short time, the Venusian atmosphere should be relatively free of this acid if the scientific establishment is correct.

Venus is a newborn planet, this acid will not have been removed and should still be found in the planet’s atmosphere.

Larry Esposito, et al., give the explanation for the evidence of sulfuric acid in Venus’ atmosphere with which most planetologists agree:

“The results of Hansen and Arking (1971) and Hansen and Hovenier (1974) show the cloud particles to be spherical with radius [of about] . . . µm [millionth of a meter] and narrowed the allowable range of real refractive index to . . . [about] 1.45. With these new constants, Sill (1972) and Young and Young (1973) independently proposed that the Venus clouds were composed of droplets of concentrated (. . . [about] 75% by weight) sulfuric acid).”

Although this does not explain the yellowish tint of the clouds, there is a broad
consensus within the scientific community that sulfuric acid is a major component of the Venusian clouds.

Nevertheless, Peter R. Ballinger, a researcher in organic chemistry, had this to say about the possibility of sulfuric acid surviving in Venus’ clouds from ancient geological periods, as was presented by Lewis M. Greenberg:

“It is likely that sulfuric acid would be gradually decomposed by solar radiation of ultraviolet and shorter wavelengths . . . to give [off] hydrogen and oxygen. This process would also be expected to result in the preferential retention of deuterium . . . Because of this and other chemical reactions, sulfuric acid might well have a relatively short lifetime consistent with a recent installation of the planet [Venus] in its present orbit.”

However, there is another problem for any other acids surviving for billions of years
in Venus’ atmosphere and interacting with the surface rock. Rock neutralizes acids. Let us recall that acids erode the surface and continually expose new rock that will act to neutralize any acids.

Acids in the lower atmosphere of Venus will come into contact with continually fresh strewn rocks and be neutralized by them. How long will those reactions take to remove the Venusian acids? Young and Young show “Such strong acids would not survive for long in the Earth’s atmosphere; they would react with rocks and other materials and soon be neutralized.”

Young and Young go on to say:

“Among the more exotic materials proposed for the clouds, only one has been detected spectroscopically. It is hydrogen chloride and it was found along with hydrogen fluoride by William S. Benedict of the University of Maryland in the spectra reported by the Connesses. Both gases are highly corrosive. When they are dissolved in water they yield hydrochloric and hydrofluoric acid. Their abundance is too low for them to be in the clouds, but that they should be present in the atmosphere at all is a surprise.

These acids would have been neutralized billions of years ago if Venus was an ancient
planet. Because these acids have not been neutralized, it indicates Venus is a newborn planet.


Also, the fact of the matter is that so little oxygen in Venus’ atmosphere means it is a
newborn planet. In fact, in 1940, when spectroscopic analysis of Venus’ cloud cover failed to reveal oxygen but instead had immense amounts of carbon dioxide, Sir Harold Spencer Jones was driven to admit this possibility: “Venus, then appears to be a world where life [dependent on oxygen] has not yet developed . . . It is a world where conditions are not greatly different from those on the [early] Earth many hundreds of millions of years ago.” At that time, it was thought the Earth was a billion years old.

(C. Ginenthal: Newton, Einstein, Velikovsky)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 06, 2017, 07:10:47 AM
MARS’ NITROGEN-15 AGE

S. Yanagita and M. Imamura in Nature, Vol. 274, (1978), p. 234, show nitrogen-15 which is an unstable isotope and does not have a long lived radioactive parent is present in excess amounts in Mars’ atmosphere. It is produced by cosmic radiation interacting with oxygen-16. Therefore, the nitrogen-15 had to be produced quite recently. Cosmic rays do not penetrate a deep atmosphere such as that of the Earth. If Mars’ atmosphere was destroyed recently, cosmic rays could then interact with oxygen-16 to produce the abundant nitrogen-15 which has not decayed. The evidence of carbon monoxide, water vapor and nitrogen-15 all indicate Mars’ atmosphere experienced a very recent catastrophe.


The carbon dioxide problem is also applicable to the planet Mars. Over billions of years its very thin atmosphere of carbon dioxide should have been completely converted to carbon monoxide and oxygen by the Sun’s ultraviolet rays. But like Venus, it is still in the early process of this conversion.

Charles A. Barth in an article titled “The Atmosphere of Mars” in the Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Vol. 2, (Palo Alto, CA 1974), edited by F.A. Donath, F.G. Stehli and G.W. Wetherill, p. 356 states:

“Photodissociation of carbon dioxide to produce carbon monoxide and atomic oxygen takes place from the top of the atmosphere all the way down to the surface. In the upper atmosphere the known recombination reactions are not rapid enough to balance the photoproduction of atomic oxygen to explain the low abundances” of carbon monoxide and oxygen. A kind of circulation called Eddy diffusion is invoked to transport oxygen to the lower atmosphere where oxygen would mix with other constituents and become reconverted to carbon dioxide. However, Mars’ atmosphere, even at the surface, is so thin that these recombination processes will occur slowly. Furthermore, ultraviolet radiation which reaches “all the way down to the surface” will photodissociate the carbon dioxide as it reforms and thus the problem remains.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1775118#msg1775118 (martian faint young sun paradox)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 06, 2017, 07:47:26 AM
TECHNETIUM 99 IN THE SOLAR ATMOSPHERE

“A further problem with the fusion of elements at the cores of massive stars is that these elements are actually observed in their atmospheres. One of these elements, technetium 99, is radioactive, which has a half-life of 212,000 years and is produced as a fission product in nuclear reactors. But this is also true of other heavy atoms that are radioactive, as [L. H.] Aller explains:

“‘Furthermore, the technetium in the S stars appears to be about as abundant in these stars as the neighboring element . . . ruthenium and molybdenum. The implication is that all these [heavy] elements were built in the S stars and that these objects have life times of about 200,000 years. How the star gets the heavy element from the core to the surface without exploding provides an impressive challenge to theoreticians.’

“The existence of these materials in measurable amounts in the atmospheres of these stars, represents an ‘impressive challenge’ because, if as presented, technetium, ruthenium, and molybdenum are only produced in the star’s central core, they will, by radioactivity, decay, before they can reach the upper atmosphere of the star to be observed.

“It is calculated that a photon, moving at the speed of light, striking hydrogen and helium atoms in the Sun, being absorbed and reemitted, takes 30 million years to reach the Sun’s photosphere and fly off into space. These various radioactive elements could never make this trip under these conditions in a shorter time period and, thus, would have decayed to other elements. [Tim] Ferris, in dealing with this contradiction, states:

“Had the technetium atoms . . . originated billions of years ago in the Big Bang, they would have decayed and there would be too few of them left to show up today in S stars or anywhere else. Yet, there they were. Clearly, the stars knew how to build elements beyond iron, even if astrophysicists didn’t.”

“‘According to [I. S.] Shklovskii, ‘Only nuclear reactions in the surface layers of the stars can account for the presence of technetium . . . lines in S stella spectra.’ The problem is that the low temperatures in the stellar atmospheres are just too low and prevent the fusing of these massive elements. These stars also contain zirconium, lanthanum, yttrium, barium, scandium, and vanadium.

I. S. Shklovskii, Stars: Their Birth and Death, (San Francisco 1978), p. 144


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1827377#msg1827377 (carbon-nitrogen-oxygen cycle in the solar atmosphere defies the nuclear furnace hypothesis)


(C. Ginenthal: Newton, Einstein, Velikovsky)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 07, 2017, 09:19:43 AM
VENUS AND EARTH SPIN-ORBIT RESONANCE

P. Goldreich, CalTech

S.J. Peale, UCSB

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232751781_Resonant_Rotation_for_Venus

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1970AJ.....75..273G

Is there evidence, not probability mathematics but actual evidence that argues that Venus must have had a near collision with the Earth? Gravitational theory holds that when celestial bodies come close and interact, then there should remain some lingering remnant in some part of the orbital pattern of both bodies.

“…a discovery was announced by P. Goldreich of CalTech and S.J. Peale of the University of California, and reported at the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union on April 23, 1966. The surprising discovery dealt with the axial rotation of Venus, already known to be slow and retrograde. Every time Venus passes between the sun and the Earth, it turns the same face to the earth. Gravitationally, this phenomenon cannot be explained even if Venus were lopsided, as some science writers have offered as the explanation, it would have been locked with the very same face toward the sun, whose gravitational pull on Venus is so much stronger than that of the earth; this ‘resonance’ as the discoverers of the phenomenon termed it, if confirmed, is a sure piece of evidence of close contact in the past between Earth and Venus, evidence not erased by the passage of time, in this case time measured in a mere few thousand years.”

An article titled “Venus and Earth: Engaged or Divorced?” in Astronomy (Vol. 7 for Oct. 1979), p. 58, discussed I.I. Shapiro and his colleague’s analysis of the Venus-Earth resonance. They note radar observations gathered over a 14 year period of time has permitted them to nail down Venus’ rotation period with high precision.

“They find it to be 243.01 +- 0.03 days. The 3 1/2 hour difference between this value and the resonance period of exactly 243.16 days; while very small, is statistically significant. On the other hand, the researchers point out that the probability of Venus’ rotation period falling by chance alone within one-fifth of a day of a resonance period is under 1%. Therefore, they suggest that Venus could either now be evolving toward such a resonance, or was once in resonance in the recent past.”

William R. Corliss who reported this article in The Moon and the Planets, (1985), p. 304, adds this remark,

“The possibility of a recent or imminent resonance is redolent of a recent solar system instability. It would be interesting if ‘recent’ means ‘within the time of man’ to that there would after all be astronomical explanations of many legends of celestial turmoil.”

Zdenek Kopal in The Realm of the Terrestrial Planets, (NY 1979) p. 180 informs us that:

“The remarkable resonance…between the synodic orbit of Venus and its axial rotation with respect to the Earth is certainly not accidental. It strongly suggests the existence of tidal coupling [Kopal’s emphasis] between the two neighboring planets, but the specific mechanism which could lead to its establishment is largely obscure…a…coupling between Venus and the Earth—a body much less massive [than the Sun]—constitutes a real challenge to our understanding.”

James Oberg further explains how difficult it is for scientists to account for this phenomenon,

“The best explanation for this close resonance (and for the fact that the Venusian year is within a few hours of being exactly 8/13 of Earth’s year), to appeal to coincidence—an unsatisfactory solution at best. Nagging doubts insist that something vital is missing from the logic involved. The best current theory [for Venus’ retrograde rotation] calls for a large off-centered asteroid impact late in Venus’ formation phase. This presents difficulties. Such an accident could reverse the spin but could not account for the spin axis being at near right angles to the plane of the orbit (an extremely unlikely result in a freak collision). If the spin reversing collision could set up nearly any new axis, but this axis would eventually wander back to its old position because of the planet’s oblateness. Such oblateness could have disappeared over millions of years that passed while the new slow rotation rate no longer provided sufficient centrifugal force. If this explanation sounds like magic its the best there is. Astronomers remain completely baffled.” [Oberg, “Venus” Astronomy (August 1976), p. 16].

Zdenek Kopal, above page 191, puts the problem this way,

“The first problem concerns the rotation of the planets. What made Venus rotate so slowly, and what tilted its axis of rotation almost upside down to give rise to its retrograde rotation. The only probable mechanism would be a very close encounter with another celestial body whose gravitational attraction played havoc with Venus and altered some of its kinematics [motions] and at the same time cause it to lock onto the Earth gravitationally?”

The answer is an interaction with the Earth. Here is what appears to be clear evidence based not on the probability theory, but on gravitational theory.

It indicates that Venus’ axial rotation is locked onto the Earth and not onto the Sun. Hoimar Von Ditfurth in Children of the Universe, (NY 1976), p. 115 remarks that, “the Earth must once have exerted a braking or decelerating effect on Venus until the two planets mutual gravitational attraction brought about the ‘coupling’ we observe today.” To do so, the Earth and Venus had to be quite close to each other for their gravitational fields to be effective in creating this couple effect. If the Earth and Venus never had a near encounter then any gravitational anomaly on Venus would cause it to lock onto the Sun. The Earth’s gravitational field is far too small compared with that of the Sun to nudge Venus into such a resonance.

(C. Ginenthal: Newton, Einstein, Velikovsky)


How could Venus, a former satellite of Jupiter, measuring some 25-30 meters in diameter, cause worldwide destruction on an unimaginable scale? Both Jupiter and Venus can emit bosons, and thus greatly increase the vibration of the subquark strings which make up the ether field above the surface of the Earth, should this emission be allowed to pass through the first dome directly.

A subquark is made up of strings of bosons, through which pass thermal energy, terrestrial gravity, electricity.

Venus, in the legends which can be found around the world, can start worldwide fires, cause huge hurricanes (1,000 km/hr), and level a small mountain with thunderbolts.


And the Evening Star and the Morning Star are two DIFFERENT planets (Typhon and Venus):

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1722427#msg1722427 (the extended Schroetter effect)



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 08, 2017, 03:34:27 AM
THE SIRIUS MERIDIAN TRANSIT PERIODS DATA: INEXISTENCE OF EARTH’S AXIAL PRECESSION II

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1718735#msg1718735 (part I)

The most precise proof that Sirius has NOT undergone precessional motion from 1988 to 2007:

Extended sidereal time-measurements from 6 April 1994 to 6 April 1996 revealed a total negative time deviation of 1.6 seconds from tropical-sidereal time. According to 'precession' this difference should be about 3.34 seconds per year. Hence a total negative deviation of about 6.68 seconds was to be expected, but did not occur in reality.

The continuous measurement of 6 April 1994 to 5 April 2000 confirmed this fact conclusively. In that period the total negative deviation of 'Sirius time' from the total mean sidereal time accumulated to 4.1 seconds. This means about negative 0.68 s per year (!). Again, according to 'precession' a negative time difference of 6 × 3.34 s or about 20 seconds should have occurred, but did NOT occur with respect to Sirius!

(http://www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/srg/images/Sirius%20Transit%20Data%20-%201988%20to%202007%20-%20Comparison%20to%20Precession_med.jpg)

(http://www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/srg/images/Sirius%20Transit%20Data%20-%201988%20to%201989.jpg)
(http://www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/srg/images/Sirius%20Transit%20Data%20-%201989%20to%201990.jpg)
(http://www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/srg/images/Sirius%20Transit%20Data%20-%201990%20to%201991.jpg)
(http://www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/srg/images/Sirius%20Transit%20Data%20-%201991%20to%201992.jpg)
(http://www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/srg/images/Sirius%20Transit%20Data%20-%201992%20to%201993.jpg)
(http://www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/srg/images/Sirius%20Transit%20Data%20-%201993%20to%201994.jpg)

(http://www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/srg/images/Sirius%20Transit%20Data%20-%201994%20to%201998.jpg)
(http://www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/srg/images/Sirius%20Transit%20Data%20-%201998%20to%202007.jpg)

(Each of the 8 graphs can be clicked, using the webpage to bring up the pdf data file with the readings that it represents: see http://www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/srg/SiriusResearch.shtml )

Between 1972 and 2016 only 27 leap seconds have been added at a rate of 0.64 seconds per year: the huge discrepancy between the precession rate of 3.34 s and the data gathered is most obvious, leap seconds do not make any difference at all, as they have to be added one second per year. Even if we reduce the treshold from 3.34 s to 2.6 s, it won't make a difference: there will still be a discrepancy between the data gathered in this extraordinary experiment and the theoretical values.

In fact, let's add the yearly values for the data of the experiment and compare them with the 52 seconds theoretical value (2.6 s x 20 years).

Total = 20.2 seconds

A discrepancy/difference of 31.8 seconds.


For the period 1999-2004 (no leap seconds), the data never exceeded 0.5 seconds.

That is, if we compare the theoretical value (2.6 x 6 = 15.6 seconds) with what actually recorded in real time (3.5 seconds) we can see that there is difference of 12.1 seconds, totally unaccounted for.


https://web.archive.org/web/20100305042618/http://www.siriusresearchgroup.com/diagrams/SiriusTransitObservations.shtml

http://www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/srg/SiriusResearch.shtml


These findings are in total agreement with the following facts: the Allais effect (as it applies to precessional motion) shows that the orbit of the pendulum defies Newtonian mechanics; the Sagnac effect proves that the Earth does not orbit the Sun, and thus is not undergoing any kind of an axial precessional movement.

The Allais Effect VI (axial precession is not related to Newtonian mechanics)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1642033#msg1642033

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

The detailed behavior of both pendulums over the eclipse period shown in Fig. 8 was remarkable. 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.


Analysis. This long Foucault-type pendulum behaved in a very stable manner. However well after the end of the locally visible eclipse, at around 11:33 (to the recording resolution, i.e. between the readings at 11:29 and 11:36), some influence clearly acted for a short period to increase the precession rate. This influence was no longer apparent during the next inter-reading interval (from 11:36 to 11:43), and then reversed itself to some extent during the next interval (from 11:43 to 11:50).


The Allais Effect VII (stationary earth/Foucault's pendulum anomalies)

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1642668#msg1642668

The physical reality is this. The Allais effect noticed can be due to either a momentary fluctuation in the earths rotation, or in the aethers rotation over that area of space where the alignment occurs.  The former for obvious reasons (the energy factor) is illogical.

"Nobel prize winner Maurice Allais had to go and throw another monkey wrench in the spokes of the heliocentric bicycle. Allais performed a marathon 30 day Foucault Pendulum experiment in 1954. During the experiment an eclipse occurred. Surprisingly, the pendulum changed angles by a significant 13.5 degrees! This suggests something in space was affecting the pendulum, not the motion of the earth."

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1917978#msg1917978 (missing orbital Sagnac effect)


Therefore, the entire concept of axial precession is wrong.

The acceleration of the rate of axial precession also cannot be explained by modern astronomy.


http://www.saturndaily.com/reports/Saturns_bulging_core_implies_moons_younger_than_thought_999.html

“The moons are migrating away much faster than expected.”

The team also found that Saturn moon Rhea is moving away 10 times faster than the other moons.

Not even Saturn can come to the rescue.


One cannot bring the influence of the planets into the acceleration of the rate of precession, since the distances have not changed, and the mass of Jupiter, as an example, has decreased (and not increased) over time.

http://www.sciencefocus.com/article/space/jupiter%E2%80%99s-gravity-pulls-so-much-matter-planet-growing

The mass of Jupiter is DECREASING.

Heliocentrists have to explain the acceleration of the rate of precession, and also have to account for these facts:

1. Solar mass is decreasing

2. Lunar distance from Earth is actually receding

3. Jupiter's mass is decreasing

4. Saturn's moons are receding at an increasing rate

Now, let us go back to the precise calculations.

Simon Newcomb included a “constant” in his precession formula to get it to match the increasing rate of precession that was observed leading up to his era.

The “constant” amount was .000222 arc seconds per year.

In 1900 the precession rate was 50.2564 (USNO).

In 2000 the precession rate was 50.290966 (AA).

This shows us the precession rate has increased over the past 100 years by .0346 for an average of .000346” per/year. Comparing this to Newcomb’s 0.000222” figure,  we can see the actual rate of change has not simply increased at a “constant” rate – it has increased at an “exponential” rate.


The mass of the Sun/Moon/planets has not increased (we all know that the mass of the Sun is actually constantly decreasing).

The orbital distances are the same (and the Moon is constantly receding from the Earth).

Precession has nothing to do with the law of attractive gravitation.


Now, not only do the RE have to offset these slight diminishments in gravitational forces, but also to come up with larger effects in the opposite direction.


The Earth is stationary and fixed. Therefore, the precession is caused by the motion of the geocentric solar system through space, above the first dome. Only a moving frame can make sense out of all the “precession” observables. 

"Yes, it is amazing that astronomers today still use a static solar system model to try and explain the apparent retrograde motion of the stars moving around the earth at about 30 degrees per 2000 years. The funny thing is NASA VLBI acknowledges that solar system motion must be in the “total measurable change in earth orientation to the fixed stars” and they call it “geometric effect”. But they do not bother to measure it because they believe it is too small to matter. So they hand the total number of 50.290966” p/y (AA 2000) over to the dynamists to model without telling them they should account for any solar system motion. Consequently the dynamists feel obliged to come up with local causes that could add up to this amount. But all their efforts have proved to be absolutely useless in predicting the changing rate of precession."


The Sirius-Sun binary system:

https://magneticnature.wordpress.com/2013/08/05/how-our-sun-orbits-sirius/

"The observable in terms of the fixed stars is exactly what we see now because the only thing we have done is replace an earth that wobbles 50” p/y with a solar system that curves through space 50” p/y. But it does require us to interpret things differently, and we would expect to find one star that moves with the sun in spite of precession – and if it is visible - this should be quite obvious throughout recorded history.

Sometime ago I received an email back from NASA VLBI (Very Long Baseline Interferometry) Group that confirmed the principle of “geometric” precession and confirmed the principle of “translation”, which is important because it describes how the motion of the solar system moving through space translates into a change in orientation as seen from earth, which lunisolar theory does not consider or acknowledge (in lunisolar theory there is no component for the moving frame of the solar system and all changes in earth orientation must be locally derive).

Of course I was not asking VLBI about the effect of the solar system curving around a nearby star (as I did not want to set off alarm that occurs when one mentions something against the mainstream) so I simply asked: “How do you account for the SS’s very slow motion around the galactic center in the precession observable?” After all, they acknowledge the SS moves around the galactic center and they measure to points outside the galaxy. In this galactic case the effect would obviously be very small (360 degrees / 240 million years = .005” p/y of observable) but I just wanted to see if they would acknowledge the “principle” of how solar system motion as a component within the precession observable. Here is the reply – then let’s analyze it."

“The answer to your question is that we do not account for the geometric effect of galactic rotation. It is a very small effect. A galactic rotation period of 240 million years -> a rotation rate of ~26 nrad/yr. If the radio sources we observed were at distances approximately equal to the distance to the galactic center (~3x10^4 light years), then this rotation rate would translate to an error of about 15-20 cm/yr in our estimates of intercontinental baselines. But the distances to the extragalactic radio sources are ~10^9 light years so the effect is much smaller ~ 0.01 mm/yr. Our current precision is at the 0.1-0.5 mm/yr level so we are not sensitive to this effect.”

"First, notice that he does not say there is no such effect. He confirms there is an effect but says that it is so small (based on the assumption the only motion of the solar system is around the galactic center) that they do not account for it.

Second, we have the “the geometric effect”. Understand that this effect produces an apparent change in orientation from our measuring platform (earth) that is completely independent of any lunisolar forces (whether or not they are real) and yet this effect is in the precession observable, but again on a galactic scale it is so small the experts feel no need to account for it.

Now replace the periodicity of the Solar System orbit around the galaxy (240 million years) with the periodicity in the binary model, 24,000 years. Coincidentally, the acknowledged galactic motion happens to be 10,000 times the average binary periodicity. This makes the calculation quite simple. All we have to do is multiply .005” (the product of 360 degrees divided by 240 million years, the apparent observable “geometric effect” [a.k.a. precession] of a rotating galaxy) by 10,000, the ratio of galactic to binary periodicity. This results in a “geometric effect” (precession) of 50 arc seconds per year (~ 10%), which is very close to the amount we observe.

Therefore, if the solar system is moving as we suspect, the geometric effect comprises most of the 50” p/y in observable, leaving very little to local effects (but still enough to translate). This is consistent with all our studies that show the earth does not wobble backwards along its orbit path around the sun as required by lunisolar theory."

"The extremely precise data, to the very second, gathered over a period six year, proves in a most effective manner that Sirius does not undergo any kind of a precessional motion for that period of time.

In that period the total negative deviation of 'Sirius time' from the total mean sidereal time accumulated to 4.1 seconds. This means about negative 0.68 s per year (!). Again, according to 'precession' a negative time difference of 6 × 3.34 s or about 20 seconds should have occurred, but did NOT occur with respect to Sirius!"



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 08, 2017, 10:24:06 AM
SOLAR DISK: THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF A SPHERICALLY SHAPED SUN

"The atmospheric pressure of the sun, instead of being 27.47 times greater than the atmospheric pressure of the earth (as expected because of the gravitational pull of the large solar mass), is much smaller: the pressure there varies according to the layers of the atmosphere from one-tenth to one-thousandth of the barometric pressure on the earth; at the base of the reversing layer the pressure is 0.005 of the atmospheric pressure at sea level on the earth; in the sunspots, the pressure drops to one ten-thousandth of the pressure on the earth.

The pressure of light is sometimes referred to as to explain the low atmospheric pressure on the sun. At the surface of the sun, the pressure of light must be 2.75 milligrams per square centimeter; a cubic centimeter of one gram weight at the surface of the earth would weigh 27.47 grams at the surface of the sun."

(https://image.ibb.co/fauUJy/photosph.jpg)

Thus the attraction by the solar mass is 10,000 times greater than the repulsion of the solar light. Recourse is taken to the supposition that if the pull and the pressure are calculated for very small masses, the pressure exceeds the pull, one acting in proportion to the surface, the other in proportion to the volume. But if this is so, why is the lowest pressure of the solar atmosphere observed over the sunspots where the light pressure is least?

Because of its swift rotation, the gaseous sun should have the latitudinal axis greater than the longitudinal, but it does not have it. The sun is one million times larger than the earth, and its day is but twenty-six times longer than the terrestrial day; the swiftness of its rotation at its equator is over 125 km. per minute; at the poles, the velocity approaches zero. Yet the solar disk is not oval but round: the majority of observers even find a small excess in the longitudinal axis of the sun. The planets act in the same manner as the rotation of the sun, imposing a latitudinal pull on the luminary.

Gravitation that acts in all directions equally leaves unexplained the spherical shape of the sun. As we saw in the preceding section, the gases of the solar atmosphere are not under a strong pressure, but under a very weak one. Therefore, the computation, according to which the ellipsoidity of the sun, that is lacking, should be slight, is not correct either. Since the gases are under a very low gravitational pressure, the centrifugal force of rotation must have formed quite a flat sun.

If planets and satellites were once molten masses, as cosmological theories assume, they would not have been able to obtain a spherical form, especially those which do not rotate, as Mercury or the moon (with respect to its primary)."


The Sun exhibits a variety of phenomena that defy contemporary theoretical understanding.

Eugene N. Parker


It is not coincidence that the photosphere has the appearance, the temperature and spectrum of an electric arc; it has arc characteristics because it an electric arc, or a large number of arcs in parallel.

British physicist C. E. R. Bruce


It is likely that the problem of the dynamics of the explosions affecting the prominences will only be solved when the electrical conditions obtaining in the chromosphere and inner corona are better understood.

Italian solar astronomer Giorgio Abetti


Observations give a wealth of detail about the photosphere, chromosphere and the corona. Yet we have difficulty in matching the observations with a theory.

Solar Interior & Atmosphere, J.-C. Pecker


The modern astrophysical concept that ascribes the sun’s energy to thermonuclear reactions deep in the solar interior is contradicted by nearly every observable aspect of the sun.

Ralph E. Juergens


(https://image.ibb.co/hkvQrJ/chromo.jpg)

PRESSURE: 10-13 BAR = 0.0000000000001 BAR

The entire chromosphere will then be subjected to the full centrifugal force of rotation, as will the photosphere itself of course.

Completely unexplained by modern science.

Since the gases are under a very low gravitational pressure, the centrifugal force of rotation must have formed quite a flat sun.

NO further recourse can be made for gravity.

Gravity has already balanced out as much as was possible of the gaseous pressure, and still we are left with A VERY LOW PRESSURE.

Solar gravity has balanced out the thermal pressure.

At this point in time the sun will turn into A HUGE GAS CENTRIFUGE WITH NO OUTER CASING, running at some 1,900 m/s.

That is, the solar gases in the photosphere and cromosphere are just standing there, with no explanation by modern science whatsoever.

As if this wasn't enough, we have the huge centrifugal force factor that is exerted each and every second on the photosphere and the cromosphere.

The centrifugal force would cause the sun to collapse into a disk in no time at all.


"However, the gravity is opposed by the internal pressure of the stellar gas which normally results from heat produced by nuclear reactions. This balance between the forces of gravity and the pressure forces is called hydrostatic equilibrium, and the balance must be exact or the star will quickly respond by expanding or contracting in size. So powerful are the separate forces of gravity and pressure that should such an imbalance occur in the sun, it would be resolved within half an hour."


Then, the heliocentrists have to deal with the Nelson effect:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1645824#msg1645824 (the Nelson effect of all the other planets, pulling constantly on the sun's atmosphere, acting permanently, are added to the centrifugal force)

Recourse can be made to the Clayton model equation or even the Lane-Emden equation in order to show that the value for g (computed using the 10-13 bar value in the chromosphere) is much smaller than the centrifugal acceleration.

The Clayton model provides us with the g value: g = 0,0000507 m/s^2 which is much lower than the centrifugal acceleration figure:

P(r) = 2πgr2a2ρ2ce-x2/3M

where a = (31/2M/21/24πρc)1/3

a = 106,165,932.3

x = r/a

M = 1.989 x 1030 kg
central density = 1.62 x 105 kg/m3

G = gr2/m(r)

m(r) = M(r/R)3(4 - 3r/R); if r = R, then M = m(r)

Using P(700,000,000) = 1.0197 x 10-9 kg/m2 value, we get:


g = 0,0000507 m/s2


RATIO


ac/g = 0.0063/0.0000507 = 124.26


Accuracy of the Clayton model:

(https://image.ibb.co/nsZDdy/chro1.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/eHYH5d/chro2.jpg)



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 08, 2017, 01:07:14 PM
EARTH - SUN DISTANCE: 15-20 KILOMETERS

The Sun's diameter is some 600 meters:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1786946#msg1786946

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1787025#msg1787025

The Sun, Moon, Black Sun, Shadow Moon and Jupiter have the same diameter.

All planets/stars have the shape of a disk.

Venus and Typhon-Nibiru (Mercury) orbit the Sun: together they orbit above the flat surface of the Earth.


The distance from Earth to the Sun is some 15-20 km (this figure might be even lower).

(https://preview.ibb.co/b9RvTy/bunda.jpg)

(http://www.oneism.org/images/INCA_TREE_OF_LIFE.jpg)

Here is the global Piri Reis map with latitudes:

https://web.archive.org/web/20170313164108/http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/Graphics-Other/PSCI/pirireis2.gif

(https://i.ibb.co/KmbNMf8/piri.jpg)

Rotate the tropics of Cancer and Capricorn by 23.5 degrees, and we get the upper and lower bounds for the orbit of the Sun on a flat earth.

It rises from beyond Japan and illuminates at least half of the entire surface (not a spotlight sun at all), and sets somewhere beyond Antarctica (just like in the Black Sun photographs taken by F. Bruenjes).

Then, it rises again to complete its orbit over the other half of the semicircle (approximately).

This is the correct description for the Sun's orbit on a Flat Earth, the one that should be included in the official FAQ.

The most important part of the Sun's orbit is its precession (the westward shift of 1.5 km/year).

(http://www.ternaround.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/TdF-Cabo-San-Pablo-sunrise-panorama1-300x168.jpg)

Sunset in Japan:

(http://www.japanpsychiatrist.com/Images/Nara.gif)

Sunrise in California:

(http://www.summitpost.org/images/original/692506.JPG)



(Norway, even though the Sun sets in Antarctica, there is still plenty of light)

The depth to which the Sun reaches the towards the shores beyond Antarctica differs according to season, of course.

The Aurora Borealis and the Aurora Australis are caused by the orbiting AURORA moon/planet (one for each pole), documented in the various legends around the world. It only orbits inside this territory (perhaps with a diameter of some 1,000 km): it is the "inner sun" of the hollow earth theory believers.

It also provides light in the northern and southern pole regions during some periods of the year.

Aurora, sister of the Sun and of the Moon:

http://www.theoi.com/Titan/Eos.html

The Sun does rise and set:

https://web.archive.org/web/20171105010205/https://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/files/2013/02/iod-earth-112211-600x325.jpeg

https://web.archive.org/web/20171116223421/http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/files/2013/02/JuneSolsticeSunset.jpeg

https://web.archive.org/web/20171116224700/http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/files/2013/02/zinkova-590x393.jpg

Now, that setting sun will appear as a rising sun in Patagonia (as an example):

(http://www.ternaround.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/TdF-Cabo-San-Pablo-sunrise-panorama1-300x168.jpg)

How is it possible?

Nikola Tesla explains:

Tesla had a bold fantasy whereby he would use the principle of rarefied gas luminescence to light up the sky at night. High frequency electric energy would be transmitted, perhaps by an ionizing beam of ultraviolet radiation, into the upper atmosphere, where gases are at relatively low pressure, so that this layer would behave like a luminous tube. Sky lighting, he said, would reduce the need for street lighting, and facilitate the movement of ocean going vessels.

Not only is the Sun setting, but its disk will slowly turn to face the other semicircle and light it up (as seen in Patagonia).

Rising sun in Argentina:

(http://imgc.allpostersimages.com/images/P-473-488-90/61/6122/WMUF100Z/posters/stocktrek-images-a-layer-of-clouds-is-lit-by-the-rising-sun-over-rio-de-la-plata-buenos-aires-argentina.jpg)

(http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/1110/strangesunrise_argerich_900.jpg)

The setting sun becomes a rising sun in a matter of a fraction of a second.

Here is a sunrise seen from St. Helena island:

(http://icons.wunderground.com/data/wximagenew/s/ScubaSchwartz/7-800.jpg)

(https://imagesus-ssl.homeaway.com/mda01/73d5fedb-b108-484f-bb31-7216daddd010.1.6)

At the same time, the sunrise seen from Maine (Mt. Desert island):

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-FJ9sXslw7f0/UECq7WQTuZI/AAAAAAAADyQ/fikHAO6fvPI/s1600/airplane1.jpg)

(http://0.asset.soup.io/asset/2893/0992_20f1_960.jpeg)

Everest sunset:

(http://www.grantdixonphotography.com.au/lib_images/EverestSunset2.jpg)

Full moon from Everest:

(http://www.bergadventures.com/v3_cyber/2013/2013-03-22-everest-climb/assets/32-01-full-moon-at-ebc.jpg)

(http://b.vimeocdn.com/ts/404/391/40439163_640.jpg)

(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTVJNgGk6z7KTdjzRCKNUrdjgSNP_IGLtDqJjOCmAwe1thl9kY7[/img

[img]http://www.everestuncensored.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/2.-Far-over-the-misty-mountains-....jpg)


With reference to the previous message, both the faint young sun paradox and the dissipation of matter from the comets' tails show that the age of the Sun is measured in some thousands of years: not nearly enough time to have the Sun attain a spherical shape anyway.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1707290#msg1707290

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1640735#msg1640735

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 10, 2017, 01:28:25 AM
QUASARS REDSHIFT IX: GALAXY 3C343.1

Another example of a quasar which can be seen in front of a galaxy, having very different redshifts.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1937556#msg1937556 (quasar redshift: galaxy NGC7319)


https://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0401007.pdf

The double radio source 3C343.1: A galaxy-QSO pair with very different redshifts

The z = 0 .344 galaxy is connected to the z = 0 .750 QSO by a radio bridge. The numerical relation between the two redshifts is that predicted from previous associations. This pair is an extreme example of many similar physical associations of QSOs and galaxies with very different redshifts.


“The significance of this discovery is huge. We have direct, irrefutable, empirical evidence that the Hubble law stands on feet of clay, that the observational justification of an expanding Universe is fatally flawed.”

Hilton Ratcliffe

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 11, 2017, 01:00:27 AM
QUASARS REDSHIFT X

Four more examples of galaxies and quasars with very different redshifts being physically associated together.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0206411.pdf

NGC 3628: Ejection Activity Associated with Quasars


http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1086/375411/pdf

QSOs ASSOCIATED WITH M82


https://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0203466.pdf

Two emission line objects with z > 0.2 in the optical filament apparently connecting the Seyfert galaxy NGC 7603 to its companion

We present new spectroscopic observations of an old case of anomalous redshift—NGC 7603 and its companion. The redshifts of the two galaxies which are apparently connected by a luminous filament are z = 0.029 and z = 0.057 respectively. We show that in the luminous filament there are two compact emission line objects with z = 0.243 and z = 0.391. They lie exactly on the line traced by the filament connecting the galaxies. As far as we are aware, this is the most impressive case of a system of anomalous redshifts discovered so far.


https://arxiv.org/pdf/0802.1587.pdf

A Cluster of High Redshift Quasars with Apparent Diameter 2.3 Degrees


Dr. Halton Arp

Graduated from Harvard University
PhD, Caltech

"Halton C. Arp - professional astronomer who, earlier in his career, was Edwin Hubble's assistant.  He has earned the Helen B.Warner prize, the Newcomb Cleveland award and the Alexander von Humboldt Senior Scientist Award.  For years he worked at the Mt. Palomar and Mt. Wilson observatories.  While there, he developed his well known catalog of "Peculiar Galaxies" that are misshapen or irregular in appearance.

Known for his classic work in “Arp’s Atlas of Peculiar Galaxies”. When he began to announce findings nearly 30 years ago that contradicted orthodox cosmology he was refused telescope time and publication in the standard journals. Then, he published two books, the first in 1987 titled “Quasars, Redshifts and Controversies”, and more recently “Seeing Red”.

In 1983 he joined the staff of the Max Planck Institute for Astrophysics in Germany.

“Redshift” is the term used to describe the shift in frequency of spectral lines toward the red end of the spectrum. It’s known to occur when an object is speeding away from us. Edwin Hubble discovered that the luminosity of a galaxy is related to its redshift: the fainter the galaxy, the higher the redshift. He suggested one interpretation of this data is that the greater the redshift (and therefore, the velocity), the farther away the galaxy. Thus, the expanding universe was born. But he was careful not to assume that this was the only possible interpretation of the redshift data. Others since have thrown scientific caution to the winds and used Hubble’s hypothesis as a rubbery yardstick with which to measure the size and age of the universe. Arp avoided this unscientific approach and made discoveries that are unequalled in the history of astronomy.

Many peculiar galaxies turn out to be what are known as active galaxies. They are often seen to have thin jets of matter firing from their cores, and bridges of matter or radio lobes connecting them with nearby objects. Arp noticed that quasars are clustered in the sky with active galaxies far too often to be a coincidence. Quasars are faint starlike objects whose spectra are highly redshifted. The Big Bang view is that their redshifts are due to the expansion of the universe and the doppler effect as the quasars race away from us at a good fraction of light speed. A high redshift equates in that model to great distance so they should have no association with much closer galaxies. Yet Arp showed that some quasars are connected by bridges or jets of matter to active galaxies. Since the advent of orbiting x-ray telescopes these bridges are becoming abundantly clear.

But now we come to the results of Arp’s work that will shake the foundations of modern physics. He found that quasars lined up on either side of active galaxies as if they are spat out at regular intervals from the galactic cores, above and below the plane of the galaxy.

Even more shocking was Arp’s discovery that quasar redshifts are quantised!

Arp discovered, by taking photographs through the big telescopes, that many pairs of quasars (quasi-stellar objects) which have extremely high redshift z values (and are therefore thought to be receding from us very rapidly - and thus must be located at a great distance from us) are physically associated with galaxies that have low redshift and are known to be relatively close by.   Arp has photographs of many pairs of high redshift quasars that are symmetrically located on either side of what he suggests are their parent, low redshift galaxies.  These pairings occur much more often than the probabilities of random placement would allow."

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 14, 2017, 02:10:23 AM
QUANTUM RIEMANN'S ZETA FUNCTION XIV

http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/zeta_tables/zeros1

     14.134725142
     21.022039639
     25.010857580
     30.424876126
     32.935061588
     37.586178159
     40.918719012
     43.327073281
     48.005150881
     49.773832478
     52.970321478
     56.446247697
     59.347044003
     60.831778525
     65.112544048
     67.079810529
     69.546401711
     72.067157674
     75.704690699
     77.144840069...


1.4134725 x 45 = 63.663 = 100sc

1sc = 0.63663 m

286.1 = 450sc

Total height of missing apex = 286.1si (sacred inches, 1si = 0.025424 m -- 1sc = 25si)

Total height of Gizeh pyramid (subterranean chamber to apex) = 286.1sc


1.4134725 = 100sc2/28.61 = 2.2222222sc

45 = 5x9 = 3x15

2.222222222 x 5 = 11.11111111111

11.1111111sc = 7.06666666666 = sc/(2 - 3sc)


14.134725 + 7.06666666 =  21.2014

21.2014 - 21.022 = 0.18

18sc = 4 x 2.861


286.1si =~ 7.2738

14.134725/7.2738 = 1.9432381 = 5.555555/2.861 = 1/(0.18 x 2.861) = 1/(0.18 x 4.5sc) = 1/0.81sc = 1.23456790.../sc


2.22222222 x 15 = 33.3333333

33.3333333 - 32.935 = 0.4

37.586 - 33.333333 = 3 x 1.4134725


141.34725 - 136.1 = 5.247 = 3.3333/sc = 4.5/(3 x 2.861)


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1857963#msg1857963

Applying the five elements proportions to the sacred cubit distance:

63.636363
16.1773
9.5445
6.36363
3.1815


21.022 - (14.134725 + 3.1815) = 3.703725

3.703725/1.4134725 = 10/6sc


14.134725 + 6.3636 = 20.4983

21.022 - 20.4983 = 0.5247 = 0.33333/sc


14.134725 + 9.5445 = 23.679225

25.0108 - 23.679225 = 1.333333

23.679225 - 21.022 = 2.5424 + 0.114444

0.11444 = 4 x 0.2861


100sc = 63.6636...

14.134725 + 63.6636 = 77.798325

77.798325 - 77.1448 = 1/(2.861 x 0.5344)


63.6636 x 1sc = 40.53054

40.9187 - 40.53054 = 1/10sc3



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 14, 2017, 04:17:44 AM
TRIAD CLAW HAND SIGN IN PAINTINGS OVER A PERIOD OF FOUR CENTURIES

Virtually all conspiracy websites have missed the most crucial aspect: all of these paintings were created in a very short interval of time, perhaps in less than a decade, much later in history, with the M sign having been incorporated within each and every hand gesture.

Only the new radical chronology of history can explain these facts: there is no way that people living centuries apart would make the very same hand sign (notwithstanding the fact that one would have to consciously force the fingers into that position, and keep them that way for any length of time required by the artist).

https://web.archive.org/web/20140419215337/http://www.pseudoreality.org/westside.html

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 16, 2017, 12:12:07 AM
QUASARS REDSHIFT XI: THE KARLSSON EFFECT III

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0803.2591.pdf

The 2dF Redshift Survey II: UGC 8584 - Redshift Periodicity and Rings


http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0004-637X/754/2/134/pdf

THE 2dF REDSHIFT SURVEY. I. PHYSICAL ASSOCIATION AND PERIODICITY IN QUASAR FAMILIES


https://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0501090.pdf

Periodicities of Quasar Redshifts in Large Area Surveys

We test the periodicity of quasar redshifts in the 2dF and SDSS surveys. In the overall surveys redshift peaks are already apparent in the brighter quasars. But by analyzing sample areas in detail it is shown that the redshifts fit very exactly the long standing Karlssson formula and confirm the existence of preferred values in the distribution of quasar redshifts.

We introduce a powerful new test for groups of quasars of differing redshifts which not only demonstrates the periodicity of the redshifts, but also their physical association with a parent galaxy.


Further evidence that the universe is not expanding at all, and that redshifts cannot be associated with estimating its age (they are not distance related).

Quasars redshifts have quantified values.

Their redshifts occur at preferred values.

Hubble's law is shown to be totally erroneous: there is no such thing as the big bang theory.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1937730#msg1937730 (part I)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1937747#msg1937747 (part II)


"If there is evidence that, in the observable physical universe, where bodies are moving with respect to one another through space, show light coming from these bodies that also exhibit clear quantum levels, then the basis upon which Bohr and the entire quantum establishment bases their case is false."

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 18, 2017, 12:05:47 AM
TROUTON-NOBLE EXPERIMENT

"The Trouton-Noble experiment is generally regarded as the electrostatic equivalent of the Michelson-Morley optical experiment: it looks for an effect predicted to be caused by the absolute motion of the Earth through the ether. If a parallel plate capacitor is suspended by means of a fine torsion fibber and charged, an electromagnetic torque is expected due to magnetic forces since the capacitor is moving through the ether."

Trouton and Noble obtained a null result: no motion relative to the ether could be detected.

This null result was repeated in experiments by Chase in 1927 and Hayden in 1994.

Then, of course, this null result was claimed to be consistent with STR.

However, the Trouton-Noble experiment previously failed because the voltages used also in all of the subsequent similar experiments were too small to show any stimulated rotation effects.

When the proper high voltage is used, the stimulated rotation of a parallel plate capacitor will be observed:

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/troutnbl.htm

The successfull replication of the Trouton-Noble experiment conducted by Jean-Louis Naudin and Patrick Cornille has been presented during the "Physical Interpretations of Relativity Theory - VI conference" at the Imperial college in London (UK) on September 12th, 1998.


The Trouton-Noble experiment is nothing less than an application of the  Biefeld-Brown effect.

For a high enough voltage, the rotation of the capacitor will take place, revealing not only the defiance of Newtonian mechanics, but also of the fact that the capacitor detects the ROTATION of the field of ether above the flat surface of the Earth.

What Dr. Paul Biefeld and T. Townsend Brown did is to achieve positive results for the Trouton-Noble experiment, however the connection between the two experiments was not established at that time.


BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1852363#msg1852363


NIPHER EXPERIMENT:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1852840#msg1852840


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1913909#msg1913909 (Biefeld-Brown effect, new video)


The fact that the Trouton-Noble effect can actually be detected successfully has huge implications in the speed of gravity debate.

Relativists make claim of the null result from the Trouton-Noble experiment to point out that relativistic forces (including both electromagnetism and gravity) involve velocity-dependent terms that almost exactly cancel the aberration effect arising from the finite speed of propagation (the absence of torque in such situations demonstrated by the null result from the Trouton-Noble experiment).


"For example, in reference to the Trouton-Noble experiment, which attempted to show
that electrically charged plates would assume a position of least resistance caused by the Earth’s movement, von Laue writes:

Thus it appeared reasonable that an electrically charged
condenser…would assume a particular orientation relative to
the velocity of the Earth, the one in which the angular
momentum vanishes. This conclusion is inescapable in
Newtonian mechanics. However, in 1903 Fr. T. Noble and H.
R. Trouton searched for this effect in vain, and even the more
accurate repetition of their experiment by R. Tomaschek (1925-
26) showed no trace of the effect. Their result is just as
convincing a proof of the principle of relativity as Michelson’s
interference experiment. Both of these experiments proved the
necessity for a new mechanics; Michelson’s experiment
because it showed the contraction of moving bodies in the
direction of motion, and the experiment of Trouton and Noble
because it showed that an angular momentum does not
necessarily lead to a rotation of the body involved….


One might think that if the plates showed “no trace of the effect” that a reasonable conclusion would be that there was no angular momentum from a moving Earth against which they had to orient themselves. But having accepted Copernicanism as gospel, von Laue is led to the incredible conclusion that “angular momentum does not necessarily lead to a rotation of the body involved.” Rather than question Copernicanism, von Laue would rather modify one of the most sacrosanct principles of physics, and one that had never heretofore been disproved by anyone – the law of angular momentum. That an intelligent man would not at least save himself and the science of physics a degree of self-respect by perhaps considering that a possible reason TroutonNoble’s results were negative was that the Earth was motionless, shows quite clearly how presuppositions hold ultimate sway over reasonable conclusions."

(from Galileo Was Wrong, vol. I)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 18, 2017, 05:59:36 AM
FASTER THAN LIGHT SPEED OF GRAVITY

Einstein’s postulate that nothing can go faster than the speed of
light causes severe problems for current cosmology’s concept of gravity,
for gravity must then travel at the same speed, or a speed less than that of
light. But a gravitational force that is limited to the speed of light will
cause enormous problems for the vast distances it must travel in the
universe. For example, considering that the distance between the sun and
Earth is 143 million kilometers, light from the sun takes 8.5 minutes to
reach Earth. We on Earth don’t notice this travel time because light is
continually being discharged from the sun, but if the sun were to stop
shinning, we wouldn’t notice the absence of light until 8.5 minutes later
(at least according to presently accepted theory about light). Now,
imagine gravity working the same way. Since, as Newton’s laws require,
the sun, in the heliocentric model, is continually tugging at the Earth so
that the Earth does not go flying off into space, then the force of gravity
must be absolutely constant. Current science believes that the force of
gravity travels from the sun to the Earth in 8.5 minutes or more. But this
slow speed of gravity is not said to be a problem because, as is the case
for light from the sun, the gravity sent from the sun to the Earth has been
undisturbed for thousands of years. Its slow speed will not cause any
problems because it already has an established connection between the
sun and the Earth.

Although this may solve one problem, it creates another. By the
same theoretical principle, if the sun were suddenly to stop issuing the
force of gravity, the Earth would immediately depart from its orbit, the
same as when we cut the string from a ball being twirled around in a
circle. Once the string is cut, the ball will depart its orbit. Conversely,
light doesn’t need an anchor in order to propagate. But since gravity is a
radial force in Newtonian physics, it must operate under different laws.
If not, then Newton’s laws cannot be applied to the orbits of planets. The
question remaining is: what principle of physics would account for the
immediate reaction of the Earth if the gravitational “string” between
them were suddenly cut?


(from Galileo Was Wrong)


The effect of aberration on orbits is not seen

As viewed from the Earth’s frame, light from the Sun has aberration.  Light requires about 8.3 minutes to arrive from the Sun, during which time the Sun seems to move through an angle of 20 arc seconds.  The arriving sunlight shows us where the Sun was 8.3 minutes ago.  The true, instantaneous position of the Sun is about 20 arcs seconds east of its visible position, and we will see the Sun in its true present position about 8.3 minutes into the future.  In the same way, star positions are displaced from their average position by up to 20 arcs seconds, depending on the relative direction of the Earth’s motion around the Sun.  This well-known phenomenon is classical aberration, and was discovered by the astronomer Bradley in 1728.

Orbit computations must use true, instantaneous positions of all masses when computing accelerations due to gravity for the reason given by Eddington.  When orbits are complete, the visible position of any mass can be computed by allowing for the delay of light traveling from that mass to Earth.  This difference between true and apparent positions of bodies is not merely an optical illusion, but is a physical difference due to transit delay that can alter an observer’s momentum.  For example, small bodies such as dust particles in circular orbit around the Sun experience a mostly radial force due to the radiation pressure of sunlight.  But because of the finite speed of light, a portion of that radial force acts in a transverse direction, like a drag, slowing the orbital speed of the dust particles and causing them to eventually spiral into the Sun.  This phenomenon is known as the Poynting-Robertson effect.

If gravity were a simple force that propagated outward from the Sun at the speed of light, as radiation pressure does, its mostly radial effect would also have a small transverse component because of the motion of the target.  Analogous to the Poynting-Robertson effect, the magnitude of that tangential force acting on the Earth would be 0.0001 of the Sun’s radial force, which is the ratio of the Earth’s orbital speed (30 km/sec) to the speed of this hypothetical force of gravity moving at light-speed (300,000 km/sec).  It would act continuously, but would tend to speed the Earth up rather than slow it down because gravity is attractive and radiation pressure is repulsive.  Nonetheless, the net effect of such a force would be to double the Earth’s distance from the Sun in 1200 years.  There can be no doubt from astronomical observations that no such force is acting.  The computation using the instantaneous positions of Sun and Earth is the correct one.  The computation using retarded positions is in conflict with observations.  From the absence of such an effect, Laplace set a lower limit to the speed of propagation of classical gravity of about 108c, where c is the speed of light.

Dr. Thomas van Flandern,  Physical Letters A 250, 1998, 1-11

B.S. Mathematics, Xavier University

Yale University, scholarship sponsored by the U.S. Naval Observatory (USNO)

PhD Astronomy, Yale University

Chief of the Research Branch, U.S. Naval Observatory

Chief of the Celestial Mechanics Branch of the Nautical Almanac Office


"In the geocentric model the ether moves against a fixed-Earth, and the aberration angle of the star is a consequence of the ether’s pressure on the travel of light, which is
opposed to Fresnel’s model that ascribed aberration to the relative motion of the star. "

Relativists cannot make use of Gravitoelectromagnetism Theory, since it is based on the MODIFIED Heaviside-Lorentz equations, and NOT on the original J.C. Maxwell set of equations.

http://sergf.ru/Heavisid.htm (Heaviside attempts to prove that the speed of gravity is the same as that of light, and amazingly presents to the reader the MODIFIED version of the Maxwell equations, and not the original equations which are invariant under Galilean transformations thus permitting faster than light signals to be propagated)


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1918701#msg1918701 (velocity vectors are additive, which means that the speed of light can be exceeded)


Nor can the failed Lorentz theory of gravitation based on the MODIFIED set of Maxwell equations be brought into play: the calculations attributed to Laplace stand correct.

Nor can the failed concept of Lorentz transformations be used as any kind of argument against Laplace's calculations:

The colossal mistakes committed by Lorentz and Einstein in deriving the Lorentz transformation/factor:

http://relativityunraveled.net/chapter-4-the-michelson-morley-experiment/

http://relativityunraveled.net/chapter-5-the-lorentz-transformation/

http://relativityunraveled.net/chapter-1-introduction/

Dr. Hans Zweig, Stanford University: http://wiki.naturalphilosophy.org/wiki/hans-j-zweig/

http://www.gsjournal.net/old/weuro/agathan5.pdf



The Kopeikin-Fomalont experiment has been shown to be very flawed by Stuart Samuel, a participating scientist with the Theory Group of Lawrence Berkeley Lab’s Physics Division, in a paper published in Physical Review Letters.

A sharp analysis of S. Carlip's attempt to prove that the speed of gravity is equal to the speed of light:

"Now let us look at Steve Carlip's paper. His second sentence is this:

The "speed of gravity" must be deduced from astronomical observations, and the answer depends on what model of gravity one uses to describe those observations.

This is an unpropitious start. Why? Because it tells us Carlip is misdirecting from the get-go. He is telling us that physicists should and do fit observations to models, rather than models to observations. They do, but they shouldn't. As Karl Popper showed us years ago, science consists of fitting models to observations, not the reverse. Yes, there is some amount of hermeneutics involved, by which previous models may suggest future research; but the current method of jamming all new data into old models by main force and computers is not scientific.

For a start, notice his use of the word “deduced.” That is not only sloppy but false. If your answer depends on your model, it is clear you are inducing your answer, not deducing it. Something that is deduced is a necessary outcome. It couldn't be otherwise because it is logically contained in the data. That is what deduced means. So if various models are giving us vastly different answers, only one can be deduced. The others are induced. More rigorously, they are all induced, but only one is correct.

Carlip's third paragraph starts with this:

In general relativity, on the other hand, gravity propagates at the speed of light.

He has just assumed what he is expected to prove here. That is called begging the question. This is typical of the standard model people, who tend to argue in very heavy-handed ways, using all the old tricks. They don't feel they have to convince you of anything, because you are supposed to already be bowing to them. They are certain you are so stupid they can lead with obvious fallacies and fool you anyway. They don't think you will know what begging the question is, or what a red herring is, or what a strawman is, or what a gambler's fallacy is. Most of all, they think you won't be able to spot misdirection, as they slide off the subject and begin discussing things they think you don't understand, like higher math or esoterica.

After that, Carlip begins, yes, misdirecting. Rather than address the question at hand, he tells his reader that the force in GR is not exactly central. What does that have to do with it? He talks about the propagation delay being cancelled, then diverts us into E/M by paragraph 4. But that isn't enough. He then diverts into the second and then the third derivative (of the mass quadrupole moment!), assuming that any mention of a third derivative will scare most readers into silence and acquiescence. Finally, in paragraph 8, he mentions some data, the decay of the orbits of the binary pulsar PSR 1913+16. But once again he just tells us that this is “attributed to the loss of energy due to escaping gravitational radiation.” Since he gives us no data to back that up, he is beggin the question again. We would need to detect escaping gravitational radiation to confirm that, and we haven't detected it. Instead, we have detected photonic and other E/M radiation, which should have decided the question. But Carlip continues to assume what he is expected to prove. He simply calls this decay of orbit a “gravitational damping,” and then says,

The rate of this damping can be computed, and one finds that it depends sensitively on the speed of gravity. The fact that gravitational damping is measured at all is a strong indication that the propagation speed of gravity is not infinite.

But wait, it hasn't been measured at all! It has been “computed.” A computation is not a measurement! Carlip isn't presenting an argument here, he is massaging your brain. He is just calling the real data “gravitational damping,” and then claiming that is proof of something. He might as well say, “The fact that we gave it a name proves it exists in the form we named it.”  he deflects us into a short assurance that the decay is due to gravitational damping. And why should we believe that? Because a computer model matched the amount seen to one set of equations in GR. It wasn't even predicted, as he almost admits. Notice his language: the rate can be computed. Yes, but anything can be computed. IF GR had predicted a rate of decay before it was measured, and IF the measurement were made without using the assumptions of GR, THEN he might have something. As it is, he has nothing."



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 18, 2017, 07:38:21 AM
FASTER THAN LIGHT SPEED OF GRAVITY II: U.S. NAVAL OBSERVATORY DATA

The most amazing thing I was taught as a graduate student of celestial mechanics at Yale in the 1960s was that all gravitational interactions between bodies in all dynamical systems had to be taken as instantaneous.  This seemed unacceptable on two counts.  In the first place, it seemed to be a form of “action at a distance.”  Perhaps no one has so elegantly expressed the objection to such a concept better than Sir Isaac Newton:  “That one body may act upon another at a distance through a vacuum, without the mediation of any thing else, by and through which their action and force may be conveyed from one to the other, is to me so great an absurdity, that I believe no man who has in philosophical matters a competent faculty of thinking, can ever fall into it”.  But mediation requires propagation, and finite bodies should be incapable of propagate at infinite speeds since that would require infinite energy.  So instantaneous gravity seemed to have an element of magic to it.

The second objection was that we had all been taught that Einstein’s Special Relativity (SR), an experimentally well established theory, proved that nothing could propagate in forward time at a speed greater than that of light in a vacuum.  Indeed, as astronomers we were taught to calculate orbits using instantaneous forces; then extract the position of some body along its orbit at a time of interest, and calculate where that position would appear as seen from Earth by allowing for the finite propagation speed of light from there to here.  It seemed incongruous to allow for the finite speed of light from the body to the Earth, but to take the effect of Earth’s gravity on that same body as propagating from here to there instantaneously.  Yet that was the required procedure to get the correct answers.

Even today in discussions of gravity in USENET newsgroups on the Internet, the most frequently asked question and debated topic is “What is the speed of gravity?”  It is only heard less often in the classroom because many teachers and most textbooks head off the question by hastily assuring students that gravitational waves propagate at the speed of light, leaving the firm impression, whether intended or not, that the question of gravity’s propagation speed has already been answered.

Yet, anyone with a computer and orbit computation or numerical integration software can verify the consequences of introducing a delay into gravitational interactions.  The effect on computed orbits is usually disastrous because conservation of angular momentum is destroyed.  Expressed less technically by Sir Arthur Eddington, this means: “If the Sun attracts Jupiter towards its present position S, and Jupiter attracts the Sun towards its present position J, the two forces are in the same line and balance.  But if the Sun attracts Jupiter toward its previous position S', and Jupiter attracts the Sun towards its previous position J', when the force of attraction started out to cross the gulf, then the two forces give a couple.  This couple will tend to increase the angular momentum of the system, and, acting cumulatively, will soon cause an appreciable change of period, disagreeing with observations if the speed is at all comparable with that of light” Eddington, 1920, p.94).  See Figure 1.

(http://www.gravitywarpdrive.com/General_Relativity_Images/Gravity_Speed_Figure_1.gif)

Indeed, it is widely accepted, even if less widely known, that the speed of gravity in Newton’s Universal Law is unconditionally infinite (e.g., Misner, C.W., K.S. Thorne & J.A. Wheeler, Gravitation, W.H. Freeman & Co., San Francisco, CA (1973), p.177).  This is usually not mentioned in proximity to the statement that GR reduces to Newtonian gravity in the low-velocity, weak-field limit because of the obvious question it begs about how that can be true if the propagation speed in one model is the speed of light, and in the other model it is infinite.

Gravity and light do not act in parallel directions

There is no cause to doubt that photons arriving now from the Sun left 8.3 minutes ago, and arrive at Earth from the direction against the sky that the Sun occupied that long ago.  But the analogous situation for gravity is less obvious, and we must always be careful not to mix in the consequences of light propagation delays.  Another way, besides aberration, to represent what gravity is doing is to measure the acceleration vector for the Earth’s motion, and ask if it is parallel to the direction of the arriving photons.  If it is, that would argue that gravity propagated to Earth with the same speed as light; and conversely.

Such measurements of Earth’s acceleration through space are now easy to make using precise timing data from stable pulsars in various directions on the sky.  Any movement of the Earth in any direction is immediately reflected in a decreased delay in the time of arrival of pulses toward that direction, and an increased delay toward the opposite direction.  In principle, Earth’s orbit could be determined from pulsar timings alone.  In practice, the orbit determined from planetary radar ranging data is checked with pulsar timing data and found consistent with it to very high precision.

How then does the direction of Earth’s acceleration compare with the direction of the visible Sun?  By direct calculation from geometric ephemerides fitted to such observations, such as those published by the U.S. Naval Observatory or the Development Ephemerides of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, the Earth accelerates toward a point 20 arc seconds in front of the visible Sun, where the Sun will appear to be in 8.3 minutes.  In other words, the acceleration now is toward the true, instantaneous direction of the Sun now, and is not parallel to the direction of the arriving solar photons now.  This is additional evidence that forces from electromagnetic radiation pressure and from gravity do not have the same propagation speed.


The solar eclipse test

Yet another manifestation of the difference between the propagation speeds of gravity and light can be seen in the case of solar eclipses (Van Flandern, 1993, pp. 49-50).  The Moon, being relatively nearby and sharing the Earth’s 30 km/sec orbital motion around the Sun, has relatively little aberration (0.7 arc seconds, due to the Moon’s 1 km/sec orbital speed around Earth).  The Sun, as mentioned earlier, has an aberration of just over 20 arc seconds.  It takes the Moon about 38 seconds of time to move 20 arc seconds on the sky relative to the Sun.  Since the observed times of eclipses of the Sun by the Moon agree with predicted times to within a couple of seconds, we can use the orbits of the Sun and the Moon near times of maximum solar eclipse to compare the time of predicted gravitational maximum with the time of visible maximum eclipse.

In practice, the maximum gravitational perturbation by the Sun on the orbit of the Moon near eclipses may be taken as the time when the lunar and solar longitudes are equal.  Details of the procedure are provided in the reference cited.  We find that maximum eclipse occurs roughly 381.9 seconds of time, on average, before the time of gravity maximum.  If gravity is a propagating force, this 3-body (Sun-Moon-Earth) test implies that gravity propagates at least 20 times faster than light.


Does General Relativity really reduce to Newtonian gravity in low-velocity, weak-field limit?

As we have already noted, Newtonian gravity propagates with unconditionally infinite speed.  How, then, can GR reduce to Newtonian gravity in the weak-field, low-velocity limit?  The answer is that conservation of angular momentum is implicit in the assumptions on which GR rests.  However, as we have already seen, finite propagation speeds and conservation of angular momentum are incompatible.  Therefore, GR was forced to claim that gravity is not a force that propagates in any classical sense, and that aberration does not apply.

In practice, this suppression of aberration is done through so-called “retarded potentials.”  In electromagnetism, these are called “Lienard-Wiechert potentials.”  For examples of the use of retarded potentials, see Misner et al., 1973, p. 1080 or Feynman, 1963, p. 214.  Suppose we let φ(x-bar, t) be the gravitational potential at a field point “x-bar” and time t, G be the gravitational constant, dV be an element of volume in the source of the potential, x-bar = (X, Y, Z) be the coordinates of that volume element in the source, ρ(x-bar, T) be the matter density at point x-bar and time T, r-bar = x-bar - X-bar, r = |r-bar| be the distance from the source volume element at time T to the field point at time t, and v-bar be the relative velocity between the field point and the source.  Then two different forms of retarded potentials in common use for gravitation are these:

(http://www.gravitywarpdrive.com/General_Relativity_Images/Gravity_Speed_Equations_3-4.gif)

However, in neither form of retarded potential is any consideration given to the transverse motion between source and target during the light time; i.e., the aberration.  Ignoring aberration is logically equivalent to adopting an infinite propagation speed for gravitational force.  That point is glossed over by emphasizing that the density distribution or the mutual distance is being taken at its retarded position, as if a finite propagation speed for gravity were being adopted.  Nevertheless, the only practical consequence of a finite propagation speed that matters in most applications is missing from these potentials.  And that clever trick then allows a theory with “gravity propagating at the speed of light” to be equivalent to a theory with infinite propagation speed in the weak-field, low velocity limit.

In short, both GR and Newtonian gravity use infinite propagation speeds with aberration equal to zero.  In Newton’s laws, that fact is explicitly recognized even though aberration and delay terms do not appear because of an infinity in their denominator.  In GR, much effort has been expended in disguising the continued absence of the same delay terms by including retardation effects in ways that are presently unobservable and ignoring aberration.  Every physicist and physics student should be at least annoyed at having been tricked by this sleight of hand, and should demand that the neglect of aberration be clearly justified by those who propose to do so.

Conclusion: The speed of gravity is > 2x1010 c

We conclude that gravitational fields, even “static” ones, continually regenerate through entities that must propagate at some very high speed, vf.  We call this the speed of gravity.  Equation 1 then tells us how orbits will expand in response to this large but finite propagation speed, since the field itself, and not merely changes in the field, will transfer momentum to orbiting target bodies.  Rewriting Equation 1 in a form suitable for comparisons with observations, we derive:

(http://www.gravitywarpdrive.com/General_Relativity_Images/Gravity_Speed_Equation_1.gif)

(http://www.gravitywarpdrive.com/General_Relativity_Images/Gravity_Speed_Equation_5.gif)

Dr. Tom van Flandern



There have been attempts to show that gravity does not attain superluminal speeds (most notably Ibison/Puthoff/Little); however, these papers make use either of the MODIFIED Maxwell equations, or rely upon GTR.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg769750#msg769750 (total demolition of STR/GTR)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 18, 2017, 03:03:15 PM
FASTER THAN LIGHT SPEED OF GRAVITY III: THE WALKER-DUAL EXPERIMENT

A 1997 laboratory experiment by William D. Walker and J. Dual showed that gravitational signals propagated much faster than light signals.

http://cds.cern.ch/record/878414/files/0508166.pdf

Theoretical, Numerical, and Experimental Evidence of Superluminal Electromagnetic and Gravitational Fields Generated in the Nearfield of Dipole Sources

Light from the sun is not observed to be collinear with the sun’s gravitational force. Astronomical studies indicate that the earth’s acceleration is towards the gravitational center of the sun even though it is moving around the sun, whereas light from the sun is observed to be aberrated. If the gravitational force between the sun and the earth were aberrated then gravitational forces tangential to the earth’s orbit would result, causing the earth to spiral away from the sun, due to conservation of angular momentum. Current astronomical observations estimate the phase speed of gravity to be greater than 2x1010c.


https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/9706082.pdf

Propagation Speed of Longitudinally Oscillating Gravitational and Electrical Fields


https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0009/0009023.pdf (very well documented, it takes into consideration each and every possible criticism addressed by other physicists)

Experimental Evidence of Near-field Superluminally Propagating Electromagnetic Fields


Other authors have tried to use as arguments either the Heisenberg uncertainty principle applied to Fourier analysis or the Sommerfeld forerunner wave theory.

There is no such thing as the Heisenberg's uncertainty principle: in ether quantum mechanics everything is very well defined and there is absolute certainty.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1401101#msg1401101

In the Sommerfeld-Brillouin theory, signal velocity does not exceed wavefront speed. However, this theory rests totally on the structure of the MODIFIED Maxwell equations which ensure that the electromagnetic field cannot advance at a speed exceeding the speed of light.

Using the original, full set of Maxwell equations, velocity vectors are additive, which means that the speed of light can be exceeded.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1918701#msg1918701


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 20, 2017, 01:44:18 AM
FASTER THAN LIGHT SPEED OF GRAVITY IV

Current astronomical observations estimate the phase speed of gravity to be greater than 2x1010c.


"How then would waves or particles be capable of speeds of 20 billion c, since there is no way to get the vacuum pressure or resistance or impedance (or whatever you want to call it) low enough to allow it? Currently, the vacuum or field has enough impedance to keep even a photon, which is said to have no mass and no radius, at c. To get something to go 20 billion c, you would have to make it 20 billion times smaller and less massive than zero.

Someone might answer me that we should look at energies, not masses or radii or wavelengths. But this would make his graviton 20 billion times less energetic than a low-energy photon, in order to pass through the known field at that speed. Since gravity works at large scales, we have another problem. How can a particle with such a low energy move stars and galaxies?

A further problem arises when we compare charge to gravity. According to the logic above, the gravitational field should be 20 billion times less powerful than the charge field. If its mediating particle is 20 billion times smaller, its field strength should be 20 billion times smaller as well. If we would have more of these gravitons than we have charge photons,  then the density goes back up, more of them collide with the photons (or the vacuum field), and we have impedance again.

How could any medium have so little resistance that it allowed for speeds of 20 billion c?

If gravitons are much smaller than photons, it would have to have a radius on the order of 10-35 m."


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1920865#msg1920865

"Klein theorized that Kaluza's new dimension likely had somehow collapsed down to the "Planck length" itself -- supposedly the smallest possible size allowed by these fundamental interactions: 10-33 cm."

The boson fulfills perfectly the conditions set by the Kaluza-Klein particle theory.

In Part I of his 1861 paper, Maxwell proposed the existence of a sea of  molecular vortices which are composed of a fluid-like aether, whereas in  Part III, he deals with the elastic solid that these molecular vortices  collectively form.

These molecular vortices are the bosons, the Kaluza-Klein particles which forms the basis of the electrogravitational theory.

Bosons propagate through laevorotatory and dextrorotatory subquark strings.


Angular momentum and tidal friction

If gravitational aberration were non-zero, the angular momentum of an orbit would progressively increase with time, an effect that is not observed. Real orbits conserve orbital angular momentum to the accuracy of all observations, except when tidal or non-gravitational forces operate. Carlip claims that the conservation of angular momentum needed by GR justifies the cancellation of transverse aberration. He claims this cancellation is not magical, but arises naturally in the mathematics when one imposes angular momentum conservation.

It is true that imposing angular momentum conservation cancels aberration, but that begs the question. What physical justification exists for simply imposing orbital angular momentum conservation into equations when orbital angular momentum is not conserved by nature for other types of force? D. McCarthy has pointed out that, to the Moon, the offset of the direction of Earth’s gravitational force due to tidal friction is indistinguishable from the offset of the direction of Earth’s gravitational force due to aberration. So if gravitational aberration exists after all because gravity propagates at lightspeed, but is cancelled by a velocity-dependent force provided by nature to conserve angular momentum (as Carlip claims), then nature must also cancel tidal friction because it has no means of distinguishing one type of non-central force from the other. However, that is contrary to observations. But how could the Moon possibly know when to cancel a non-central force component, and when to respond to it?

The only logical answer to this dilemma is that no such mysterious, deus ex machina force exists because gravity has no aberration in need of canceling. In that case, we may be certain that gravity propagates much faster than lightspeed.

Dr. Tom van Flandern


And the Trouton-Noble experiment can no longer be used by relativists to claim that gravity involves velocity-dependent terms that almost exactly cancel the aberration effect arising from the finite speed of propagation:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1943392#msg1943392


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 20, 2017, 11:22:57 AM
BOHR MODEL INVALIDATED BY REDSHIFT QUANTIZATION (KARLSSON EFFECT)

Orbiting electrons are undergoing centripetal acceleration, and should therefore give off electromagnetic radiation, the loss of energy also causing them to spiral toward the nucleus, colliding with it in a fraction of a second.

To make matters for the restriction of physical reality from traveling beyond the speed
of light, there is another phenomenon that electrons can supposedly do is namely tunnel through time to go instantaneously from one place inside the atom to another. That is, the electron can go from one place to another without traversing the space in between. This is one of quantum theory’s concepts accepted almost universally by the scientific establishment. The electron’s speed, if it was a thousand times the speed of light, would still be too slow, because it still is traversing the intervening space. Niels Bohr maintained this concept which has become known as a “quantum” – going from point A to point B without traversing the intervening space. He argued that this was reality and scientists must accept it. He did not realize when he adopted this concept that he was harking back to medieval supernatural theological philosophy. This was a question raised by Thomas Aquinas and Duns Scotus.

Niels Bohr was bringing science back to medieval theology and showed that an electron could defy the rules that apply to all physical entities. Let us look further into this concept. Max Planck explained that light coming out of the atom came out as discrete packets of energy called quanta. Seeing that there were several levels of these quanta, he devised a formula which fit these different levels. Niels Bohr, then understanding this, wrote formulas that allowed for these unique levels of energy but only on the supposition that when a photon struck an electron, the electron had to jump instantaneously from a lower orbit or place in the atom to another. If it moved through the intervening space, the energy would be smeared and not at only one unique level. He assumed that unique quantum behavior in the atom was required to explain this.

But can light exhibit quantum behavior outside the atom in the observable world as well as in the atom? And can it do so with physical bodies? If there is evidence that, in the observable physical universe, where bodies are moving with respect to one another through space, show light coming from these bodies that also exhibit clear quantum levels, then the basis upon which Bohr and the entire quantum establishment bases their case is false.


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1937730#msg1937730 (Karlsson effect I)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1937747#msg1937747 (Karlsson effect II)

The Karlsson Effect: the redshift is systematically quantised in discrete values along preferred peaks.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1942735#msg1942735 (Karlsson effect III)


David Wick points to the way in which Niels Bohr derived the concept that electrons jump from one point to another without traveling the intervening space:

“Bohr’s scientific method at the time was opportunistic: he simply lifted relevant formulas from where they were available. For the dynamics of the electron’s orbit [around the atom’s nucleus], he used Newtonian mechanics. For the description of light emitted [and discrete bundles of energy], he assumed Maxwellian theory. But neither theory provided any justification for restricting [electron] orbits to discrete series, or any motivation for an electron to ‘jump’ from one orbit to another. Bohr’s model was a chimera: a quantum head grafted onto a classical body, with a tissue of ad hoc assumptions holding them together.

When we compare Bohr’s quantum jumps with galaxies moving at discrete recessional
speeds, we can see the similarity. Here, Wicks states:

“Bohr’s model was elegant, if implausible. Bohr, took Rutherford’s solar system and simply legislated flight paths for the planets. He postulated that the angular momentum of the electron around the proton can take only one of a discrete series of values. This is as natural [or unnatural] as insisting that all skaters at the ice show twirl at two revolutions per second, four revolutions per second, and so on, with all other speed forbidden. But [mathematically] it worked.”

Galaxies and quasars exhibit light coming out of them, which is quantized, but atoms
have quantum packets of energy coming out of them. The quantum physicists maintain that this can only be caused by electrons going from one point to another without traversing the intervening space. The cosmologists finding a similar quantization effect for galaxies and quasars, knowing these bodies lie at an entire range of distances that are not multiples of a certain number, refuse to accept what the quantum evidence shows. What appears to be the case is that atoms contain elements that give off quantum packets of energy without the necessity of electrons making quantum leaps. There is a sameness to the macro and micro universe that is indicated by the fact that light is quantized in both.

(C. Ginenthal: Newton, Einstein, Velikovsky)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1830498#msg1830498 (more information on the false Bohr atomic model)



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 22, 2017, 10:37:52 AM
THE MODIFIED MAXWELL EQUATIONS AND THE SCHRODINGER EQUATION

E. Schrodinger derived his wave equation which governs his atomic model directly from the modified Maxwell equations:

http://www.phys.ufl.edu/courses/phy3063/spring15/How%20to%20Derivre%20the%20Schrodinger%20Equation.pdf


Moreover, the Klein-Gordon equation, initially used by Schrodinger to arrive at the final form of the wave equation, can also be derived from the modified Maxwell equations:

http://jpier.org/PIER/pier105/11.10042702.pdf


But the modified Maxwell equations apply ONLY to ripples in the sea of ether - the original set of Maxwell equations is invariant under Galilean transformations and was based totally on the concept of molecular vortices:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1918701#msg1918701

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1919728#msg1919728

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1920865#msg1920865


And Schrodinger's mathematical description of the electrons as a wave function has further huge problems.

The wavefunction for two electrons is a function of 6 variables, for 3 electrons in 9 variables, and the dimension keeps going up as the electrons become more numerous.

"The solution of the many-electron Schrödinger equation is therefore a complicated function of 3N variables, where N is the number of electrons in the system."

"The ‘complementarity’ model and the mutually exclusive properties of particle and wave imposed on light were not the only problems that wave/particle duality posed.  There was also the problem of Schrodinger’s wave equation.  Schrödinger came up with the "wave packet" to represent the electron. An electron appears to be a particle. But the waves would disperse. A multi-dimensional space was required. Helium required a 6-dimensional space, lithium got 9 dimensions and uranium needed 276. Try as he might, there was no way for Schrodinger to prevent this dispersal of the wave packet. Since it was made up of waves that varied in wave-length and frequency, as the wave packet travelled through space, it would soon spread out as individual waves moved at different velocities. An almost instantaneous coming together, a localization at one point in space would have to take place every time an electron was detected as a particle. Secondly when attempts were made to apply the wave equation to helium and other atoms, Schrodinger’s vision of the reality that lay beneath his mathematics disappeared into an abstract multi-dimensional space that was impossible to visualize.

The wave function of an electron encodes everything there is to know about its single three dimensional wave. Yet the wave function for the two electrons of the helium atom could not be interpreted as two three dimensional waves existing in ordinary three dimensional space. Instead the mathematics pointed to a single wave inhabiting a strange six-dimensional space. In each move across the periodic table from one element to the next, the number of electrons increased by one and an additional three dimensions were required. Schrodinger was never able to come to terms with the fact that his construct did not represent ‘reality’. Yet the question remained how could a system that required so many dimensions, the three dimensions we live in are hard enough to explain, represent how the atom behaved? Is a system requiring 276 dimensions acceptable to a physical explanation at any level ? Most probably not, yet it has been accepted for almost a hundred years! At this point Max Born ( a statistical mathematician and physicist)  put an end to the discussion by claiming that the waves did not have a physical existence but that they were probability waves. This still gave rise to problems because each of these probability waves represented the possibility location of an electron and it was only when it was located that the wave would collapse and the position of the electron be known. I think it is clear that the Quantum Mechanic explanations were highly convoluted and not very realistic. Quantum Mechanics is essentially a statistical science, it holds the view that ‘there is no description of reality’."


A normal electromagnetic wave is made up of two scalar waves (telluric currents, subquark strings) which travel in double torsion fashion: one of them has a dextrorotatory spin, the other a laevorotatory spin.

Whittaker’s 1903 discovery that sets of longitudinal waves are the actual basis of all electromagnetic waves: Whittaker showed that vectors can always be further broken down into more fundamental coupled scalar components.

A Hertzian wave is just a ripple in the sea of ether.

Ether = subquark strings = telluric currents

A telluric current is a transversal wave, through which flow/propagate longitudinal waves.

A non-Hertzian wave is just such a longitudinal wave, propagating through the transversal wave.

Bosons (particles) travel through subquark strings (waves).

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1920865#msg1920865

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 06, 2017, 12:40:46 AM
QUANTUM RIEMANN'S ZETA FUNCTION XV

Five elements of the Gizeh pyramid:

26.7
53.4
80
136.1
534

Applying the five elements proportions to the sacred cubit distance:

63.636363
16.1773
9.5445
6.36363
3.1815

Rotate a model of the Gizeh pyramid clockwise by 90 degrees.

To the right, we have another Gizeh pyramid (the shadow of the first pyramid), which is rotated anticlockwise by 90 degrees, the two pyramid frustums will be facing each other.

Total distance from one subterranean chamber to the other: 534 units.

In the center we have the two apexes of the pyramids forming a merkabah geometrical figure.

Two sothic triangles embed each of the two apexes: the height of the triangle will measure exactly 14.134725 units (the value of the first zero of Riemann's zeta function).

Two other sothic triangles will embed the top portion of the frustums of the two pyramids, again the height of these triangles will measure 14.134725 units.

The distance separating the two sets of triangles, located to the left of the center of the merkabah, will measure exactly 63.6363... units (the sacred cubit distance).

In the same manner the distance separating the two sets of triangles located to the right of the center of the merkabah will also measure 63.6363... units.

(https://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/zeros.jpg)

The zeros of the Riemann zeta function, having positive values will be distributed as follows on the sacred cubit distance (63.6363...): starting from 14.134725..., all the way to 77.144..., these zeroes will be distributed along the line connecting the tips of the two sothic triangles located to the left of the merkabah, moving from right to left.

The zeros of the Riemann zeta function, having negative values, -14.134725 to - 77.144, will be distributed along the second line, connecting the tips of the two sothic triangles located to the right of the merkabah, moving from left to right.

Then, the next set of zeroes having positive values, from 79.337... to 141.124 will be distributed along the second line, connecting the tips of the two sothic triangles located to the right of the merkabah, moving right to left.

In the same manner, the next set of zeroes having negative values, -79.337 to -141.124,  will be distributed along the first line, connecting the tips of the two sothic triangles located to the left of the merkabah, moving left to right.

That is, each of the two sacred distances will include TWO Riemann zeta functions waves.

14.134725 + 63.6363 = 77.7647

77.7647 + 63.6363 = 141.3947

141.3947 + 63.6363 = 205.0247

205.0245 + 63.6363 = 268.6547

268.6547 + 63.6363 = 332.2847


The sacred cubit fractal (dividing the critical line into 63.6363... segments, and further using the five elements proportions) is the hidden template of the zeta function.

63.636363
16.1773
9.5445
6.36363
3.1815

9.5445 - 6.36363 = 6.36363 - 3.1815 = 3.1815

3.1815
0.80886
0.477225
0.31815
0.159075

16.1773 - 9.5445 = 6.6328

6.6328
1.68632
0.99492
0.66328
0.33164


63.6363 - 16.1773 = 47.459

47.459
12.066
7.11885
4.7459
2.373

47.459 - 12.066 = 35.393

35.393
8.998
5.309
3.5393
1.77

35.393 - 8.998 = 26.395

26.395
6.7106
3.96
2.6395
1.31975

26.395 - 6.7106 = 19.6894

19.6894
5.0045
2.95266
1.96894
0.98422

19.6894 - 5.0045 = 14.68

14.68
3.7372
2.202
1.468
0.734

14.68 - 3.7372 = 10.9478

10.9478
2.7834
1.6422
1.09478
0.5474

10.9478 - 2.7834 = 8.1694

8.1694
2.0757
1.22466
0.81694
0.40822

8.1694 - 2.0757 = 6.0887

6.0887
1.548
0.9133
0.60487
0.304425

6.0887 - 1.548 = 4.5407

4.5407
1.1544
0.681105
0.45407
0.227035

4.5407 - 1.1544 = 3.3863

3.3863
0.861
0.508
0.33863
0.169315

3.3863 - 0.861 = 2.5253

2.5253
0.692
0.3788
0.25253
0.126

2.5253 - 0.692 = 1.833

1.833
0.4661
0.275
0.1833
0.09


12.066 - 7.11885 = 4.947

4.947
1.2577
0.74205
0.4947
0.28735


Then, the values of the subdivision of the sacred cubit distance using the five elements ratios/proportions, will nearly coincide with the values of the zeroes of Riemann's zeta function.

Using the first sacred cubit distance, connecting the tips of the sothic triangles located to the left of the merkabah, the first subdivision will occur from right to left, for the positive values of the zeroes of the zeta function; the second subdivision will occur from left to right, for the similar negative values of the zeroes of the zeta function (starting from the left: 3.1815, 6.6363, 9.5445, 16.1775, then the remaining portion of the sacred cubit distance will be divided using the subdivision of the 47.459 distance ((63.6363 - 16.1773 = 47.459)). The values marked in red will represent the values obtained from this second subdivision, going from left to right.

That is, each of the two Riemann zeta function waves is linked to the other wave, since these special values (marked in red) are used to complete the set of figures which can be obtained from the other subdivision of the sacred distance.

     14.134725142 
     21.022039639  20.497725 (14.134725 + 6.363)
     25.010857580  23.679225 (14.134725 + 9.5445)
     30.424876126  30.312025 (14.134725 + 16.1773)
     32.935061588  32.685 (30.312025 + 2.373)
     37.586178159  37.43 (30.312 + 7.11885)
     40.918719012  40.5234 (77.7647 - 16.1773 - 12.066 - 8.998)
     43.327073281  42.37 (30.312 + 12.066)
     48.005150881  47.68 (42.37 + 5.309)
     49.773832478  49.554 (77.7647 - 16.1773 - 12.066)
     52.970321478  51.37 (42.37 + 8.998)
     56.446247697  55.336 (51.37 + 3.96)
     59.347044003  58.08 (51.37 + 6.7106) or 59.07 (51.37 + 6.7106 + 0.98422)
     60.831778525  60.05 (58.08 + 1.96844)
     65.112544048  65.06 (60.05 + 5.0045)
     67.079810529  67.26 (65.06 + 2.202)
     69.546401711  68.79 (65.06 + 3.7322)
     72.067157674  71.575 (68.79 + 2.7834)
     75.704690699  75.1988 (71.575 + 2.0757 + 1.548)
     77.144840069  77.214 (75.1988 + 1.1544 + 0.861)

Law of five elements:

1→3
3→5
5→2
2→4
4→1

++-+-

or

-++-+
+-+-+
-+-++

Applying this sequence of subsequent additions and substractions to the value 20.497725 (which is 14.134725 + 6.3636), we obtain:

20.497725 + 0.80886 = 21.3066

3.1815
0.80886
0.477225
0.31815
0.159075

(9.5445 - 6.3636 = 3.1815, the interval which is to be subdivided further)

0.80886 - 0.477225 = 0.331635

0.331635
0.084315
0.049745
0.0331635
0.01658

21.3066 - 0.331635 = 20.975

0.0331635 - 0.01658 = 0.01658

0.01658
0.0042153
0.002487
0.001658
0.000829

20.975 + 0.0042153 = 20.9792, which is a very good approximation to the value of 21.022 (the value of the second zero of the zeta function)

This is more elegant than using straightforward additions (20.97445, 21.00761, 21.01183, 21.015, 21.01734, 21.0191, and so on).

Further subdivisions using the same law of the ratios of the five elements will form an infinite series which will approximate exactly the value of each of the zeroes of Riemann's zeta function.


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 06, 2017, 02:51:37 AM
QUANTUM RIEMANN'S ZETA FUNCTION XVI

     79.337375020  78.574 (77.7647 + 0.80886)
     82.910380854  82.3 (141.3947 - 16.177 - 12.066 - 8.998 -
                                6.7106 - 5.0045 - 3.73 - 2.7834 - 2.0757 - 1.548)
     84.735492981   84.12 (77.7645 + 6.363)
     87.425274613   87.31 (77.7647 + 9.5445)
     88.809111208   88.995 (87.31 + 1.68632)
     92.491899271   92.44 (141.3947 - 16.177 - 12.066 - 8.998 - 6.7106 - 5.0045)
     94.651344041   93.94 (77.7647 + 16.1773)
     95.870634228   96.315 (93.94 + 2.373)
     98.831194218   98.688 (93.94 + 4.746)
    101.317851006  101.06 (93.94 + 7.11885)
    103.725538040  104.15 ((141.3947 - 16.177 - 12.066 - 8.998)
    105.446623052  106.01 (93.94 + 12.066)
    107.168611184  107.78 (93.94 + 12.066 + 1.77)
    111.029535543  111.317 (106.01 + 5.309)
    111.874659177  111.38 (141.3947 - 16.177 - 12.066 - 1.77)
    114.320220915  115.01 (106.01 + 8.998)
    116.226680321  116.326 ( 115.01 + 1.31975)
    118.790782866  118.966 (115.01 + 3.96)
    121.370125002  121.72 (115.01 + 6.7106)
    122.946829294  123.68 (121.72 + 1.968)
    124.256818554  124.67 (121.72 + 2.9566)
    127.516683880  126.72 (121.72 + 5.0045)
    129.578704200  128.92 (126.72 + 2.202)
    131.087688531  130.45 (126.72 + 3.7322)
    133.497737203  133.23 (130.45 + 2.7834)
    134.756509753  135.3 (133.23 + 2.0757)
    138.116042055  138.213 (141.3947 - 3.1815)
    139.736208952  139.555 (138.002 + 0.861 + 0.692)
    141.123707404  141.076 (141.3947 - 0.31815)


    143.111845808  142.2 (141.3947 + 0.80886)
    146.000982487  145.929 (205.0247 - 16.1773 - 12.066 - 8.998 - 6.7106 - 5.0045 - 3.7322 -                                            2.7834 - 2.0757 - 1.548)
                                 145.38 (141.3947 + 3.1815 + 0.80886)
    147.422765343  147.76 (141.3947 + 6.3636)
    150.053520421  149.55  (205.0247 - 16.1773 - 12.066 - 8.998 -
                                 6.7106 - 5.0045 - 3.7322 - 2.7834)
    150.925257612  150.94 (141.3947 + 9.5445)
    153.024693811  152.63 (150.94 + 1.68632)
    156.112909294  156.07 (205.0247 - 16.1773 - 12.066 - 8.998 -
                                 6.7106 - 5.0045)
    157.597591818  157.57 (150.94 + 16.1773)

The Lehmer phenomenon, a pair of zeros which are extremely close, is related to the close proximity of some of the values of the two subdivisions of the 63.6363... segment, one going from left to right, the other one occurring from right to left: very close values right from the first level of the subdivision process such as 111.317 and 111.38.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1858153#msg1858153

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1855591#msg1855591

(https://s16.postimg.org/ci7d25t6d/riem2.jpg)


http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/zeta_tables/zeros1 (list of the zeroes of the zeta function)

The next step, of course, would be to understand why, as an example, the subdivision values of 2.373 and 7.11885 are used in approximating the zeroes 32.935 and 37.586, and not 4.7459 (there are no other zeroes between 32.935 and 37.586). 2.373 corresponds to the 26.7 ratio value in the five elements proportions, 7.11885 is matched with the figure of 80 in the same sequence of fundamental proportions, while 4.7459 coincides with the 53.4 ratio in that sequence.

534           47.459
136.1        12.066
80             7.11885
53.4           4.7459
26.7           2.373

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 11, 2017, 02:22:52 AM
GEOGRAPHICAL CENTER OF THE EARTH: THE LOCATION OF THE GARDEN OF EDEN

http://www.pseudepigrapha.com/jubilees/8.htm

In the classic work Die Erdkarte der Urbibel (1931), A. Herrmann asserts that the geographical chapters 8 and 9 of the Book of Jubilees are an older redaction of the Priestly document, indeed older than the sources of Genesis, dating from the period of King Solomon (official chronology). The Book of Jubilees is not a revision of the Genesis, on the contrary, the opposite applies.


And the Book of Jubilees states quite clearly that the geographical center of the Earth is the very same location as for the Garden of Eden.

Book of Jubilees, chapter 8:

"And for Ham came out as the second portion, beyond the Gejon (Nile), toward the south, to the right of the garden, and it proceeds to all the fire mountains, and goes toward the west to the sea of Atil and goes west until it reaches the sea of Mauk  the one of which everything descends that is destroyed. And it proceeds to the north to the shore of Gadil and goes to the west of the water of the sea until it approaches the river Gejon, and the river Gejon goes until it approaches to the right of the Garden of Eden, and this land is the land which came forth for Ham as the portion he shall retain for himself and the children of his generations forever."

"And there came out of the lot for Shem the middle of the earth, which he and his children should have as an inheritance for the generations unto eternity, from the middle of the Mountain Rafu from the exit of the water of the river Tina, and his portion goes toward the west through the midst of this river, and they go until they approach to the abyss of the waters out of which comes this river, and this river empties and pours its waters into the sea Miot, and this river goes into the great sea: all that is toward the north of this is Japhet's, and all that is to the direction of the south is Shem's."

"And his (Ham/Khem's) portion reaches unto the great sea, and reaches straight until it approaches the west of the tongue which looks toward the south; for the sea is called the tongue of the Egyptian Sea (Red Sea). And it turns from there toward the south, toward the mouth of the great sea in the shore of the waters and proceeds toward Arabia and Ophra, and it proceeds until it reaches to the water of the River Gejon (Nile), along the shore of this same river. And it proceeds toward the north until it approaches the Garden of Eden, and toward the south thereof to the south, and from the east of the whole land of Eden, and toward the whole east , and it turns to the east, and proceeds until it approaches toward the east of the hills whose name is Rafa, and it descends toward the border of the outlet of the water of the river Tina."

Notice that the Garden of Eden is described as being located to the WEST of the Nile river and NORTH of Egypt, and the land of Ham as being located to the right of the Garden, thus contradicting clearly the version served by the corresponding chapters in the Genesis.

If we can find out the exact location of the Riphath/Rafu mountains, the river Tina, the sea of Miot, and especially the sea of Atil, we immediately have at our disposal the exact place of the Garden of Eden (which IS NOT located anywhere near the Middle East).

Mountain Riphath/Rafu is easily seen to be the mountain range in the northern portion of Anatolia (ancient Paphlagonia/Mysia/Bithynia), namely the Temnus and the Olympus ranges/mountains (Riphath was given the portion of Anatolia, NORTH of river Tina and EAST of the land given to the first son of Noah).

Location of the sea of Atil:

His head [Ro-AT-SH] was at Roxolania/Rus, south of Belarus. Its name changed to the Ukraine (Gk kranion = cranium, not Slavic ukraina to/at the border). His throat [GaRGeret] is Georgia. His left shoulder [KaSaF] is the Caspian sea. His right shoulder [-AT-aTZiL] was Euxinus, now the Black Sea. His right arm/hand is being washed [NaTiLat] at Anatolia.

Therefore, the sea of Atil IS actually the Black Sea, or Pontus Euxinus. And the sea of Miot is the Sea of Marmara, which goes into the Great Sea (Mediterranean Sea).

River Tina is related to lake Arthynia (which discharges its waters into the Macestus River, which separates Asia from Bithynia), located next to the Sea of Marmara.

https://web.archive.org/web/20050125005755/http://www.bostontoistanbul.com/maps/MarmaraRegionMap.jpg

THE GARDEN OF EDEN IS LOCATED RIGHT NEXT TO THE SEA OF MARMARA (sea of Propontis) (SEA OF MIOT), IN THE WESTERN PORTION OF ANATOLIA: a region with which cannot be accessed by land or sea (we have the same situation at the North/South Poles, which have never been actually discovered or located precisely, see The Hollow Earth by R. Bernard, Raymond Benard - The Hollow Earth ), etherically veiled from view completely. Mount Olympus is also located there (with a height of at least 25 km, the first Dome is located below the peak of this mountain), the very center of the surface of the flat earth.


Now, let us make the connection between the BOOK OF ENOCH, BOOK OF JUBILEES and the BOOK OF NOAH:

Book of Enoch:
And they took  me to the living waters, and to the fire (Volcano) of the west, which receives every setting of the sun. And I came to a river of fire (river of lava) in which the fire flows like water and discharges itself into the great sea towards the west .

Book of Jubilees: 
...to the right of the garden, and it proceeds to all the fire mountains, and goes toward the west to the sea of Atil.

Book of Noah:
And they will shut up those Angels, who showed iniquity, in that burning valley, (Eden Valley) which my great-grandfather Enoch had shown to me previously, in the west, near the mountains of gold and silver and iron and soft metal and tin.


http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#31

From there I passed on above the summits of those mountains to some distance eastwards, and went over the Erythraean sea. And when I was advanced far beyond it, I passed along above the angel Zateel, and arrived at the garden of righteousness. In this garden I beheld, among other trees, some which were numerous and large, and which flourished there.

The original term used by Enoch was THE SEA OF ATIL, and NOT the Erythraean Sea (added later by translators who had no idea of the true location of the sea of Atil, the Black Sea).

The true name of the first son of Noah, PELASG/PELASGOS,  was changed to Shem.

All legends of the Arcadians, Greeks, Thracians point out that the first son of Noah was called Pelasg; and Pelasg never set foot in Mesopotamia (a portion of land given to the descendants of the sons of Khem/Ham; namely, the northern part was given to Misraim and some of his sons, and the southern portion was taken over by Nimrod and his sons).


Christ was crucified at Constantinople, and not in Jerusalem; and not 2,000 years ago, but some 250 years ago.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1641885#msg1641885

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1673763#msg1673763


The application of the Gauss Easter formula to historical events leaves no room for errors:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg758652#msg758652


Pompeii and Herculaneum were destroyed at least after 1750 AD:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1683424#msg1683424 (five consecutive messages)


The most direct proof that the biography of Dionysius Exiguus, the central pillar of modern chronology, was faked/falsified/forged during the Renaissance:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1674108#msg1674108

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1674662#msg1674662

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1638504#msg1638504


Galileo and Kepler, fictional characters invented at a later time in history:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1638725#msg1638725


When did Shakespeare live?

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1620012#msg1620012


L. Euler: a fictional character invented at the end of the 18th century:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1483598#msg1483598

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1483917#msg1483917


The astronomical recordings attributed to Benjamin Franklin and the London Royal Society during the 18th century could not possibly be true:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1484659#msg1484659

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488947#msg1488947


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 12, 2017, 05:37:33 AM
QUANTUM RIEMANN'S ZETA FUNCTION XVII

The next step, of course, would be to understand why, as an example, the subdivision values of 2.373 and 7.11885 are used in approximating the zeroes 32.935 and 37.586, and not 4.7459 (there are no other zeroes between 32.935 and 37.586). 2.373 corresponds to the 26.7 ratio value in the five elements proportions, 7.11885 is matched with the figure of 80 in the same sequence of fundamental proportions, while 4.7459 coincides with the 53.4 ratio in that sequence.

534           47.459
136.1        12.066
80             7.11885
53.4           4.7459
26.7           2.373


The large gaps within a subdivision of the sacred distance (63.63... units) are due to the fact that they include the zeroes from the other Riemann zeta wave.

Starting from the right and moving toward the left (see the two previous messages on this subject, on this page), let us list all of the zeroes and their corresponding values on the sacred distance (according to the law of the five elements):

The first column contains the values of the zeroes themselves (including both waves: 14.134725 to 77.7649, from right to left, and -77.7649 to -141.3947, from left to right). The second column includes the values of the subdivision of the sacred distance which are very close to the figures of the zeroes of the zeta function. The third column lists the result of the substraction 141.3947 - (the values from the second column), for the wave which moves from left to right, and the result of the addition 14.134725 + (the values from the second column), for the wave which travels from right to left.


141.12   0.31815   141.07

139.736 1.41347   139.98

138.11   3.1815     138.213

134.75   6.363 + 0.31815   134.713

21.022   6.363 +  0.477225   20.9747

We can already see that the gap between the first two zeroes, 14.134725 and 21.022, is being filled by the values of the zeroes from the second wave in a precise manner.

133.05   6.363 + 1.41347   133.618

131.087   9.5445 + 0.66328   131.187

25.0108   9.5445 + 0.995   24.674


3.1815
0.80886
0.477225
0.31815
0.159075

3.1815 - 0.80886 = 2.3726

2.3726
0.60332
0.3559
0.23726
0.11863

16.1773 - 9.5445 = 6.6328

6.6328
1.68632
0.995
0.66328
0.33164

We can observe that 0.80886 + 0.60332 = 1.4122, which is very close to 1.4134725, which is why I preferred to include the second value in the list as it provides a better overall picture of the values obtained.


129.578   9.5445 + 1.4134725   130.437

127.516   14.134725   127.26

30.424     16.1773       30.312

124.256   14.1347 + (1.41347 x 2)        124.434

123.68     [14.1347 + (1.41347 x 2)] + 1.41347    123.02

32.935     16.1773 + 2.373     32.685

121.37     {[14.1347 + (1.41347 x 2)] + 1.41347} + 1.41347     121.6

When listed in this manner, it becomes apparent that the values of the zeroes of the zeta function are positioned on the sacred distance in a very precise fashion.

The alleged randomness of the values of the zeroes disappears completely: we can see at a glance how the zeroes follow one another in an accurate and logical manner.


(https://s13.postimg.org/6kuwu232f/riem.jpg)

"One of the most exciting possibilities involves an astonishing, unexpected connection
between the distribution of prime numbers and the energy levels of excited atoms. The
vehicle is a branch of mathematics known as random matrix theory.

If the random matrices belong to a class of matrices known as the Gaussian Unitary
Ensemble (GUE), physicists obtain good estimates of the average spacing between
consecutive energy levels of heavy atomic nuclei and other complex quantum systems.
It turns out that the spacings between consecutive zeros of the zeta function also
appear to behave statistically like the spacings between consecutive eigenvalues of
these large, random matrices. Indeed, this observation also suggests that the infinitely
many zeros specified in the Riemann hypothesis are irregularly distributed in a
particular way along the line 1/2 + bi."

But they ARE NOT irregularly distributed along the 1/2 + bi line.

The mathematicians, so far, have missed the connection between the sacred cubit and the value of the first zero of the zeta function, 14.134725, and the fact that there are two zeta function waves travelling at the same time, on the same sacred cubit distance.

Once we make that connection, (Quantum Riemann's Zeta Function I - XVII series of messages), everything becomes very clear: the values of the zeroes are distributed a very precise manner along the sacred cubit distance.

How then could this extraordinary mathematical relationship arise out of a totally random process described by the big bang theory/stellar evolution hypotheses?


How could the architects of the Gizeh pyramid have known the value of the first zero of the zeta function, and at the same time build the pyramid to a precise height which equals 141.347 meters?

G.F.B. Riemann's derivation of the Riemann-Siegel formula still counts as the most difficult calculation ever undertaken in the 19th century.

It is still being regarded as "magical":

https://michaelberryphysics.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/berry483.pdf


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1859126#msg1859126 (the sequence of the moments of the zeta function and the quantum energy levels)


“There’s a complexity to the zeta function that we have not been able to grasp"

The series of messages dedicated to the Riemann zeta function and the sacred cubit has proven otherwise: it is completely within our reach to grasp the complexity of the function, once we realize that the value of the first zero is the value of the height of the Gizeh pyramid divided by 10.


In 1985, it became possible for the very first time to measure the height of the masonry base very precisely:

(https://s12.postimg.org/viaku97pp/pyr1.jpg)

One author noted the following:

As our drawing clearly shows, not only the pyramid's envelope but also everything inside it was determined with the aid of three equal circles. Theodolitic equipment placed within shaft D beamed upward a key vertical line whose function we shall soon describe. But first this equipment beamed out the horizontal rock/masonry line, on which the centers of the three circles were placed. The first of these (Point 1) was at D; Points 2 and 3, where its circle intersected the line, served as centers for the other two, overlapping circles. To draw these circles the pyramid's architects, of course, had to decide on the proper radius.

Our own calculations show that the radius adopted for the three circles envisioned by us was equal to 60 such Sacred Cubits; the number 60 being, not accidentally, the base number of the Sumerian sexagesimal mathematical system. This measure of 60 Sacred Cubits is dominant in the lengths and heights of the pyramid's inner structure as well as in the dimensions of its base.


However, the builders MUST have had ALL of the other measurements of the pyramid (angles, lengths, displacement factor) at their disposal BEFORE proceeding with the drawing of the circles, which must have been a geometrical aid meant to correctly place the other features of the Gizeh Pyramid on a drawing. And this fact, of course, takes us right back to the core the problem: calculation of arctangents and arcsines, using power series approximations.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1834389#msg1834389 (four consecutive messages)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1836001#msg1836001



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 15, 2017, 01:40:52 AM
QUANTUM RIEMANN'S ZETA FUNCTION XVIII

At the present time, there is no way to precisely predict where the explicit location a zero of the zeta function might occur.

The frequency of the zeroes Riemann-Mangoldt equation is not exact, nor is the average spacing between the zeroes formula.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1855726#msg1855726

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1856911#msg1856911

The approach using interpolating determinants (with functions which closely resemble the Riemann-Siegel formula) leads very quickly to insurmountable problems: for zero #47 (138.11) a term like 10-1216 has to be used; for zero #220 (427.21) the value of that term increases to 10-17793, for zero #400 (679.74) the new value will be 10-52001. To even achieve these results, which deal with the first few hundreds of zeroes of the zeta function, several computing centers from several universities around the world had to be used.


The distances between the values of the two subdivisions of the sacred distance can be used to infer the precise location of the next zero of the zeta function.

141.12

Using the subdivision of the sacred distance, from right to left (3.1815, 6.363, 9.5445, 16.1773, 63.6363), and the next level of subdivisions applied to the 3.1815 distance:

3.1815
0.80886
0.477225
0.31815
0.159075

141.3947 - 0.31815 = 141.076

Using the subdivision of the sacred distance, from left to right:

138.02 + 0.861 + 0.692 + 0.4661 = 140.02

Subdividing further the segment 1.833 - 0.4661 using the five elements ratios, we get the values: 0.3475, 0.26, 0.1932, 0.1441, 0.10745.

So, adding these values successively to 140.02 we get:

140.3675
140.6275
140.821
140.965
141.072

We can see immediately that the values which most closely resemble each other (in fact they are practically equal) are:

141.076 (from the right to left subdivision)

141.072 (from the left to right subdivision)


141.3947 - 0.159075 = 141.2356, the values obtained from the other subdivision are not even close to this one.

141.3947 - 0.477225 = 140.917, not a direct match with the values from the other subdivision

141.3947 - 0.80886 = 140.5858

Not even if we use the next level of subdivision values for the interval 3.1815 - 0.80886 (2.3726, 0.60322, 0.3559, 0.23726, 0.11863), the figures obtained will not match the ones listed above, 141.076 and 141.072 (the difference will become even smaller if we further subdivide those segments using the five elements ratios).

In my opinion, these calculations serve as a precise evidence that a zero of the zeta function has to be located right next to the 0.31815 value of the subdivision of the sacred distance.


139.736

Using the left to right subdivision, we get:

139.555 (138.002 + 0.861 + 0.692)

Using the right to left subdivision:

141.3947 - 0.80886 - 0.60322 - 0.45 = 139.533

141.3947 - 0.80886 - 0.60322 - 0.17694 = 139.541

2.3726 - 0.60322 = 1.7694 (1.7694, 0.45, 0.26541, 0.17694, 0.08847)


138.11

141.3947 - 3.1815 = 138.213

133.23 + 2.07 + 1.548 + 1.1544 = 138.002

138.002 + 0.169315 = 138.171


143.111

141.3947 + 0.80886 + 0.60322 + 0.26541 = 143.0722

205.0247 - 16.1773 - 12.066 - 8.998 - -6.7106 - 5.0045 - 3.7322 - 2.7834 - 2.0757
- 1.548 - 1.1544 - 0.861 - 0.692 - 0.1833 = 143.0383


Other features, such as applying the musical scale to the sacred distance might be used to clarify things further (two lateral octaves).

(http://www.richardhodges.com/MusicalScale_files/image004.jpg) (https://www.endlesssearch.co.uk/images/rayofcreation_basic_lateraloctaves_11.gif)
(https://www.endlesssearch.co.uk/images/rayofcreation_x3_shockoctave_x1_h.gif)

Five whole tones: DO-RE, RE-MI, FA-SOL, SOL-LA, LA-SI
Two half-tones intervals: MI-FA and SI-DO


However, the ability to actually predict where the next value of a zeta zero will occur on the sacred cubit distance is most important (on the location of Lehmer pairs see the discussion posted earlier on this page).


The precise relationship between primes and zeroes of zeta:

http://people.reed.edu/~jerry/361/lectures/rvm.pdf

(https://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/picomp.gif)

https://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/encoding1.htm

"The sequence of nontrivial zeta zeros is sometimes described as being "dual" to the sequence of primes."

But the sequence of nontrivial zeta zeroes is totally based on the subdivision of the sacred cubit distance using the five elements ratios/proportions and the fact that there not one, but two zeta function waves which complement each other and which propagate at the same time on the 63.6363... segment, one travelling from right to left, the other one from left to right.



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 18, 2017, 01:10:31 AM
STATIONARY EARTH: EXPERIMENTAL PROOFS

Hoek Experiment

http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Hoek/Hoek_Experiment.html

Martinus Hoek, “Determination de la vitesse avec laquelle est entrainée une onde
lumineuse traversant un milieu en mouvement,” Arch. Neerl., 1868, 3, pp. 180-185;
and 1869, 4, pp. 443-450

"In 1868, M. Hoek, an astronomer from Utrecht, split a light beam so that it would travel in opposite directions, and he had the beams travel through both water and air. Again, since light travels slower in water, then as the light beams meet back at the starting point, one beam will come in slower than the other and cause what is known as “fringes” on the receiving plate, that is, alternating light and dark patterns. Working on the idea that as the Earth moved through space it was doing so against the ether, which creates friction against the light (and which Fresnel described as a “drag”), if the apparatus of Hoek’s experiment were turned in the direction of the Earth’s movement, and then subsequently perpendicular to it, there would not only be fringes but a noticeable shifting of the fringes.

To his surprise, Hoek noticed no significant difference in the fringes, not in accord with an Earth supposedly moving 30 km/sec."

(http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Hoek/Hoek1.jpg)

In 1892, H. Lorentz was summoned to come up with some kind of explanation in order to account for the results of the Hoek experiment and also for the Michelson experiment of 1881.

With just one stroke of a pen, Lorentz discarded all asymmetrical terms of the original set of Maxwell's equations and introduced his own version of electromagnetic theory (“La theorie electromagnétique de Maxwell et son application aux corps mouvants.” Archives néerlandaises des sciences exactes et naturelles 25 (1892): 363–552).

But there is no such thing as the Lorentz transformation:

https://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Relativity%20Theory/Download/7149

The colossal mistakes committed by Lorentz and Einstein in deriving the Lorentz transformation/factor:

http://relativityunraveled.net/chapter-4-the-michelson-morley-experiment/

http://relativityunraveled.net/chapter-5-the-lorentz-transformation/

http://relativityunraveled.net/chapter-1-introduction/

Dr. Hans Zweig, Stanford University: http://wiki.naturalphilosophy.org/wiki/hans-j-zweig/

"A solution to the original/corrected Maxwell equations indicates that these equations are invariant under the Galilean transformation.

Consequently velocity vectors are additive, which means that the speed of light can be exceeded.

The common representation of Maxwell’s [modified] equations is valid only for static systems.

The physicists at the turn of the twentieth century were unaware of this limitation. They assumed that Maxwell’s [modified] equations were universally valid (i.e.: applicable to any inertial coordinate system) and tried to apply them to dynamic systems which led to inconsistencies. But instead of realizing and correcting the error (by modifying Maxwell’s equations; [i.e., using the original ether equations published by Maxwell in 1861) they introduced the Lorentz transformation which was the foundation of the flawed theory of relativity."

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1918701#msg1918701

Rigorous proof that discarding the Lorentz condition produces energy from the vacuum systems is given by Evans:

M. W. Evans et al., “Classical Electrodynamics without the Lorentz Condition: Extracting Energy from the Vacuum,” Physica Scripta, 61, 513-517 (2000)

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1238/Physica.Regular.061a00513/meta

http://www.academia.edu/25242199/Classical_Electrodynamics_without_the_Lorentz_Condition_Extracting_Energy_from_the_Vacuum

And this is the same Lorentz who in 1886 made this statement:

“Briefly, everything occurs as if the Earth were at rest…”

(“On the Influence of the Earth’s Motion on Luminiferous Phenomena,” as quoted in Arthur Miller’s Albert Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity, p. 20)


Mascart Experiment

E. Mascart, "Sur les modifications qu'eprouve la lumiere par suite du mouvement de la source lumineuse", Ann. de l'Ecole norm. 1, 1872, 157-214

Still another experiment was performed just one year after Airy’s findings to test for the motion of the Earth. In 1872 Eleuthère Elie Nicolas Mascart devised an experiment in which he could detect the motion of the Earth through ether by measuring the rotation of the plane of polarization of light propagated along the axis of a quartz crystal. Mascart was awarded the 1873 Grand Prix of the Paris Academy of Sciences for this work

Polarization is a phenomenon of white light, which propagates along the axis of forward movement at many different angles but is reduced to just one angle. Polarizers are filters containing long-chain polymer molecules that are oriented in one specific position. As such, the incident light vibrating in the same plane as the polymer molecules is the only light absorbed, while light vibrating at right angles to the plane is passed through the polarizer. Mascart set up the experiment so that if the Earth were passing through the ether at the expected clip of 30 km/sec, then the light’s plane of polarization would be affected. Mascart found no such results. His experiment was just another indication that Earth was not moving.

(from Galileo Was Wrong)


Airy Experiment

George Airy belonged to the exclusive Astronomer Royal of England, thus he was a well-respected scientist and had quite a reputation and audience for his endeavors.

Airy had to figure out some way of determining whether the light from a star was affected by Earth’s supposed motion. Whereas Bradley used only one kind of telescope, Airy had the ingenious idea of using a second telescope filled with water. Since Arago/Fresnel/Fizeau had already shown that light’s speed was slowed by glass or water, Airy assumed that if a telescope was filled with water then the starlight coming through the water should be slower than it would be in air, and thus bend the starlight outward toward the upper side of the telescope and away from the eyepiece (just as we see light bent when we put a pencil in water). In order to compensate for the outward bending of the starlight, Airy assumed he would have to tilt his water-filled telescope just a little more toward the lower end of the star so that its light would hit his eyepiece directly rather than hitting the side of the telescope.

Although Airy had suspected the outcome prior to the actual experiment, indeed, he soon discovered that he was not required to tilt his water-filled telescope toward the star to any greater degree than his air-filled telescope. These results indicated that Earth wasn’t moving, since if there is no additional adjustment necessary for a water-filled telescope toward the direction of the starlight, it means the starlight is coming into both telescopes at the same angle and speed, that is, directly overhead. If Earth were moving, then a water-filled telescope would have to be titled toward the starlight a little more acutely than an airfilled telescope: in the heliocentric model, the Earth is moving sufficiently against the incidence of distant starlight upon it, and thus the water-filled telescope would not be able to catch all of the starlight in the slower medium of water. It would have to be titled slightly ahead of the air-filled telescope to make up for light’s slower speed in water.

In other words, if Earth were moving, it would be moving against the ether, and thus the ether wind, as it were, would be expected to push the starlight past the telescope. Airy showed that the ether was not pushing the starlight faster through one medium than the other since both of his telescopes could view the star from the same angle.

(from Galileo Was Wrong)

G. B. Airy's experiment (1871)

'Airy's failure' (Reference - Proc. Roy. Soc. London v 20 p 35). Telescopes have to be very slightly tilted to get the starlight going down the axis of the tube because of the earth's 'speed around the sun'. Airy filled a telescope with water that greatly slowed down the speed of the light inside the telescope and found that he did not have to change the angle of the telescope. This showed that the starlight was already coming in at the original measured angle so that no change was needed. This demonstrated that it was the stars moving relative to a stationary earth and not the fast orbiting earth moving relative to the comparatively stationary stars. If it was the telescope moving he would have had to change the angle.

(Imagine the telescope like a tube, sloped so that the light from one star hits the bottom of the tube. Even if the starlight is slowed down inside the tube (using water), it will still hit the bottom of the tube because its direction is already determined. If it were the tube that was moving, slowing down the starlight would mean that the angle of the tube would have to change for the light to hit the bottom of the tube.)

It is interesting that the original short two page report merely lists the results and discusses the accuracy of the telescope used. There is not the slightest reference to the astonishing result that this experiment demonstrates - that the stars are moving round the stationary earth.

Airy's experiment proved that the starlight was already coming into the earth at an angle, being carried along by the rotating aether.

https://web.archive.org/web/20120206194913/http://www.geocentricuniverse.com/Airy.htm


Michelson Experiment (1881)

Just a few years after George Airy’s experiment, Albert Michelson invented a somewhat sophisticated piece of equipment to test Airy’s results. The interferometer he assembled was similar to Hoek’s, but it was built a little better and was more accurate, yet it was very sensitive to vibration and heat, and therefore its results could be thrown off a bit. Nevertheless, if the Earth were moving through ether this machine was designed to detect it. The idea was to split a light beam into two beams and send them in perpendicular directions, which beams are then reflected back and recombined on a photographic plate. The distances traveled by the beams are not the same, thus the waves from the two beams will not be in synch, producing a pattern of light and dark fringes after they recombine. These fringes prove that the principle behind the interferometer indeed works, since non-synchronous light waves will produce fringes. Identical to Hoek’s experiment, Michelson’s procedure was to turn, slightly and periodically, the table on which the interferometer rested. The speeds of the two beams with respect to the ether will thus change, and so will the times taken for the beams to recombine. Because troughs and crests of the light waves would not match up the same as in a non-rotating table, the original fringes would shift in their pattern of bright and dark lines.

The first interferometer trial was in 1881. After Michelson drew up plans for the device and submitted them to a company in Berlin for construction, Alexander Graham Bell, famous for the invention of the telephone, provided the needed funds. Michelson had not met Edward Morley as yet and thus he worked alone. Lo and behold, when Michelson performed the experiment he did not see a significant shifting of fringes, at least not those he was expecting. Using a 600 nanometer wavelength of light, Michelson expected to see fringe shifts (or, as he called them, “displacement of the interference bands”) of at least 0.04 of a fringe width. The 0.04 figure corresponds to an Earth moving at 30 km/sec around the sun. If this was combined with what Michelson believed was the solar system’s apparent movement toward the constellation Hercules, the fringes should have shifted on the order of 0.10 of a fringe width. But Michelson didn’t see any fringe shifting close to either value.

The interpretation of these results is that there is no displacement of the interference bands. The result of the hypothesis of a stationary ether is thus shown to be incorrect, and the necessary conclusion follows that the hypothesis is erroneous. This conclusion directly contradicts the explanation of aberration which has been hitherto generally accepted, and which presupposes that the Earth moves through the ether, the latter remaining at rest.

Albert A. Michelson, “The relative motion of the Earth and the Luminiferous ether,”
The American Journal of Science, Vol. 3, No. 22, 1881, p. 128

Unfortunately for the heliocentrists, Michelson only confirmed Airy’s results and, in the process, overturned the hypothesis of Fresnel and Fizeau, who claimed that the Earth moved through space at 30 km/sec and was doing so against the ether, which creates friction against a light beam pointed in the same direction, and which would thus decrease the speed of the light beam.

Michelson’s experiment, as he says himself, also overturned the idea that “the Earth moves through the ether.” On the surface, this is a rather amazing admission by Michelson. Perhaps he did not realize what he had said; nevertheless, there it is. He did not say that the ether did not exist; rather, he said Earth does not move through the ether. Fresnel had “presupposed” that the Earth moved at 30 km/sec through ether, but Michelson’s results said no. At this point Michelson was being very honest with his own results.

(from Galileo Was Wrong)

It is to be noted that Lorentz was called upon again in 1882 to try to explain the Michelson experiment, but all he could do is try to make use of an early version of the transformation that bears his name, thus nullifying his very own argument.


The orbital Sagnac effect is completely missing:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1911899#msg1911899

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1917978#msg1917978

In addition, the orbital solar gravitational potential is not being registered either by the GPS satellites' clocks.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1846706#msg1846706


Thus, the hypotheses of the Ruderfer experiment are totally fulfilled:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1846721#msg1846721

Why is there no requirement for a Sagnac correction due to the earth’s orbital motion? Like the transit time in the spinning Mossbauer experiments, any such effect would be completely canceled by the orbital-velocity effect on the satellite clocks.


Given the results of the Michelson experiment (1881) which proved that the Earth does not move through ether, the results of the Ruderfer experiment prove one thing very directly: it is the dynamical ether which rotates above the surface of a stationary Earth.



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 19, 2017, 03:07:04 AM
GEOCENTRIC UNIVERSE: GAMMA-RAY BURSTS

In the recently published book by Oxford University Press titled The Biggest Bangs: The Mystery of Gamma-Ray Bursts, the Most Violent Explosions in the Universe, author and astrophysicist Jonathan I. Katz of Washington University, a scientist who admits of no partiality toward a geocentric universe, includes a chapter titled The Copernican Dilemma.

Katz’s studies have found that, when all the known gamma-ray bursts are calculated and catalogued, they show Earth to be in the center of it all.

He writes:

The uniform distribution of burst arrival directions tells us that the distribution of gamma-ray-burst sources in space is a sphere or spherical shell, with us at the center (some other extremely contrived and implausible distributions are also possible).

To this day, after the detection of several thousand bursts, and despite earnest efforts to show the contrary, no deviation from a uniform random distribution (isotropy) in the directions of gamma-ray bursts on the sky has ever been convincingly demonstrated.


Gamma-ray bursts are equivalent to 1045 watts of energy, which is over a million trillion times as powerful as the sun.


No longer could astronomers hope that the Copernican dilemma would disappear with improved data. The data were in hand, and their implication inescapable: we are at the center of a spherically symmetric distribution of gamma-ray-burst sources, and this distribution has an outer edge. Beyond this edge the density of burst sources decreases to insignificance.

Jonathan Katz, The Biggest Bangs: The Mystery of Gamma-Ray Bursts, The Most Violent Explosions in the Universe, Oxford University Press, 2002, p. 111

Studies of the cosmic background radiation have confirmed the isotropy of the radiation, or its complete uniformity in all directions. If the universe possesses a center, we must be very close to it…otherwise, excessive observable anisotropy in the radiation intensity would be produced, and we would detect more radiation from one direction than from the opposite direction.

Joseph Silk, University of California (Berkeley)

In other words, the isotropy of the CMB can only be true from an Earth-centered location. If observed anywhere else in the universe the CMB will appear anisotropic.

In 1995, G. J. Fishman and C. A. Meegan, after analyzing a number of gamma-ray bursts, came to the only logical conclusion: “The isotropy and inhomogeneity of the bursts show only that we are at the center of the apparent burst distribution.”

Annual Reviews of Astronomy and Astrophysics 33, 415, 1995

During the same time, S. E. Woolsey’s review of gamma radiation stated the logical conclusion even more directly: “The observational data show conclusively that the Earth is situated at or very near the center of the gamma-ray burst universe.”

“Gamma-Ray Bursts: What Are They?” in Seventeenth Texas Symposium on Relativistic Astrophysics and Cosmology, New York Academy of Sciences, New York, 1995, p. 446


Cosmic Ether Background:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1828839#msg1828839


How significant is this quadrupole-octopole alignment? As a simple definition of preferred axis [it] denotes the spherical harmonic coefficients of the map in a rotated coordinate system….if the CMB is an isotropic Gaussian random field, then a chance alignment this good requires a 1-in-62 fluke.

Max Tegmark, Angélica de Oliveira-Costa and Andrew J. S. Hamilton, “A high resolution foreground cleaned CMB map from WMAP,” Physical Review D, July 26, 2003, p. 14

Angélica de Oliveira-Costa stated that the cosmic quadrupole and octopole are both very planar and aligned, which according to the CERN correspondent reporting the interview means that the points “happen to fall on a great circle on the sky,” and we are in the center of that great circle.

Perhaps just as important is the following remark by the Tegmark team:

What does this all mean?…it is difficult not to be intrigued by the similarities [of our findings] with what is expected in some non-standard [i.e., non Big Bang] models, for instance, ones involving a flat “small Universe” with a compact topology and one of the three dimensions being relatively small.

Working alongside mathematician Jeffrey Weeks, New Scientist reports:

Scientists have announced tantalizing hints that the universe is actually relatively small, with a hall-of-mirrors illusion tricking us into thinking that space stretches on forever….Weeks and his colleagues, a team of astrophysicists in France, say the WMAP results suggest that the universe is not only small, but that space wraps back on itself in a bizarre way (Nature, vol. 425, p. 593)….Effectively, the universe would be like a hall of mirrors, with the wraparound effect producing multiple images of everything inside.” Spergel adds: “If we could prove that the universe was finite and small, that would be Earth-shattering. It would really change our view of the universe”

New Scientist, October 8, 2003

In a recent publication, the team of Dominik Schwarz, Glenn Starkman, et al., discovered that:

The large-angle correlations of the cosmic microwave background exhibit several statistically significant anomalies compared to the standard inflationary cosmology….the quadrupole-octopole correlation is excluded from being a chance occurrence in a gaussian random statistically isotropic sky at >99.87%….The correlation of the normals with the ecliptic poles suggest an unknown source or sink of CMB radiation or an unrecognized systematic. If it is a physical sources or sink in the inner solar system it would cause an annual modulation in the time-ordered data….Physical correlation of the CMB with the equinoxes is difficult to imagine, since the WMAP satellite has no knowledge of the inclination of the Earth’s spin axis.

Dominik J. Schwarz, Glenn D. Starkman, Dragan Huterer and Craig J. Copi, “Is the
Low-l Microwave Background Cosmic?” Physical Review Letters, November 26, 2004,
pp. 221301-1 to 4

Schwarz and Starkman then refer to the study of Tegmark and Oliveira-Costa we covered above, noting that the “preferred axes of the quadrupole modes…and the octopole modes…were remarkably closely aligned” (i.e., geocentric), and they add the study of Hans Kristian Eriksen in 2003 at the University of Oslo, citing that:

What they found contradicted the standard inflationary cosmology – the hemispheres often had very different amounts of power. But what was most surprising was that the pair of hemispheres that were the most different were the ones lying and below the ecliptic, the plane of the earth’s orbit around the sun. This result was the first sign that the CMB fluctuations, which were supposed to be cosmological in origin…have a solar system signal in them – that is, a type of observational artifact.

The significance of Eriksen’s finding may go over the heads of most people not familiar with astrophysical language, but the simple interpretation is that all the radiation in the universe, whether it is symmetric or asymmetric, is centered around the Earth (although because Eriksen is a Copernican he refers to it as “the plane of the earth’s orbit around the sun”). This is confirmed when Schwarz, et al., state later: “Within that plane, they sit unexpectedly close to the equinoxes – the two points on the sky where the projection of the earth’s equator onto the sky crosses the ecliptic.” In other words, all the data show that, as far out as our telescopes can see, space is oriented geocentrically. What are the chances that this could happen by accident? The team of Copernicans has to admit that the “combined chance probability is certainly less than one in 10,000.”

In conclusion, all the investigations show that the characteristics of the CMB: (a) lean heavily against the Big Bang theory and (b) suggest that our local system (e.g., sun, Earth and planets) is either a central source or the central depository or “sink” for the CMB radiation. This means that the Earth and its neighbors are in the center of the phenomenon. He further adds that the positioning of the poles symmetrically above and beneath the sun’s ecliptic is to be interpreted as no accident. The CMB poles couldn’t position themselves in respect of the Earth’s rotation or translation since the poles have no reaction to such movement. As such, the orientation of the CMB is purely geocentric.

(from Galileo Was Wrong)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 19, 2017, 07:42:42 AM
GEOCENTRIC UNIVERSE II: X-RAY BURSTS

BL Lacertae (or BL Lac) objects are somewhat between a quasar and a galaxy, since their spectra are dominated by a non-thermal radiation, but one that is continuous and which features radio and X-ray emissions. Although more rare, they are similar to quasars, and one would expect BL Lac’s to have the same periodicity. Indeed they do. Interestingly enough, the data supporting this is documented in one of the standards of the industry, the 1995 Véron and Véron catalogue.

The catalogue’s graph shows BL Lac distribution occurring in redshift clumps of 0.30, 0.60 and 0.96 km/sec. This precise periodicity, of course, is giving the same evidence of the centrality of Earth that gamma-rays and quasars have given.

The periodicity of the galaxy-quasar pairs that come in the mathematical intervals noted earlier (see page 14 of this thread) constitutes another proof as to the position of the Earth in the exact center of these periodicities.

The same periodicity was found of X-ray clusters using the German-built X-ray telescope, ROSAT.

In a survey conducted by Marguerite Pierre, et al., Dr. Halton Arp writes:

The most amazing thing about this investigation is perhaps the obvious non-random distribution of the X-ray clusters in this region of the sky and the failure of the investigators to comment on it. Perhaps the next most amazing aspect is that the largest grouping of the brightest X-ray clusters in this whole region conspicuously coincided with the brightest galaxies in the region – but went unremarked.

(from Galileo Was Wrong)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 19, 2017, 08:31:29 AM
GEOCENTRIC UNIVERSE III: QUASAR SPHERICAL SHELLS

All kinds of interesting objects and forces were being found in man’s telescope, e.g., quasars, gamma-ray and X-ray bursters, cosmic background microwave radiation, and a wide assortment of galaxies and star clusters. To the utter consternation of the world’s scientists, each of the newfound discoveries kept revealing the same piece of startling information – that Earth was right smack in the center of it all. In the words of astrophysicist Yatendra P. Varshni of the University of Ottawa who specialized in quasars:

The Earth is indeed the center of the Universe. The arrangement of quasars on certain spherical shells is only with respect to the Earth. These shells would disappear if viewed from another galaxy or quasar. This means that the cosmological principle will have to go. Also it implies that a coordinate system fixed to the Earth will be a preferred frame of reference in the Universe. Consequently, both the Special and General Theory of Relativity must be abandoned for cosmological purposes.

Astrophysics and Space Science, 43:3 (1976), p. 8

Astrophysicist Yatendra P. Varshni did extensive work on the spectra of quasars. In 1975 he catalogued 384 quasars between redshift of 0.2 and 3.53 and, amazingly, found that they were formed in 57 separate groupings of concentric spheres around the Earth. He made the following startling conclusion:

...the quasars in the 57 groups...are arranged on 57 spherical shells with the Earth as the center....The cosmological interpretation of the redshift in the spectra of quasars leads to yet another paradoxical result: namely, that the Earth is the center of the universe.

“The Red Shift Hypothesis for Quasars: Is the Earth the Center of the Universe?” Astrophysics and Space Science, 43: (1), (1976), p. 3

Varshni first based his calculations on the spectra of the quasars and then did a second test on their actual redshifts. Both tests produced the same results.

Varshni calculated the odds against such an arrangement and found:

From the multiplicative law of probability, the probability of these 57 sets of coincidences occurring in this system of 384 QSOs is ≈ 3 × 10-85. We hope this number will be convincing evidence that the coincidences are real and cannot be attributed to chance.

Soon after Varshni’s work, astronomers found over 20,000 quasars, and none of them altered Varshni’s original results. In fact, they refer to it as the “quasar distribution problem.”

The other “problem,” of course, is that since these quasars are distributed around Earth with such specific periodicity, this means that Earth is situated in a quasar-free hole, and that no other such “holes” exist anywhere else in the universe. Moreover, even if one were to dispute Varshni’s findings by positing an alternative explanation for redshift (e.g., the belief that red-shift does not measure distance), the 57 concentric groupings of quasars will appear nonetheless when put in terms of “phase space,” which, in astrophysics, is a multidimensional view of the sky utilizing Cartesian dimensions coupled with time and momentum to plot positions on a map.

A year after Varshni’s 1976 paper, C. B. Stephenson attempted to explain the startling findings by suggesting that the Big Bang produced periodic bands of quasars that spread out over time.

Astrophysics and Space Science, 51, 117-119 (1977)

Varshni wrote back to the same periodical a few months later critiquing Stephenson’s
proposal, saying:

Instead of having Earth at the center, now we have to assume that the Universe evolved in fits and starts of quasar production. The concept of preferred epochs for quasar production is hardly any more aesthetic than that of a preferred position for the Earth.”

Astrophysics and Space Science, 51, 121, 1977

Perhaps getting wind of Varshni’s results, in the same year a team of astronomers from California Institute of Technology led by Vera C. Rubin set out to disprove the geo- or galacto-centric findings. That they may have been motivated to refute Varshni’s findings is suggested by one conspicuous comment in their report reflecting the possible upsetting of their evidence: “Hopefully, it will not force a return to the pre-Copernican view of a hierarchy of motions whose sum is zero at the Sun.” The team set out to prove that the sum total of motions in the universe did not add up to zero in our local system, for a null sum would mean that the Earth-based observer was not in motion. Try as they may, the team was not able to rule out a null sum pointing to a geocentric universe.

Vera C. Rubin, Norbert Thonnard and W. Kent Ford, Jr., “Motion of the Galaxy and the Local Group determined from the velocity anisotropy of distant Sc I galaxies,” The Astronomical Journal, vol. 81, No. 9, Sept. 1976, p. 735

Another study conducted in 1976 by Paul Schechter of the Steward Observatory analyzed the data of Rubin’s team and sought to determine whether the results could be controverted, but found they could not. Schechter found the same canceling of galactic motion centered on the Earth-based observer as did the Rubin team.

Paul L. Schechter, “On the Solar Motion with Respect to External Galaxies,” Astronomical Journal, vol. 82, August 1977, pp. 569-576

Not only does the new scientific evidence show us that Earth is in the center of these heavenly bodies, it may also require us to accept that the universe is much smaller than Big Bang hypothesizers have led us to believe. Note this admission from the previous author:

On the other hand, if the redshifts displayed by the object were false indicators of recession velocity, then the sources could be nearby and the problem of the energy source would go away.

But the implications of this explanation were even more horrifying to astronomers. If some entirely unknown physical mechanism could mimic the Doppler displacement of the emission lines of a receding object, then the whole concept of an expanding universe would be thrown into question; the Hubble scale of cosmic distances an essential tool for both astronomers and cosmologists would have to be discarded.

Not only does Varshni’s evidence compel him to dismiss Einstein’s Relativity, but Edwin Hubble’s theory that the universe is expanding is also suspect. Varshni’s astounding evidence has also been confirmed by other astrophysicists, with even more extensive studies.

The Ukrainian team of N. A. Zhuck, V. V. Moroz, A. A. Varaksin, who examined 23,760 quasars, confirm the following:

Regularity in quasar allocation…revealing that the quasars are grouped in thin walls of meshes [with] quasars spatial distribution in spherical and Cartesian coordinates…quasars have averages of distribution, root-mean-square diversion and correlation factors, typical for uniform distribution of random quantities; in smaller gauges the quasars are grouped in thin walls of meshes…. It is impossible to term these results, and the results of other similar investigations, as ordinary accidental coincidence. Obviously we have the facts confirming that the quasars are distributed uniformly in the universe…

“Quasars and the Large Scale Structure of the Universe,” N. A. Zhuck, V. V. Moroz, A. A. Varaksin, Spacetime and Substance, International Physical Journal, Ukraine, Vol. 2, No. 5 (10) 2001, p. 193, 196

They conclude that the “quasars’ allocation in meshes correlates with galaxy allocation,” which means that the same spherical groupings noticed in quasars are also true for galaxies.

In addition, their evidence brings them to the same conclusion as Varshni’s in the discovery of the distribution of his quasars. The Ukrainian team states that their result “…confirms the concept of the stationary inconvertible universe and to reject [the] concept [of a] dynamic dilating universe which [was] erroneously formed in the XXth century and taking a beginning from a so-called Big Bang….Such a model is based on the non-steady solutions of the Einsteinian equations obtained by Soviet geophysicist and mathematician Friedmann at the beginning of the 1920s and the dynamics of the exploding commencement…advanced by American physicist Gamov at the end of the 1940s.”

(from Galileo Was Wrong)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 04, 2017, 04:36:30 AM
DARK FLOW II

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1936995#msg1936995 (Dark Flow, part I)

(https://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/images/content/433217main_Dark_Flow_map.jpg)

Dark flow may extend across the entire observable Universe.

Dr. Alexander Kashlinsky (senior staff scientist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, PhD Cambridge):

The measurements of the “Dark Flow” (DF) take on additional importance due to the fact that the DF may be the most direct observational link thus far to the physics of the Quantum Cosmology era.


The cosmological implications of the large-scale motion of galaxy clusters are as follows.

Dark Flow totally defies the law of "universal" gravitation.

Dark Flow completely disobeys the theory of General Relativity.

"According to the Big Bang theory, the Universe is about 13.7 billion years old; yet the gravitational attractor, tugging only on galaxy clusters, is some 32-34 billion light years away. Additionally, this gravitational force is unique and selective in its action; only affecting galaxy clusters, but not everything else. Gravity undoubtedly must affect the motion of all massive bodies and, therefore, since it is pulling the galaxy clusters, it should be pulling everything else to it, not just galaxy clusters, based on Newtonian Law.

In terms of Einstein, the identical problem exists. A massive object outside the Universe has warped space to cause galaxy clusters to move toward or away from it; that warping of space should do the same for all matter in the Universe. In terms of Dark Energy, all galaxies are supposedly moving away from each other and, therefore, would not also, at the same time, permit only galaxy clusters to not follow this expansion, but move to or away from a preferred area. If Dark Energy existed, these galaxy clusters should also be moving away from one another in different directions.

These clear-cut findings defy the Big Bang theory and, thus, have made the Dark Flow evidence very unwelcome for many cosmologists."

(https://s1.postimg.org/30n42h8osv/flow1.jpg)

(https://s1.postimg.org/4zw26zc4r3/flow2.jpg)

Newton's law of universal gravitation is totally DEFIED on a grand cosmic scale by the large scale motion of the galaxy clusters.

Einstein's GTR is made completely useless by Dark Flow.

In a series of papers over the past three years, Kashlinsky and his colleagues have shown that the huge region of space in which we live a region at least 2.5 billion light-years across is moving relative to the rest of the universe, and fast, in total defiance to the accepted laws of gravitation.


In an important development, published in the peer reviewed and prestigious journal Physical Review D, cosmologist C. Tsagas has proven that the universe either has dark flow or dark energy, but not both. Tsagas argues that the dark flow is skewing our perspective on the behavior of the universe as a whole. Without considering the dark flow, but just knowing that light we observe from nearby galaxies left its source more recently than light from galaxies farther away, we get the false impression that the whole of space recently entered an accelerating phase. According to Tsagas' work, the acceleration of the universe in our immediate vicinity is caused by its motion alone. The universe beyond our region isn't accelerating outward; rather, it is safely rolling to a stop.

In other words, given the irrefutable evidence for Dark Flow, the invocation of the existence of "dark energy," a mysterious, invisible substance that permeates space and drives its outward expansion to account for the "expanding" universe hypothesis, is no longer possible.

Then, modern cosmology has another quandary on its hands: it claims that 95% of the known universe is not observable (dark matter and dark energy), while at the same time it dismisses the aether/ether theory on the same grounds.

But ether drift can be detected:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1722791#msg1722791

Dark Flow not only defies Newtonian graviation and GTR, but also proves that there is no such thing as dark energy.

https://academic.oup.com/mnrasl/article/426/1/L36/988475/Dark-flows-and-the-cosmological-axis (C. Tsagas, Dark flows and the cosmological axis, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters, Volume 426, Issue 1, 1 October 2012, Pages L36–L40)


In another outcome, based on the experimental data, scientists have proved that the space of the Universe revolves.

For example, Professor Michael Longo (University of Michigan in Ann Arbor), having studied [1,2] in the framework of Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) database project SDSS DR5, which contains about 40,000 galaxies (of them - more than 15,000 spiral galaxies), for where the value of redshift z < 0.04, came to the conclusion that the number of left twisted spiral galaxies is much larger than spiral galaxies swirling right.

Conclusions of professor Michael Longo were confirmed by a group of scientists led by Professor Lior Shamir (Lawrence Technological University).

They investigated about 250 thousand spiral galaxies, for which the value of redshift z < 0.3. Professor Lior Shamir also found that galaxies to the left more than to the right. Symmetry breaking between the right- and left - twisted spiral galaxies is about seven percent, but the probability that is a cosmic accident is very low - claims Professor Michael Longo. The results of research professors Michael Longo and Lior Shamir contradict the notion that the Universe is homogeneous and symmetric.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370269311003947

http://ccapp.osu.edu/workshops/GLCW8/glcw8/talks/mLongo.pdf

The stakes here are big. If there is a preferred direction:

Cosmological principle is violated. ("On large spatial scales, the Universe is homogeneous and isotropic.")

Einstein Equivalence is violated. (“The outcome of any local non-gravitational experiment is independent of the velocity of the freely-falling reference frame in which it is performed.”)

Lior Shamir, ”Handedness asymmetry of spiral galaxies with z¡0.3 shows cosmic parity
violation and a dipole axis”, Physics Letters B, Volume 715, Issues 1-3, 29 August 2012,
Pages 25-29.


Most cosmologists have no idea that Kurt Godel provided an exact solution of the Einstein field equations that described a rotating universe.

Dark Flow is simply the rotation of the heavenly bodies contained within the space between the two aether domes. It also detected the existence of the second dome, within the flat earth theory context.

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2011/07/-is-the-universe-spinning-new-research-says-yes.html


Concerning the Cavendish experiment, in the official chronology of history, Cavendish discovered that when he heated one of the objects the attraction between the objects increased. For over two hundred years the physics establishment has either ignored, or tried to explain away, this result.

Cavendish discovered that "the arm moved backwards, in the same manner that it before move forward". Gravity is not supposed to involve repulsion. The second result was that after heating one of the weights "the effect was so much increased, that the arm was drawn 14 division aside, instead of about three". Heating one of the weights increased the attraction. The heating increased the emission of the weight and when this was absorbed by the other weight it increased the attraction.

Therefore, the Cavendish experiment proved that gravity effects varied with temperature. Convection currents fail to explain how such an effect could be observed.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1852840#msg1852840 (Dr. F. Nipher experiments: the relationship between gravitation and the electric field)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 09, 2017, 03:47:48 AM
WHEN DID SHAKESPEARE LIVE? II

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1620012#msg1620012 (part I, includes the fact that the references to Paul in the plays could not have been made in the early part of the 17th century and that Shakespeare owned a copy of Ortelius' maps dated 1570, which feature Pompeii and Herculaneum as thriving cities in Italy, 1570AD)

In The Great Cryptogram, by Ignatius Donnelly, extraordinary circumstantial evidence is invoked to prove that both the plays attributed to Shakespeare and the works published by Francis Bacon were written by one and the same person.

https://archive.org/stream/greatcryptogramf00donnrich#page/n12/mode/1up

The author of the Shakespearean plays had a very good knowledge of Latin and Greek.

"The greater part of the story of Timon was taken from the  untranslated Greek of Lucian."

"Shakespeare's plays," says White, " show forty per cent of  Romance or Latin words, which is probably a larger proportion  than is now used by our best writers; certainly larger than is  heard from those who speak their mother tongue with spontaneous, idiomatic correctness."

"The writer was a classical scholar. Rowe found traces in him of the Electra of Sophocles; Colman, of Ovid; Pope, of Dares Phrygius, and other Greek authors; Farmer, of Horace and Virgil; Malone, of Lucretius, Statius, Catullus, Seneca, Sophocles, and Euripides; Stevens, of Plautus; Knight, of the Antigone of Sophocles; and White, of the Alcestis of Euripides.

White says:

His very frequent use of Latin derivatives in their radical sense shows a somewhat thoughtful and observant study of that language.

White further says:

Where, even in Plutarch's pages, are the aristocratic republican tone and the tough muscularity of mind, which characterized the Romans, so embodied as in Shakespeare's Roman plays? Where, even in Homer's song, the subtle wisdom of the crafty Ulysses, the sullen selfishness and conscious martial might of broad Achilles; the blundering courage of thick-headed Ajax ; or the mingled gallantry and foppery of Paris, so vividly portrayed as in Troilus and CreSsida ?

Knight says:

The marvelous accuracy, the real, substantial learning, of the three Roman plays of Shakespeare present the most complete evidence to our minds that they were the result of a profound study of the whole range of Roman history, including the nicer details of Roman manners, not in those days to be acquired in a compendious form, but to be brought out by diligent reading alone."

"And again:

In his Roman plays he appears co-existent with his wonderful characters, and to have read all the obscure pages of Roman history with a clearer eye than philosopher or historian. When he employs Latinisms in the construction of his sentences, and even in the creation of new words, he does so with singular facility and unerring correctness.

Appleton Morgan says:

In Antony and Cleopatra, Charmian suggests a game of billiards. But this is not, as is supposed, an anachronism, for the human encyclopedia who wrote that sentence appears to have known — what very few people know nowadays — that the game of billiards is older than Cleopatra."

Alexander Schmidt, in his lexicon, under the word Adonis, quotes the following lines from Shakespeare:

Thy promises are like Adonis' gardens,

That one day bloomed and fruitful were the next. 

Upon which Schmidt comments:

Perhaps confounded with the garden of King Alcinous in the Odyssey?

Richard Grant White says:

No mention of any such garden in the classic writings of Greece and Rome is known to scholars.

But the writer of the plays, who, we are told, was no scholar, had penetrated more deeply into the classic writings than his learned critics; and a recent commentator, James D. Butler, has found out the source of this allusion. He says:

This couplet must have been suggested by Plato. (Phaedrus, p. 276.) The translation is Jowett's — that I may not be suspected of warping the original to fit my theory:

Would a husbandman, said Socrates, who is a man of sense, take the seeds, which he values and which he wishes to be fruitful, and in sober earnest plant them during the heat of summer, in some garden of Adonis, that he may rejoice when he sees them in eight days appearing in beauty? Would he not do that, if at all, to please the spectators at a festival? But the seeds about which he is in earnest he sows in fitting soil, and practices husbandry, and is satisfied if in eight months they arrive at perfection.

Here we clearly have the original of the disputed passage:

Thy promises are like Adonis' gardens,

That one day bloomed and fruitful were the next.
"

"W. O. Follett in his pamphlet, Addendum to Who Wrote Shakespeare, quotes a remark of the brothers Langhorne in the preface to their translation of the Lives of Plutarch, to this effect:

It is said by those who are not willing to allow Shakspere much learning, that he availed himself of the last mentioned translation [of Plutarch, by Thomas North]. But they seem to forget that, in order to support their arguments of this kind, it is necessary for them to prove that Plato, too, was translated into English at the same time; for the celebrated soliloquy, " To be or not to be," is taken almost verbatim from that philosopher; yet we have never found that Plato was translated in those times. "

"The story of Othello was taken from the Italian of Cinthio's II Capitano More, of which no translation is known to have existed; the tale of Cymbeline was drawn from an Italian novel of Boccaccio, not known to have been translated into English, and the like is true of other plays.

Richard Grant White conclusively proves that the writer of Othello had read the Orlando Furioso in the original Italian; that the very words are borrowed as well as the thought; and that the author adhered to the expressions in the Italian where the only translation then in existence had departed from them. The same high authority also shows that in the famous passage, "Who steals my purse steals trash," etc., the writer of Othello borrowed from the Orlando Innatnorato of Berni, "of which poem to this day there is no English version."

"It further appears that Shakespeare found the original of The Merchant of Venice in an untranslated Italian novel. Mr. Collier says:

In the novel Il Pecorone of Giovanni Fiorentino, we have the words in the Italian: li chel Giudeo gli potesse levare una libra di came d'addosso di qualumque luogo e' voiesse," which are so nearly like those of Shakespeare as to lead us to believe that he followed here some literal translation of the novel in Il Pecorone. None such has, however, reached our time, and the version we have printed at the foot of the Italian was made and published in 1765."

The plot of Hamlet was taken from Saxo Grammaticus, the Danish historian, of whom, says Peter Whalley (An Enquiry into the Learning of Shakespeare) writing in 1748, "no translation hath yet been made."  So that it would appear the author of Hamlet must have read the Danish chronicle in the original tongue."

"In Romeo and Juliet, Shakespeare places Romeo in a sycamore grove outside the walls of Verona. Shakespeare scholar Richard Roe has gone to all the locations in Italy and when he went to Verona he found there was a huge ancient grove of sycamores there. Some people say Shakespeare picked that up from a traveller but what traveller, having seen Venice and all the antiquities, would remark on a grove of sycamores outside Verona? No one would. That is the observation of someone who has been there."

In Act I Scene I, Benvolio tells Romeo’s mother:

underneath the grove of sycamore

That westward rooteth from the city’s side,

So early did I see your son…


(http://blog.tuscanynowandmore.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/roes-verona-sycamores.png)

BOOK I.— THE ARGUMENT.

PART I.

WILLIAM SHAKSPERE DID NOT WRITE THE PLAYS.

Chapter I. — The Learning of the Plays, 13

II. — Shakspere's .Education, 27

III. — Shakspere's Real Character, 44

IV. — The Lost Manuscripts and Library, 73

V. — The Author of the Plays a Lawyer, 102

PART II.

FRANCIS BACON THE REAL AUTHOR OF THE PLAYS.

Chapter I. — Francis Bacon a Poet, 121

II. — The Author of the Plays a Philosopher, 149

III. — The Geography of the Plays, 161

IV. — The Politics of the Plays, 173

V. — The Religion of the Plays, 196

VI. — The Purposes of the Plays, 212

VII. — The Reasons for Concealment, 246

VIII. — Corroborating Circumstances, 259

PART III.

PARALLELISMS.

Chapter I. — Identical Expressions, 295

II. — Identical Metaphors, 335

III. — Identical Opinions, 370

IV. — Identical Quotations, 397

V. — Identical Studies, 411

VI. — Identical Errors, -437

VII. — Identical Use of Unusual Words, 444

VIII. — Identities of Character, 462

IX. — Identities of Style, 481


But the works attributed to Francis Bacon must have been written much later in time, at least after 1750AD.

http://sas-space.sas.ac.uk/4649/1/John_Dee_and_the_English_Calendar__Science%2C_Religion_and_Empire_by_Robert_Poole___Institute_of_Historical_Research.pdf

"John Dee concluded that the calendar had indeed slipped out of line by ten days since the time of the council of Nicaea, but more to the point that it had slipped by eleven days since the time of Christ. An eleven-day alteration, to the time of Christ, rather than a ten-day alteration to the time of Nicaea, was needed, concluded Dee."

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg758652#msg758652

A brief summary of the dating of the First Council of Nicaea and the startling conclusions following the fact that the Gregorian calendar reform never occurred in 1582 AD.

Gauss' Easter formula proves that the Council of Nicaea could not have taken place before the year 876-877 AD, and that the vernal equinox fell on March 21, in the year 743 AD (and not in the year 325 AD).

And John Dee was Francis Bacon's mentor, in the official chronology of history.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 10, 2017, 04:03:07 AM
WHEN DID SHAKESPEARE LIVE? III

“So far as anybody actually knows and can prove, Shakespeare of Stratford-on-Avon never wrote a play in his life.”

M. Twain

“It is undeniably painful to all of us that even now we do not know who was the author of the Comedies, Tragedies and Sonnets of Shakespeare.”

S. Freud


https://doubtaboutwill.org/

https://doubtaboutwill.org/pdfs/SAC_beyond_reasonable_doubt_1.pdf


"How could an untraveled, poorly-schooled commoner have written so widely on topics about which he would have had no first-hand knowledge – court intrigue, the legal process, life in other countries, even stories and information that had never been translated into English?"

https://doubtaboutwill.org/declaration

The following are among the many outstanding writers, thinkers, actors, directors and statesmen of the past who have expressed doubt that Mr. “Shakspere” wrote the works of William Shakespeare:

Mark Twain
Henry James
Walt Whitman
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Sir George Greenwood
Orson Welles
Tyrone Guthrie
Charlie Chaplin
Sir John Gielgud
Hugh Trevor-Roper
William James
Sigmund Freud
Clifton Fadiman
John Galsworthy
Mortimer J. Adler
Paul H. Nitze
Lord Palmerston
William Y. Elliott
Harry A. Blackmun
Lewis F. Powell, Jr.

Present-day doubters include many more prominent individuals, numerous leading Shakespearean actors, and growing numbers of English professors. Brunel University in West London, and Concordia University in Portland, Oregon, now offer degree programs in authorship studies.

https://doubtaboutwill.org/past_doubters


And yet none of these famous thinkers have issued the most important and pertaining question: WHEN were the works/plays attributed to Shakespeare actually created?


(https://s1.postimg.org/4xp24t3umn/image.jpg)

Unpathed Waters: Studies in the Influence of the Voyages on Elizabethan Literature (Robert R Cawley)

The Works of Francis Bacon, Volume II, p. 208

(https://s1.postimg.org/6tr5ps5qb3/ob2.jpg)

A Companion to Global Historical Thought


http://alteagallery.com/stock_detail.php?ref=11185

ORTELIUS, Abraham.
Theatrum Orbis Terrarum. Antwerp: Gillis van den Rade, 1575. Folio, contemporary full calf gilt rebacked, bookplate on front pastedown; engraved titlepage in original colour with gold highlights including a mss presentation inscription from Anthony Bacon; pp. (xix), 70 maps, as called for, in original hand colour, five maps with minor repairs to either centrefold or margin.
A fine example of the first regularly produced atlas, as well as an important association copy, with a gilt mss presentation inscription from Anthony Bacon to "B. Turræo Italo DDD". Anthony Bacon (1558-1601), foster-brother of Francis Bacon and nephew of William Cecil, Lord Burghley.



Ortelius' atlas "Theatrum Orbis Terrarum"

Map "Regnum Neapolitanum", 1570, which features Pompeii as a thriving city in full activity:

(http://chronologia.org/en/articles/im/ortelius1.jpg)

(http://chronologia.org/en/articles/im/ortelius3.jpg)

https://www.ideararemaps.com/en/product/regni-neapolitani/


Thus Anthony Bacon and Francis Bacon had full knowledge of the Theatrum Orbis Terrarum map which exhibited in plain view the city of Pompeii in 1570 AD.


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1683424#msg1683424 (five consecutive messages, a full analysis of the fact that Pompeii and Herculaneum were destroyed by the eruption of the Vesuvius volcano at least after 1750 AD: maps, paleomagnetic dating, frescoes)


Official chronology information about Sebastian Munster’s Cosmographia:

Sebastian Münster’s Cosmographia was an immensely influential book that attempted to describe the entire world across all of human history and analyze its constituent elements of geography, history, ethnography, zoology and botany. First published in 1544 it went through thirty-five editions and was published in five languages, making it one of the most important books of the Reformation period.

Sebastian Münster: Cosmographia, "1544 AD", p. 479:

(http://www.dillum.ch/html/muenster_cosmographie_479_vesuvius_79_ad.gif)

The eruption of Vesuvius is now set as the year 79 AD and Pliny’s Historia Naturalis is described by Munster as having been a major influence upon his own work.

http://www.mapforum.com/10/10munster.htm

Amazingly, then, for the 1588 edition of the Cosmographia, Sebastian Henricpetri substituted new maps taken from Ortelius, but using woodcuts cut in emulation of the copperplate style of Ortelius's maps, even the Theatrum Orbis Terrarum (1570).


Shakespeare's plays and Bacon's works were created during the later decades of the 18th century.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 12, 2017, 12:01:33 AM
POMPEII - HERCULANEUM: 1725 - 1778 VI

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1683424#msg1683424 (parts I-V, five consecutive messages)

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ilya.it%2Fchrono%2Fpages%2Fpompejidt.htm&edit-text=

On the way from Naples to the south to Torre Annunziata, 15 kilometers from Naples, one can see a monument on the façade of the Villa Pharao Mennela, an epitaph for the victims of the eruption of Vesuvius in 1631, on two stone slabs with the text in the Latin language , On one of these are the towns of Pompeii and Herculaneum, as well as Resina and Portici, in the list of destroyed cities.

AT O
VIII ET LX POST ANNO XVII CALEND (AS) IANUARII
PHILIPPO IV REGE
FUMO, FLAMMIS, BOATU
CONCUSSO CINERE ERUPTIOHE
HORRIFICUS, FERUS SI UNQUAM VESUVIUS
NEC NOMEN NEC FASCES TANTI VIRI EXTIMUIT QUIPPE, EXARDESCENTE CAVIS SPECUBUS IGN, IGNITUS, FURENS, IRRUGIA,
EXITUM ELUCTANS. COERCITUSAER, IACULATUS TRANS HELLESPONTUMDISIECTO VIOLENTER MONTISCULMINE,
IMMANI ERUPIT HIATU POSTRIDGE,
CINEREM
PONE TRAFFIC AD EXPLENDAM VICEM PELAGUS IMMITE PELAGUS
FLUVIOS SULPHUREOS FLAMMATUM BITUMEN,
FOETAS ALUMINE CAUTES,
INFORME CUIUSQUE METALLI RUDUS,
MIXTUM AQUARUM VOIURINIBUS IGNEM
FEBRVEM (QUE) UNDANTE FUMO CINEREM
SESEQ (UE) FUNESTAMQ (UE) COLLLUVIEM
IUGO MONTIS EXONERANS
POMPEIOS HERCULANEUM OCTAVIANUM, PERSTRICTIS REАTINA ET PORTICU,
SILVASQ (UE), VILLASQ (UE), (UE)
MOMENTO STRAVIT, USSIT, DIRUIT
LUCTUOSAM PRAEA SE PRAEDAM AGENS
VASTUMQ (UE) TRIUNPHUM.
PERIERAT HOC QUOQ (UE) MARMORALTE SEPQLUM CONSULTISSIMI NO MONUMENTUM PROREGIS.
NE PEREAT
EMMAHUEZL FONSECA ET SUNICA COM (ES),
MONT IS RE (GIS) PROR (EX),
QUA ANIMI MAGNITUDINE PUBLICA CALAMITATI EA PRIVATAE CONSULUIT
EXTRACTUM FUNDITUS GENTIS SUI LAPIDEM.
COELO RESTITUIT, VIAM RESTAURAVIT,
FUMANTE ADHUC ET INDIGNANTE VESEVO.
AN (NO) SAL (UTIS) MDCXXXV,
PRAEFECTO VIARUM
ANTONIO SUARES MESSIA MARCHI (ONE) VICI.

(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/gallery/pom01.jpg)
(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/gallery/pom35.jpg)
(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/gallery/pom36.jpg)


Pompeii Grafitti, gladiators with helmets which feature mobile visors, a XVth century invention (official chronology of history):

(https://image.ibb.co/eKWH6J/po1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/bSzR0d/po2.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/kTC76J/po3.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/jb1dDy/po4.jpg)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 12, 2017, 02:56:38 AM
WHEN DID SHAKESPEARE LIVE? IV

Shakespeare in Italy

(http://www.shakespeare-today.de/upload/Buchdeckel/rOE_BOOK_AA300_.jpg)

“A fascinating look at a largely untouched aspect of Shakespeare’s identity and influences. Recommended for Shakespeare enthusiasts and scholars as well as travelers looking for a new perspective, this is also particularly intriguing as a companion to specific plays.” (Library Journal (starred review))

“An exceptionally entertaining, enlightening, and handsome companion for a thrillingly literate Italian sojourn.” (Booklist)

“Exciting, original, and convincing....This book is essential reading for all concerned with who really wrote the works of Shakespeare. A thrilling journey of discovery.” (Sir Derek Jacobi)

“This is a revolutionary and revelatory book, part thrilling detective story and part sober scholarly treatise.” (Michael York, Shakespearean actor of stage and screen and co-author of A Shakespearean Actor Prepares)

“This represents a hugely significant intervention in the study of Shakespeare and his dramatic works.” (Dr. William Leahy, Head of the School of Arts, Shakespeare Authorship Studies, Brunel University)

“Unless someone can prove him wrong, anyone who claims to have written the plays of Shakespeare needs to show some Italian travel documents.” (Mark Rylance, Founding Artistic Director, Shakespeare's Globe Theatre, London)

Richard Paul Roe spent more than twenty years traveling the length and breadth of Italy on a literary quest of unparalleled significance.

Using the text from Shakespeare’s ten “Italian Plays” as his only compass, Roe determined the exact locations of nearly every scene in Romeo and Juliet, The Two Gentlemen of Verona, The Merchant of Venice, Much Ado about Nothing, The Tempest, and the remaining dramas set in Italy. His chronicle of travel, analysis, and discovery paints with unprecedented clarity a picture of what the author of the Shakespearean plays must have experienced before penning his plays.

Equal parts literary detective story and vivid travelogue—containing copious annotations and more than 150 maps, photographs, and paintings—The Shakespeare Guide to Italy is a unique, compelling, and deeply provocative journey that will forever change our understanding. . . and irrevocably alter our vision of who William Shakespeare really was."


http://www.shakespeare-today.de/index.203.0.1.html (review by some of the greatest Shakespearean actors)

"The so-called Italy plays of Shakespeare are the subject of Roe’s tremendous inquiry, and his more than two decades of painstaking investigation and research have resulted in the landmark book, The Shakespeare Guide to Italy, Retracing the Bard’s Unknown Travels.

Roe, not coincidentally an attorney as well as an author, does something never before achieved: he proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the playwright of Romeo and Juliet, Much Ado About Nothing, and the eight (yes, ten plays in total, to be clarified below) other Shakespeare plays set in Italy actually went to Italy.

Roe upends the centuries-old truism that would have us believe that the author invented a fanciful version of Italy filled with myriad factual errors.  In fact, Roe demonstrates, it is the scholars who have erred.  Their sin, dating from the early 18th century “biographers” of Shakespeare to modern editors of the Arden, Riverside, Folger et al editions of the plays, is to never do what Roe does: go to the source, the land in question, Italy.

Now that Roe has proved the writer was there, he has, in essence, thrown the Stratford-centric theory of authorship on the dust heap of faulty theories, because there is absolutely no evidence that man who signed his name Shaksper, Shakspe, Shakspere and Shakespeare, and who hailed from Stratford, ever left the shores of his mother country."


https://deveresociety.co.uk/articles/review-2012March-cole-roe.pdf


"If Shakespeare was never personally in Italy, then...

- How did he know there are sycamore trees on Verona’s west side?

- How did he receive the precise knowledge of Milan to know that, even though Mantua and Verona are due east, the fastest way to get to them was through Milan’s north and not east gate, which led to rice marches, unpaved roads and uncrossable tributaries?

- How did Shakespeare know that the inland city of Bergamo was famous for sail-making?

- How did he know that Guilio Romano, known in England as a painter, was also a sculptor?

- How did he know that the Venetian “Doge” was called a “Duke”?

- How did he know that in Florence there was a lodging house for pilgrims named “Saint Francis” beside the port on the way to the pilgrimage site of “San Giacomo Maggiore”?

- How did he know that in Padua there is a lodging house, merchant homes and the parish church of  St Luke’s all by the port?

- How did he know that in Milan there was a place, not on any map in England, called “St. Gregory’s Well,”?

- How did he know that in Venice there is a dark, narrow street called the Sagittary, where the arrow makers lived?

- How did he know about the common ferry that brought visitors to Venice, and the precise distance between Belmont and Venice?

- How did he know there was a statue on the Rialto called “El Gobbo”?

- How did Shakespeare know that in the floor of the Sienna cathedral was a circular mosaic that depicted the Seven Ages of Man… used by him in Jacques famous seven ages of man speech in As You Like It ?"


Roe's book one chapter at a time, highlights from Chapter 1.

1C. Saint Peter’s Church [Act III, Sc. 5]. Though no scene is set there it is mentioned in connection with Juliet. No other version of the story mentions it, so why would Shakespeare? And why this church name of all others. Roe reasoned it had to be the Capulet parish church. Even the modern local guides don’t seem aware of it as the author did, suggesting he had a ‘keen knowledge of the layout of Verona’. For instance, though unaware of the Capulet church, the modern locals realize that the early fight scene would have been fought at the end of Via Cappello, at Stradone San Fermo, when the Stradone was called ‘il Corso.’“ So if Shakespeare knew something that even the modern locals don’t know that would be an indication of his intimate knowledge of the town. Roe found four Saint Peter’s churches that had been there around Shakespeare’s time. He found one perfectly located. The San Pietro Incarnario is the local parish church on the direct path from the Capulet home to the cell of Friar Francis.

4G. Twice in the play is there a line saying “Pisa, renowned for grave citizens” (1,1 and 4,2). Yet in my edition of the play there is no note offering any explanation for the citizens being renowned for their being grave. Roe explains it, which the author obviously knew as well since he uses the pun several times. At the Campo Santo, were entombed in stately marble structures, often quite large, the elite or honored citizens of Pisa. It was a place of quite renown and still is a major tourist site today.

4H. Finally, the author also knew, unlike editors who find it hard to believe for a city far from the sea, that “Bergamo was the principal source of sails for the Mediterranean world”. Would this likely be another casual comment a traveler would make, if they would even be likely to know it, and that the Stratford William would just happen to hear? And even if possible, would it be as likely as that learned by a genuine English traveler through Northern Italy?

https://www.playshakespeare.com/forum/authorship-debate-and-apocrypha/6887-shakespeare-and-italy?limitstart=10


Titian’s Painting of “Venus and Adonis”

(https://hankwhittemore.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/v-and-a-by-titian1.jpg?w=300&h=296)

"Professor Magri further researched Italian Renaissance Art in the Shakespeare works.

Let's start with Shakespeare's 'first heir' of his invention, Venus and Adonis.

Her main argument here is that this poem was NOT based on the literary work of Ovid or Virgil, nor even Titian's painting that is called Venus and Adonis. This one is called the Prado version.

Rather, she says, it was based on a version of this Titian painting that was present, at that time, only in Venice. The Prado version does have strong similarities to Shakespeare's poem. You may enjoy examining this painting as it and the poem are described. One problem for this version as the poem source is its location. Titian had created it for Philip II of Spain, son of Emperor Charles V. It was intended for the marriage of Philip to Queen Mary Tudor, Elizabeth's half-sister. The painting was brought to London in September of 1554 for the marriage. However, Philip left England in 1555 and took all his Titian paintings with him. It was not there for any chance for Stratford's Shakspere. This Prado V&A has remained in the Royal Collection of Madrid since 1556. And so there was hardly anyone in England then who could have seen it and enable it to be sourced when Shakespeare's poem was written.

Magri says that the V&A myth in Ovid's Metamorphoses "is totally different from Titian". In Ovid, but not in the painting and not in the Shakespeare's poem, Adonis responds favorably to Venus' love for him. Many other artists, following Ovid, represent Adonis as "a tender, sweet, even sensuous lover". But "Titian departed from the Ovidian source". She then gives details of how the poem and painting correspond.

Five versions of Titian's V&A are considered as possible matches to the poem, and only one fits it faithfully. This one is the Barberini version, now in Rome. The main parallels between this particular painting and Shakespeare's poem are:
•   Venus invites Adonis to sit down by her [The painting seems to show him just after standing up to leave her].
•   She keeps embracing him, and is sure she will win him.
•   He is resolute to return to the boar hunt and tries to twist away from her.
•   He looks at her "all askance".
•   Venus shed tears. [the painting, after recent restoration, showed faded traces of paint on her cheeks that suggest tears].

In addition, Magri shows how Shakespeare alluded to an actual painting, rather than of a narrative, of the subject matter:

Fie, lifeless picture, cold and senseless stone
Well-painted idol, image dull and dead
Statue contenting but the eye alone

Similarly with Adonis' horse:

Look when a painter would surpass the life
In limning out a well-porportion'd steed,
His art with nature's workmanship at strife

Finally, ONLY in the Barberini painting does Adonis wear a 'bonnet'.

"And with his bonnet (which) hides his angry brow"
"Bonnet nor veil henceforth no creature wear"
"And therefore would he put his bonnet on"
"The wind would blow it off""

"The author of Venus and Adonis by “William Shakespeare” (1593) describes a painting by Tiziano Vecellio, or Titian, in which Adonis wears a bonnet or cap.

This was the only Titian painting with that detail and, during Shakespeare’s time, it could have been seen only at Titian’s home in Venice.

I continue to be struck by the simplicity and clarity of this piece of factual evidence presented in an article by the brilliant scholar Dr. Noemi Magri.

In her essay, entitled The Influence of Italian Renaissance Art on Shakespeare’s Works; Titian’s Barberini Painting: the Pictorial Source of “Venus and Adonis,” Dr. Magri writes that Titian made many replicas of his work and that Shakespeare based his poem on the only autographed replica in which Adonis wears a bonnet or hat:

“Titian’s painting was his source of inspiration, the thing that stimulated him to write a poem about this subject though he also had a thorough knowledge of Ovid … Shakespeare describes the painting in detail: he portrays the painting in words and the description is too faithful to ascribe it to mere coincidence…

“It is evident that Shakespeare’s Adonis is wearing a hat, a bonnet.  The mention of the bonnet is not coincidental.  This is the detail here taken as evidence of the pictorial source.”

With one fair hand she heaveth up his hat – line 351

Bonnet nor veil henceforth no creature wear – line 1081

And therefore would he put his bonnet on – line 1087"


But now, both the Stratfordians and the anti-Stratfordians have a huge problem.

It was first observed by the great Swiss historian, Dr. Christoph Pfister.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg998158#msg998158 (C. Pfister archive, who discovered that there was no human settlement prior to 1700 AD in Switzerland, and that all gothic/medieval buildings and all ancients documents pertaining to the period 500 AD - 1600 AD were actually created in the 18th Century AD)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1830487#msg1830487 (C. Pfister archive II)

(http://dillum.ch/html/tiziano_pompeii_comparison.gif)

Abbildung 11: Italienische oder pompejanische Renaissance:
Tizian: Liegende Kurtisane (unten) und liegende Mänade aus
Pompeji (oben)
Abbildung der Mänade aus: Pietro Giovanni Guzzo: Pompei, Ercolano, Stabiae, Oplontis;
Napoli 2003, 75

Figure 11: Italian Renaissance and Pompeian:
Titian: Horizontal courtesan (below) and from lying maenad
Pompeii (top)
Figure out the maenad: Pietro Giovanni Guzzo: Pompei, Ercolano, Stabia, Oplontis;
Napoli 2003, 75

The well-known painting by Titian copied perfectly at Pompeii...

As Titian did not have at his disposal a space-time machine to take him back to the year 79 AD, we can only infer that the authors of both paintings/frescoes were contemporaries, perhaps separated only by a few decades in time.

"The use of Renaissance artists of identical details, same colors decisions, motives, general composition plans, the presence in the Pompeian frescoes of the things that emerged in the 15 to 17 century, the presence in Pompeian paintings of genre painting, which is found only in the epoch of the Renaissance, and the presence of some Christian motifs on some frescoes and mosaics suggest that Pompeian frescoes and the works of artists of the Renaissance come from the same people who have lived in the epoch. "Vitas Narvidas," Pompeian Frescoes and the Renaissance: a comparison, "Electronic Almanac" Art & Fact 1 (5), 2007."


The most important work on the extraordinary similarities between the frescoes discovered at Pompeii and the Renaissance paintings/sculptures (Raphael, Tintoretto, Da Vinci, Botticelli, Goltzius):

http://web.archive.org/web/20120202135352/http://artifact.org.ru/kalibrovka-teorii/vidas-narvidas-pompeyskie-freski-i-renessans-ochnaya-stavka.html

English translation:

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fweb.archive.org%2Fweb%2F20120202135352%2Fhttp%3A%2F%2Fartifact.org.ru%2Fkalibrovka-teorii%2Fvidas-narvidas-pompeyskie-freski-i-renessans-ochnaya-stavka.html&edit-text=


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1683424#msg1683424 (Pompeii-Herculaneum, 1725-1778, five consecutive messages)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 12, 2017, 11:24:37 PM
TORONTO - NEW PHOTOGRAPHS II

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1616955#msg1616955 (part I)

Another photograph signed Ms. Kerry-Ann Lecky Hepburn, no curvature whatsoever across a distance of 55 km (Grimsby-Toronto), the boat is not part of either an ascending slope or a descending slope:

(https://image.ibb.co/kJp4no/torontoboat.jpg)

Two photographs taken from the Niagara escarpment: the boats are not part of either an ascending slope or a descending slope, no curvature of 59 meters whatsoever all the way to the other shoreline:

(https://i.ibb.co/L9Y0y9f/IMG-0086.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/dc26WJK/IMG-0078-2.jpg)

Port Credit - Toronto, 14.5 km, 4 meters curvature, absolutely nonexistent, there isn't one centimeter/one inch of curvature over this distance:

(https://farm3.static.flickr.com/2300/2410587891_e9bbe99452_b.jpg)
(https://farm3.static.flickr.com/2012/1571369829_dada8e886e_b.jpg)
(https://farm4.static.flickr.com/3118/2889142212_de5f408540_b.jpg)
(https://farm1.static.flickr.com/253/454343806_8776df8b25_o.jpg)
(https://farm4.static.flickr.com/3276/2549368657_8150a4dbaa_b.jpg)
(https://farm4.static.flickr.com/3089/2379255560_d357df6305_o.jpg)
(https://farm3.static.flickr.com/2157/2336833000_3079d5112b_b.jpg)
(https://farm1.static.flickr.com/253/454343806_8776df8b25_o.jpg)

Let us increase the distance to 33.6 km, zero curvature (supposed to be 22 meters), Oakville - Toronto:

(https://farm4.static.flickr.com/3269/2586347950_98fc26bfb8_b.jpg)

We now go to Etobicoke, some 6 miles from Toronto, no 1,8 meter curvature, no ascending slope:

(https://farm1.static.flickr.com/232/508992681_f797741b8a_o.jpg)
(https://farm3.static.flickr.com/2001/2955330790_7bb3738133_b.jpg)
(https://farm4.static.flickr.com/3281/2402347338_cf9a9ee2cd_b.jpg)

There is no curvature whatsoever across lake Ontario.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 01, 2017, 12:30:57 AM
DUFOUR-PRUNIER EXPERIMENT

http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/pdf/Dufour_and_Prunier-On_the_Fringe_Movement_Registered_on_a_Platform_in_Uniform_Motion_%281942%29.pdf

A. Dufour and F. Prunier created Sagnac interferometers that were composites of moving and stationary paths, including stationary sources and stationary detectors. This was essentially to test if the relativistic approach could be distinguished from the classical approach.

"In all cases of this experimental test, the Sagnac effect was the same. This overturned Langevin’s analysis, and in 1937, he had to revise his explanation, as pointed out by Kelly: 

“In his final essay on the subject in 1937, Langevin proposed that the results published that year by Dufour and Prunier showed that one had to assume either (a) the light speed varied to c + wr in one direction and c – wr in the other direction, or (b) the time aboard the spinning apparatus had to change by a factor of +/-2wA/c2 in either direction. Indeed, Langevin went as far as to say that assuming (a), “we find, by a very simple and very general reasoning, the formula for the difference of the times of the path of the two light beams in the Sagnac experiment.” .

The proposition (b) though is untenable because if this were true then when the light beam passed back to the moving detector, the local time from each direction would be out of synchronization, meaning that the clocks cannot be counting real time and that the effective time dilation is meaningless. This was also pointed out by Herbert Ives in his 1938 paper criticizing Langevin. Ives says about the absurdity of Langevin’s proposition (b):

” There are of course not merely two clocks, but an infinity of clocks, where we include those that could be transported at finite speeds, and around other paths. As emphasized previously, the idea of “local time” is untenable, what we have are clock readings. Any number of clock readings at the same place are physically possible, depending on the behaviour and history of the  clocks used. More than one “time” at one place is a physical absurdity. “

The only explanation left, is Langevin’s proposition a) that the light speed varies by C+/-wr in one or the other direction around the disk, consistent with Dufour and Prunier’s experimental results."

In 1939, Dufour and Prunier carried out their
final experiment. They did a test with both the
beginning and end of the light path on the
spinning disc, but with the middle portion of
the path reflected off mirrors fixed in the
laboratory (directly above the disc). In this
test, they had both the light emitter and the
photographic recorder fixed in the laboratory.

The fringe shifts resulting from all the above
Dufour and Prunier tests were the same as in
their original Sagnac-type tests.

In 1942 Dufour and Prunier published a
composite paper reviewing their total
experimental work to date. At the end of this
paper they state that "the relativity theory
seems to be in complete disagreement with the
result which was garnered from the
experiment
".

Herbert Ives, Light Signals Sent Around a Closed Path:

http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Ives/Herbert_Ives_Light_Signals_Sent_Around_a_Closed_Path.pdf

 Ives was a pioneer in the development of television at Bell Telephone Laboratories.  The following quotations are from his 1938 article.
 
     The experiment was interpreted by its author as positive evidence for the existence of the luminiferous ether…

     It is the purpose of this paper first to show that the Sagnac experiment in its essentials involves no consideration of rotation, and second to investigate the results obtained when transported clocks are used.

 
Ives analyzed the Sagnac experiment using a hexagonal path rather than a circular one.
 
He concluded with this statement:
 
     The net result of this study appears to be to leave the argument of Sagnac as to the significance of his experiment as strong as it ever was.

The Sagnac effect is not due to rotation, but instead is a linear effect due to a true anisotropic light speed in a moving frame.


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 08, 2017, 06:06:54 AM
ORBITAL SAGNAC EFFECT IS MUCH GREATER THAN THE ROTATIONAL SAGNAC: AN EXACT FORMULA

http://www.anti-relativity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3912&start=60

"Let tr = 4(Ar)(wr)/c² be the sagnac for the rotation and
to = 4(Ao)(wo)/c² be the sagnac for the orbit.

Let's choose distance for the experiment say 30km.
Light takes 0.0001 seconds to travel for that distance.
In that time period, it is your contention that tr/to > 1. That is your whole point.

tr/to = 4(Ar)(wr)/c² / 4(Ao)(wo)/c² = (Ar)(wr)/(Ao)(wo)

The distance to the sun is 150,000,000 km
The linear speed of the earth's orbit is 30km/s
The earth's radius is 6360 km
The linear speed of the earth's rotation is 0.462 km/sec

Let's calculate the angular speed for each.
w = v/r
wr = 0.462/6360 = 7.264e-5
wo = 30/150,000,000 = 2.0e-7

A = (θ/360)πR²
To calculate θ/360 for the earth's rotation, it is θ/360 = 30km/ 2 π Rr
Hence, Ar = 30Rr/2 = 15 Rr

The same is true for Ao
Ao = 15 Ro

So,
Ar = 15 Rr = 15 * 6360 = 93900
Ao = 15 Ro = 15 * ( 150,000,000 ) = 2250000000

Now, lets do the ratio of tr/to
tr/to = (Ar wr ) / (Ao wo ) = (93900 * 7.264e-5) / (2250000000 * 2.0e-7) = 6.82 / 450 = 0.015

As we can see, the rotational sagnac in any time period is smaller than the orbit.

In fact, the orbital is 450/6.82 = 66.
This is consistent with my logic.

The earth's orbital speed is 30km/s and the rotational is 0.462.
30/0.462 = 66.

As we can see, the ratio of the sagnacs is based only on the linear speeds of each and the orbital sagnac is 66 times greater for two way. One way is half that. It is not at all based on the ratios of the angular speeds. We can see with math that is false."


But the orbital Sagnac is not being registered/recorded by the GPS satellites, which means the Earth is stationary:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1917978#msg1917978

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 09, 2017, 02:54:24 AM
ORBITAL SAGNAC EFFECT IS MUCH GREATER THAN THE ROTATIONAL SAGNAC: AN EXACT FORMULA II

oRo)/(ωrrr) = vo/vr


The orbital Sagnac is larger than the rotational Sagnac at least by a factor of 60.

http://www.anti-relativity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3912&start=60

"A = π r ²

It is A = π r ² only if the light makes a complete circle back to the receiver.

Since we are dealing with 30 km, we must use the area of a sector of the circle representing the 30 km.

The normal derivation is

2πr ( 1/ (c-v) - 1/(c+v))

The 2πr is the distance between the emitter and the receiver for the light path.

Now, we do not have the full 2πr. We only have a portion of it. So, we have 2πrK where 0 <= K <= 1. Remember, we must know the distance betweern the emitter and the receiver. Mathpages assumes light traversed the entire circle ± vt. That is not our experiment.

Now, let's continue.

∆t = 2πrK ( 1/ (c-v) - 1/(c+v)) = 2πrK ( 2v / ( c² - v²) ) = 4πrKv / (c² - v²).

Let's use angular velocity ω = v/r.

Hence,

∆t = 4πrKv / (c² - v²) = 4πr²Kω / (c² - v²)

Now, let's use the area created by the distance between the the emitter and the receiver.

A = Kπr²

∆t = 4πr²Kω / (c² - v²) = 4Aω / (c² - v²).

Since v is so small, it is usually eliminated from the denominator.

Hence,

∆t = 4Aω /c².

Now, let's try to understand A.

A = Kπr²

Since K is only a subset of the circumference, then K can be expressed as θ/360 since the full circumference is 360 degrees and we are only using a portion of it.

Hence, A = (θ/360) πr²

which is the familiar area of a sector of a circle.

Now, this is two way light travel and the total correction.


∆t = 4Aω /c²

Assume 30 km of a distance between the emitter and the receiver




Rotation of the earth

Earth radius 6378
ω - 7.292 e-5 radians/s

A = (θ/360) πr²

Calculate the number of degrees 30 km represents of the earth's circumference.

θ = (30) (360 ) / ( 2 π r ) = (30) (360 ) / ( 2 π 6378 ) = 0.27

A = (θ/360) πr² = (0.27/360) π (6378)² = 95798.77

Now for the calculation of the sagnac correction for 30 km
∆t = 4Aω /c² = 4 (95798.77)(7.292 e-5 )/c² = 3.105 e-10

So, the rotational sagnac is
∆t = 3.105 e-10




Orbit of the earth

Earth distance to sun 150,000,000
ω - 2.0 e-7

A = (θ/360) πr²

Calculate the number of degrees 30 km represents of the earth's orbit.

θ = (30) (360 ) / ( 2 π r ) = (30) (360 ) / ( 2 π 150,000,000 ) = 1.146 e-5

A = (θ/360) πr² = (1.146 e-5/360) π (150000000)² = 2249025000

Now for the calculation of the sagnac correction for 30 km
∆t = 4Aω /c² = 4 (2249025000)(2.0 e-7 )/c² = 2.0e-8

So, the orbital sagnac is
∆t = 2.0e-8


Now, let's go a little further to understand what this means.

Take the ratios of the two sagnacs

2.0e-8 / 3.105 e-10 = 64.4

The linear velocity of the rotation of the earth is 0.465 km/s
The linear velocity of the orbit of the earth is 30 km/s

Take the linear velocity ratios
30/ 0.465 = 64.5

Ths difference above is rounding.

Hence, this proves the sagnac correction is a function purely of the linear velocity NOT THE ANGULAR VELOCITY of the receiver on the circular path.

If this statement is false, then this ratio would have other factors so that sagnac ratio would not equal the linear velocity ratio."


(http://image.ibb.co/dPqR2b/tr2.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/k3mSaw/sat1.jpg)

"Satellites transmit their signal to Earth and that’s that.  There’s no transmission back to the satellites, or between satellites, and none of their signals are made to loop the equator.

(The notable exception would be in the synching of ground-monitoring stations.  There are six monitoring stations located roughly along the equator and these would need to be kept in-synch with each other.  Such a process would need to adjust for the Sagnac effect, in the shape of a loop, as the signal from the designated master station was transmitted to the others.)"

"The motion of the earth's orbit is also a sagnac effect. We should see light path distance differentials caused by the orbit just like we see if for earth's rotation.

The orbital path is simply longer and nothing else.

The earth - sun orbital frame is a sagnac rotating frame.

The Sagnac correction for the earth's rotation is applied because as the light moves toward the receiver, the receiver rotates with the earth changing the distance the signal travels.

In the same light, if the unit had been at the equator at noon, then it should see the full effect of the Sagnac effect of the earth's revolution around the sun.
In other words, assume a satellite is low on the horizon in the east at the equator.

We should measure a sagnac correction for the earth's rotation on its axis and a sagnac correction of the earth's rotation/revolution around the sun.
If sagnac is true for the earth's rotation, then light travels at one speed c. the speed of light cannot be increased by circular motion and presumably not by linear motion either.

If light travels at one speed c, then as the earth moves in it's revolution loop at 30k/s, while light moves c through space, the unit at the equator at noon would move with the earth' rotation and the earth's revolution cutting the distance the signal must travel to meet the unit.
The earth is rotating at 1000 mph. This shows up in GPS as c+v and c-v as you would expect with Sagnac.

All that is fine.

When the satellite emits at c, the earth rotates the receiver at v and so a correction is needed.

This is all OK.

Now, the earth is revolving around the sun at 67000 mph, as we are told by the heliocentrists.

Let's say the unit is at the equator and the satellite is low on the horizon in the east at noon.

That means the unit is traveling at the orbital speed of the earth at 67,000 MPH.

The satellite emits at one speed c in space. While the light travels through space toward the unit at c, the unit moves with the earth at 67,000 MPH. The unit cuts the distance that the light must travel.

This is not being seen by any experiements nor GPS."

Try to imagine the center of the earth as the sun and the earth's orbit as the surface. So, the earth is in a rotational/circular pattern in its orbit. Just like the rotational sagnac, the earth rotates toward where the satellite emitted the signal, and with the orbit, the earth, the unit is orbited toward where the signal was emitted.

Then we simply apply the well-known formula to this situation, where R = 150,000,000 km, v = wR (=30km/s).

The orbital Sagnac is much greater than the rotational Sagnac and that it is missing.


The path of the light signal from the GPS satellites to the receiver on the surface of the Earth is a uniform/translational Sagnac effect.

The delay is being caused not by the rotation of the Earth around its own axis (since the orbital Sagnac is totally missing), but by the rotation of the ether field above the surface of the flat earth.

Heliocentrists will state that there are two choices:

(a) a rotating Earth in a fixed ether, or

(b) a rotating ether above the surface of a fixed Earth


The reason that (a) must be excluded is the missing orbital Sagnac effect: if one claims that the Earth is rotating in a fixed ether, then in order to account for the four seasons, one must also say that the Earth is also revolving around the sun.


(https://image.ibb.co/k5ye17/ky1.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/gFef8n/wa1.jpg)

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0609/0609222.pdf (first experiment conducted by R. Wang)

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0609/0609202.pdf (second experiment carried out by R. Wang)

The experiment was repeated with 24 different
arrangements of conveyor speeds, fiber lengths, and the
three different FOC configurations shown in Fig.1.
The conveyor speeds were between 3 and 9 cm/s. The
loops had perimeters of 2.5, 4.0, 8.0, and 16.0 m; in
each case there were three turns of the fiber wound on
the loop.

As shown in Fig. 3, the phase shift or the traveltime
difference between two counter-propagating light
beams in the moving optic fiber was clearly observed
in all different configurations of FOCs. The phase shift
Δφ, and therefore, the travel-time difference Δt are
proportional to both the total length and the speed of
the moving fiber whether the motion is circular or
uniform. Other tests using smaller end wheels for the
FOC and fiber loops with additional curves also
confirmed the same finding.

Professor Wang's seminal paper did prove that the Sagnac applied to linear motion.


Faced with the missing orbital Sagnac effect, relativists have begun to renounce both STR/GTR and to rely on the local aether model (MLET, Modified Lorentz Ether Theory).

Journal of Electromagnetic Waves and Applications:

http://www.ee.nthu.edu.tw/ccsu/qem/f3c.pdf

For the interplanetary propagation, earth’s orbital
motion contributes to the Sagnac effect as well. This local-ether model
has been adopted to account for the Sagnac effect due to earth’s
motions in a wide variety of propagation phenomena, particularly the
global positioning system (GPS), the intercontinental microwave link,
and the interplanetary radar.


The peer reviewers at the Journal of Electromagnetic Waves and Applications agree that the orbital Sagnac is larger than the rotational Sagnac, that it is missing, and that a local-ether model has to be adopted in order to account for this fact.


The solar gravitational potential effect upon the GPS clocks is also missing:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1846706#msg1846706


This means that the hypotheses of the RUDERFER EXPERIMENT are totally fulfilled:
Why is there no requirement for a Sagnac correction due to the earth’s orbital motion? Like the transit time in the spinning Mossbauer experiments, any such effect would be completely canceled by the orbital-velocity effect on the satellite clocks.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1846721#msg1846721 (M. Ruderfer experiment)

Given the outcome of the Michelson experiment (1881) which proved that the Earth does not move through ether, the results of the Ruderfer experiment prove one thing very directly: it is the dynamical ether which rotates above the surface of a stationary Earth.

When Michelson performed the experiment he did not see a significant shifting of fringes, at least not those he was expecting. Using a 600 nanometer wavelength of light, Michelson expected to see fringe shifts (or, as he called them, “displacement of the interference bands”) of at least 0.04 of a fringe width. The 0.04 figure corresponds to an Earth moving at 30 km/sec around the sun. If this was combined with what Michelson believed was the solar system’s apparent movement toward the constellation Hercules, the fringes should have shifted on the order of 0.10 of a fringe width. But Michelson didn’t see any fringe shifting close to either value.

The interpretation of these results is that there is no displacement of the interference bands. The result of the hypothesis of a stationary ether is thus shown to be incorrect, and the necessary conclusion follows that the hypothesis is erroneous. This conclusion directly contradicts the explanation of aberration which has been hitherto generally accepted, and which presupposes that the Earth moves through the ether, the latter remaining at rest.

Albert A. Michelson, “The relative motion of the Earth and the Luminiferous ether,”
The American Journal of Science, Vol. 3, No. 22, 1881, p. 128

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg865008#msg865008 (fake special theory of relativity experiments)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 12, 2017, 08:12:33 AM
ORBITAL SAGNAC EFFECT IS MUCH GREATER THAN THE ROTATIONAL SAGNAC: AN EXACT FORMULA III


Satellites do not register/record the orbital Sagnac effect, which is at least 60 times greater than the rotational Sagnac effect.

The Stanford Gravity Probe B (GPB) experiment was mentioned above. It involves a mechanical gyroscope, but I know of no physicist who would argue that a mechanical and an optical gyroscope would give different results. It is the intent of GPB to measure the Lense-Thirring frame dragging from earth rotation and the geodetic precession (spinorbit and space curvature effects). The former will amount to about 0.05 arc seconds per year and the latter to about 6.9 arc seconds per year. By contrast, if the gyroscope were affected by the orbital rotation, an additional anomalous precession of 1,296,000 arc seconds per orbit results. This insensitivity of mechanical gyroscopes to orbital rotation is clearly illustrated by the early TRANSIT (Navy navigation) satellites. During launch the satellites acquired a large spin, and the satellites themselves acted like large mechanical gyroscopes. In order to point the transmit antenna toward the earth, a boom with attached mass had to be deployed to cause gravity-gradient stabilization. But the satellite spin had to be removed before the gravity-gradient stabilization could occur—precisely because a gyroscope is not itself affected by the orbital rotation.

Ronald Hatch

Director of Navigation Systems Engineering and Principal and co-founder of NavCom Technology, Inc.
Institute of Navigation (ION), including Chair of the Satellite Division, President and Fellow.
https://www.gps.gov/governance/advisory/members/hatch/


The local aether model hypothesized by the proponents of the MLET (Modified Lorentz Ether Theory) cannot be correct.

This local aether model is the last stand of the relativists, once they are confronted with the missing orbital Sagnac effect and with the result of the M. Ruderfer experiment.

(https://image.ibb.co/mio417/ether1.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/mcsa8n/ether1b.jpg)

Moreover, the local aether model has to be extended to the solar system, the Milky Way and to the Laniakea Supercluster of galaxies.

(https://image.ibb.co/c7bJTn/ether1a.jpg)

oRo)/(ωrrr) = vo/vr

We can obtain the Galactic Sagnac effect formula and Universal Sagnac formula:

(https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-7d2e780827f955cf150235718f595b01)

(http://www.blazelabs.com/pics/universe.gif)

vg/vo = 240km/s/30km/s = 8

vu/vg = 600km/s/240km/s = 2.5

It is known that the speed of the Vela supercluster is some 14,500 km/s:

http://www.businessinsider.com/vela-galaxy-supercluster-discovered-2016-11

(http://static4.businessinsider.com/image/58337ba6ba6eb620008b5ad5-904)

None of these Sagnac effects are being recorded by the GPS satellites.

As a final proof that it is movement of the receiver which is significant--not whether that movement is in a curved or straight line path--a test was run using the highly precise differential carrier phase solution. The reference site was stationary on the earth and assumed to properly apply the Sagnac effect. However, at the remote site the antenna was moved up and down 32 centimeters (at Los Angeles) over an eight second interval. The result of the height movement was that the remote receiver followed a straight line path with respect to the center of the earth.

The Sagnac effect was still applied at the remote receiver. The result was solved for position that simply moved up and down in height the 32 centimeters with rms residuals
which were unchanged (i.e. a few millimeters). If a straight line path did not need the Sagnac adjustment to the ranges the rms residuals should have increased to multiple meters. This shows again that it is any motion--not just circular motion which causes the Sagnac effect.


http://web.stcloudstate.edu/ruwang/ION58PROCEEDINGS.pdf

(Conducting a Crucial Experiment of the Constancy of the Speed of Light Using GPS, R. Wang/R. Hatch)


The local aether model has to assume that geosynchronous satellites which orbit beyond the outer boundary of the ether envelope (20,000 km), at an altitude of 35,786 kilometers (22,236 mi) or at an altitude of 1,528,483 kilometers (1 million miles) (SOHO satellite)  will not register the orbital Sagnac effect in the same fashion as would the satellites which do orbit below the inner boundary of the ether envelope.

The LISA (Light Interferometer Space Antenna) poses another problem for the local aether model.

(https://image.ibb.co/kpLCon/ether2.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/di2xM7/ether3.jpg)


The proponents of the local aether model also have to assume that the gravitational field drags the ethers around its gravitational field. The local ether envelope is thus stationary but does not rotate with the Earth around its own axis, however it does orbit the Sun together with the Earth.

But ether theory has nothing to do with attractive gravity; on the contrary, ether theory is a form of PRESSURE GRAVITY.

The Allais effect, the DePalma effect, the Kozyrev effect, the Biefeld-Brown effect, the double forces of attractive gravitation paradox, the Nipher effect all prove very conclusively that the ether is form of gravitational pressure and has nothing to do with attractive gravity. The quotes and letters attributed to Newton mention only PRESSURE GRAVITY and nothing on attractive gravity.

There is another way to prove this using one of the most intriguing and baffling problems which has to be solved by the proponents of the local aether model.

Dr. William H. Cantrell explains:

The Emeritus Professor of Electrical Engineering Petr Beckmann proposed that the outdated term "aether" could be replaced with the more modern term "gravity." Clearly, a gravitational field would have characteristics very similar to a partially entrained aether. Both would cause the bending of light rays. Gravity would be strongest near the surface of the planet where the partially entrained aether was most dense. Light would still behave in the same manner, if the speed of light is constant with respect to the source of the dominant gravitational field. This would square with all of the known experimental data because in nearly every case, the observer has always been tied to the Earth-bound frame of reference—so we substitute the word "gravity" for the word "aether." Obviously gravity exists and we know that, although gravity is "emitted" by the Earth, it does not rotate with it. So this is a very plausible replacement for a partially entrained aether.

The double-star evidence is often used to discount alternative theories such as this one. Consider a binary star system revolving around its common center of mass, located a considerable distance from Earth. According to Beckmann’s theory, each star emits light at a velocity of c with respect to the source of its own gravitational field. Given the proper orientation in the ecliptic with respect to the center of mass, the velocity of light initially emitted is c + v from one star and c – v from the other (assuming a tangential velocity of revolution, v, for both stars). As each star revolves about the other, their roles will reverse as will the sinusoidal ± v light speed component from each. Although small at first, if any difference in velocity were to remain in effect over the years or centuries it would take for the two sources of starlight to reach the Earth, the slower light from one star (at a given point in their revolution) would never catch up with faster light from the other star, even if given a slight head start due to fortuitous positioning. This would cause peculiar visual effects on Earth that astronomers simply do not observe—unusual Doppler shifts and other anomalies.

But there is more to Beckmann’s theory. The gravitational fields of the two stars will, of course, merge into one combined field at a suitable distance from their common center of mass, and the light from the two stars will transition to a common value of c. This, however, is not the end of the story. As the starlight traverses the heavens, it will speed up and slow down so as to always propagate at the speed of light with respect to whatever source of gravitational field it encounters. Upon entering our solar system, the starlight will transition to a heliocentric frame of reference, and upon encountering the Earth’s gravitational field, it will adjust once again to speed c with respect to our own reference frame. This is definitely heresy—the two sources of starlight will indeed travel with two different speeds initially, before stabilizing at a common velocity. And this velocity will change as the starlight enters our own solar system, and change yet again as it enters the gravitational pull of the Earth. The speed of transition will, of course, be gradual as one gravitational field yields to another more dominant field in its local neighborhood. This is an intriguing "make-sense" theory, not only because it replaces the partially entrained aether theory described earlier, but because it also squares with the Pioneer 10 and 11 deep-space radio data (and probably with the Venus radar data from the 1960s).


The dextrorotatory ether/scalar wave causes terrestrial gravitation.

The laevorotatory ether/scalar wave is the antigravitational wave.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1920865#msg1920865 (subquarks: the building blocks of the universe, absolute proofs coming from ether quantum mechanics)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1401101#msg1401101


Therefore, the local ether field CANNOT travel with the Earth anywhere, as there is no such thing as attractive gravitation.

The local ether field is rotating above the flat surface of the Earth.

In the local aether model, this ether envelope is STATIC; however, the experiments performed by Dr. Dayton Miller and Dr. Yuri Galaev show very clearly that the ether is DYNAMIC (ether drift tests).

https://web.archive.org/web/20101128012239/http://spinbitz.net/anpheon.org/html/AnpheonIntro2003.htm




Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 13, 2017, 08:41:12 AM
SAGNAC EFFECT FORMULA FOR A RECTANGULAR INTERFEROMETER

For a interferometer in the shape of a rectangle:

Here is a list of the scientific publications signed A. Tartaglia and A. M. Ruggiero:

http://porto.polito.it/view/creators/Ruggiero=3AMatteo_Luca=3A004059=3A.scopus_impact.html

The Sagnac for a parallelogram shaped interferometer.

(http://image.ibb.co/m9YATG/ta1.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/k3Mx8G/ta2.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/me5w2b/ta3.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/iXXLTG/ta4.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/mKHyFw/ta5.jpg)

Published in the  AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICS, vol. 83, pp. 427-432. - ISSN 0002-9505

dt = 2Lv/c2


How do the best physicists in the world actually compare the Sagnac effects?

Dr. A.G. Kelly, one of the best experts of the 20th century regarding the Sagnac effect (Dr. Kelly discovered the huge errors in the Hafele-Keating paper).

http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/ebooks/Kelly-TimeandtheSpeedofLight.pdf

(https://image.ibb.co/gyju17/kel1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/igfpZS/kel2.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/nP9YuS/kel3.jpg)

The linear velocities (the circumferential tangent speeds at the end point) are being compared and NOT the angular velocities.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 16, 2017, 04:56:24 AM
LISA (LIGHT INTERFEROMETER SPACE ANTENNA) ORBITAL SAGNAC > ROTATIONAL SAGNAC

(https://image.ibb.co/kpLCon/ether2.jpg)

Algebraic approach to time-delay data analysis: orbiting case
K Rajesh Nayak and J-Y Vinet

https://www.cosmos.esa.int/documents/946106/1027345/TDI_FOR_.PDF/2bb32fba-1b8a-438d-9e95-bc40c32debbe

This is an IOP article, published by the prestigious journal Classic and Quantum Gravity:

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0264-9381/22/10/040/meta

See also: Algebraic approach to time-delay data analysis for orbiting LISA

https://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.70.102003

"In this work, we estimate the effects due to the Sagnac phase by taking the realistic model for LISA orbital motion."

(https://blogs-images.forbes.com/startswithabang/files/2017/06/eLISA_Orbit.jpg?width=960)

"Earlier results assume a simple module in which LISA rotates only about its own axis!!

In reality the motion of LISA is much more complex and our study shows that the main term for Sagnac effect comes from orbital motion."

(https://image.ibb.co/ivHjjS/lisa2.jpg)

Conclusions:

The contribution from the Sagnac effect is much larger than earlier predicted.

Full calculations comparing the rotational Sagnac with the orbital Sagnac lead to the final result:

(https://image.ibb.co/iMSdB7/lisa3.jpg)

The original arm length for LISA: 5,000,000 km (L)

Earth - Sun radius: 150,000,000 km (R)

ORBITAL SAGNAC/ROTATIONAL SAGNAC =~ R/L = 30

(https://image.ibb.co/di2xM7/ether3.jpg)

(http://www.astronomy.com/-/media/Images/News%20and%20Observing/News/2015/12/ASYDG0116_100Lisa2.png?mw=600)

But the orbital Sagnac is missing. The time delay of the signal from the Lisa Pathfinder to Earth (which was in orbit from 2015 to 2017 (according to ESA), sending signals to Earth from a 1,500,000 km distance) would have been much greater had the orbital Sagnac been recorded/registered by the light interferometer.


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 17, 2017, 04:11:46 AM
LISA (LIGHT INTERFEROMETER SPACE ANTENNA) GALACTIC SAGNAC > ORBITAL SAGNAC II

(https://image.ibb.co/dDSTB7/lisa4.jpg)

The laser frequency stability for LISA is currently at 30Hz/√Hz.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20060012084.pdf

It is hoped that the figure can be reduced to 10Hz/√Hz.

However, the paper published in the Classic and Quantum Gravity journal has lowered the threshold to 5Hz/√Hz.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0306096.pdf

The initial estimate, based on the calculation of the rotational Sagnac effect for LISA, was much lower: 0.1Hz/√Hz.

"This is a very difficult requirement to satisfy".

The angular velocity for LISA is the same as the orbital angular velocity of the Earth (https://lisa.nasa.gov/archive2011/Documentation/sts_1.04.pdf ).


And yet, the full effects of the orbital Sagnac upon the calculations of the laser frequency stability have not been taken into consideration.

As has been proven in the previous message, the calculations of Dr. R.K. Nayak (over ten papers published on the subject) and Dr. J.Y. Vinet (Member of the LISA International Science Team), published by prestigious scientific journals and by ESA, show that the orbital Sagnac is 30 times greater than the rotational Sagnac for LISA.

However, the galactic Sagnac effect is eight times greater than the orbital Sagnac effect.

(https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-7d2e780827f955cf150235718f595b01)

vg/vo = 240km/s/30km/s = 8

http://www.technocrates.org/astronomers-calculate-speed-of-the-solar-system/15096/

(http://www.technocrates.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/solar-system-speed.jpg)

The LISA antenna rotates along with the Sun around a galactic orbit (heliocentric version). Thus the galactic Sagnac effect must be accounted for in the calculations for the laser frequency stability.

After the rotational Sagnac calculations for the laser frequency stability, the threshold had to be lowered to 0.1Hz/√Hz and upon using a very complex analysis, it was possible to raise it to 5Hz/√Hz.

But the orbital Sagnac effect is 30 times greater than the rotational Sagnac effect for LISA, as proven and calculated by Dr. R.K. Nayak and Dr. J.Y. Vinet.

(https://image.ibb.co/iMSdB7/lisa3.jpg)

This will lower the threshold of the laser frequency stability to a much greater extent. And the galactic Sagnac effect must be included as well, which is eight times greater than the orbital Sagnac.

The requirements for the LISA Pathfinder are similar, with respect to the laser frequency stability:

http://www.ice.csic.es/research/IGWMweb/talks/Nofrarias_IGWM2012.pdf

http://moriond.in2p3.fr/grav/2017/transparencies/3_tuesday/1_morning/5_heinzel.pdf

http://www.phys.ufl.edu/lisasymposiumx/resources/contributions/Th3a_6_Ferroni.pdf

Why then did the LISA Pathfinder not record/register both the orbital Sagnac effect and the galactic Sagnac effect?

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/lisa-pathfinder-mission-paves-way-for-space-based-detection-of-gravitational-waves

Either the LISA Pathfinder mission never took place, or the hypotheses of the M. Ruderfer experiment were fulfilled which proves the existence of ether meaning that the Earth is stationary:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1982291#msg1982291


Any Sagnac interferometer is detecting gravitational waves (dextrorotatory ether waves) a fact which seems to escape the research currently performed on the subject:

https://web.stanford.edu/~rlbyer/PDF_AllPubs/1996/311.pdf


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 20, 2017, 01:01:34 AM
LISA (LIGHT INTERFEROMETER SPACE ANTENNA) ORBITAL SAGNAC > ROTATIONAL SAGNAC III

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/-IxjU7Ux6YE/maxresdefault.jpg)

Algebraic approach to time-delay data analysis: orbiting case
K Rajesh Nayak and J-Y Vinet


https://www.cosmos.esa.int/documents/946106/1027345/TDI_FOR_.PDF/2bb32fba-1b8a-438d-9e95-bc40c32debbe

This is an IOP article, published by the prestigious journal Classic and Quantum Gravity:

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0264-9381/22/10/040/meta

(https://image.ibb.co/iSbPJn/lis1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/b2YMyn/lis2.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/cStX4S/lis3.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/mpRKjS/lisa5.jpg)

In this work, we estimate the effects due to the Sagnac phase by taking the realistic model for LISA orbital motion.

This work is organized as follows: in section 2, we make an estimate of Sagnac phase
for individual laser beams of LISA by taking realistic orbital motion.
Here we show that, in general, the residual laser noise because of Sagnac phase is much larger than earlier estimates.

For the LISA geometry, R/L is of the order 30 and the orbital contribution to the Sagnac phase is larger by this factor.

The computations carried out by Dr. R.K. Nayak (over ten papers published on the subject) and Dr. J.Y. Vinet (Member of the LISA International Science Team), and published by prestigious scientific journals and by ESA, show that the orbital Sagnac is 30 times greater than the rotational Sagnac for LISA.

(https://image.ibb.co/iMSdB7/lisa3.jpg)

"In reality the motion of LISA is much more complex and our study shows that the main term for Sagnac effect comes from orbital motion."

ORBITAL SAGNAC/ROTATIONAL SAGNAC =~ R/L = 30

This fact is true for each and every satellite orbiting above the surface of the Earth, especially the GPS satellites.

This immediately proves the existence of ether: the hypotheses of the Ruderfer experiment are fulfilled, the orbital Sagnac effect is not being registered by the GPS satellites.

It also proves that the Earth is stationary: no orbital Sagnac effect is being recorded at all. And neither is the galactic Sagnac effect.


SAGNAC EFFECT WITHOUT AN AREA OR A LOOP

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0609/0609202.pdf

The use of a phase-conjugate mirror has permitted new breakthroughs in the experimental science of the Sagnac effect.

(https://image.ibb.co/g629jS/lis5.jpg)

The equation which expresses the relationship between interference fringes and time differences is F=dt[c/λ] (where dt = 4vL/c2).

This experiment shows us two important points. First, it confirms the phase reversal of a PCM and demonstrates the Sagnac effect in an arc segment AB, not a closed path. Second, it gives us important implications: The result, φ = 4πRΩL/cλ, can be re-written as φ = 4πvL/cλ where v is the speed of the moving arc segment AB (where R is the radius of the circular motion, Ω is the rotational rate).

If we increase the radius of the circular motion as shown in Fig. 6, the arc segment AB will approach a linear segment AB, the circular motion will approach the linear motion, the phase-conjugate Sagnac experiment will approach the phase-conjugate first-order experiment as shown in Fig. 4, and the phase shift is always φ = 4πvL/cλ.


The Sagnac effect for a ROTATING LINEAR SEGMENT interferometer IS: 2vL/c2, where v=RΩ.

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0609/0609222.pdf

Let's observe that this is very similar to the formula for a triangular interferometer derived earlier:

4ωA/c2 = (4ωhL/2)/c2 where h is the height of the triangle to point D (midpoint between A and B), and L is the distance from A to B.

dt = 2vL/c2 where v = the speed at point D, the midpoint between A and B.


The Sagnac effect for a ROTATING LINEAR SEGMENT interferometer IS: 2vL/c2, where v=RΩ.

Using the values for v for both the orbital Sagnac and the rotational Sagnac we can see immediately that vo/vr = 60.


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 29, 2017, 01:18:57 AM
LISA (LIGHT INTERFEROMETER SPACE ANTENNA) ORBITAL SAGNAC > ROTATIONAL SAGNAC IV

(https://www.glasgowuniversitymagazine.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2016/02/Gravity.png)

https://web.archive.org/web/20161019095630/http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/ptti/2003papers/paper34.pdf

Dr. Massimo Tinto, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Principal Scientist

In the SSB frame, the differences between back-forth delay times are very much larger than has been previously recognized. The reason is in the aberration due to motion and changes of orientation in the SSB frame. With a velocity V=30 km/s, the light-transit times of light signals in opposing directions (Li, and L’i) will differ by as much as 2VL (a few thousands km).

SSB = solar system barycenter

Published in the Physical Review D

http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/ is the U.S. Naval Observatory website


https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0310017.pdf

Within this frame, which we can assume to be Solar System Barycentric (SSB), the differences between back-forth delay times that occur are in fact thousands of kilometers, very much larger than has been previously recognized by us or others. The problem is not rotation per se, but rather aberration due to motion and changes of orientation in the SSB frame.

The kinematics of the LISA  orbit brings in the effects of motion at several orders of magnitude larger than any previous papers on TDI have addressed. The instantaneous rotation axis of LISA swings about the Sun at 30 km/sec, and on any leg the transit times of light signals in opposing directions can differ by as much as 1000 km.

Aberration due to LISA’s orbit about the Sun dominates its instantaneous rotation.

The formula is 2VL/c.

V = RΩ

(https://image.ibb.co/hV6fr7/sagab2.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/ds9GW7/sagab1.jpg)

Actually, there is no difference in the path lengths: the light signals take different times around the path, amounting to two different speeds c + v and c - v, which of course would be equivalent to admitting that STR is false.

Therefore, the papers have to mention the difference in path lengths to avoid admitting that STR is false.

(https://image.ibb.co/k5ye17/ky1.jpg)

The formula for the difference in path lengths is:

dp = 2ΩA/c (p = path length)

Then, the difference in time will be:

dt = 2dp/c


The ORBITAL SAGNAC calculated at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory amounts to an admitted difference in path lengths of 1,000 kilometers.

The difference in path lengths for the rotational Sagnac is 14.4 kilometers:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0306125.pdf (Dr. Daniel Shaddock, Jet Propulsion Laboratory)

https://gwic.ligo.org/thesisprize/2011/yu_thesis.pdf (pg. 63)

Therefore the difference in path lengths for the ORBITAL SAGNAC is some 60 times greater than the difference in path lengths for the rotational Sagnac, according to these calculations.

The formula used for the ORBITAL SAGNAC (difference in path lengths) is 2VL/c, V = RΩ.

R = Earth - Sun distance

Ω = orbital angular velocity

This formula is extremely similar to the formulas derived earlier for a triangular interferometer and for a rotating linear segment (phase conjugate mirror).


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 30, 2017, 03:21:44 AM
GALILEO WAS WRONG

(http://astro-andy.eu//img/q_a_galileo_was_wrong.jpg)

“It is both amusing and instructive to speculate on what might have happened if such an experiment could have been performed in the sixteenth or seventeenth centuries when men were debating the rival merits of the Copernican and Ptolemaic systems. The result would surely have been interpreted as conclusive evidence for the immobility of the Earth, and therefore as a triumphant vindication of the Ptolemaic system and irrefutable falsification of the Copernican hypothesis."

Dr. G. J. Whitrow
Emeritus Professor and Senior Research Fellow of the Imperial College
Fellow of the Royal Astronomical Society

Experiments which found no translational motion corresponding to a 30km/s orbital motion of the Earth, while at the same time did detect the rotational ether drift:

Hoek (1868)
Mascart (1872)
Michelson (1881)
Michelson-Morley (1887)
Miller (1925-1933)
Galaev (2001-2002)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1956136#msg1956136

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1780340#msg1780340

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1722791#msg1722791

Fake special theory of relativity tests:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg865008#msg865008


The four part series on the LISA space antenna orbital Sagnac (see the previous four messages) has revealed that the orbital Sagnac effect is much larger than the rotational Sagnac effect, and yet it is not being registered/recorded by satellites.

The solar gravitational potential effect upon the satellites' clocks also does not show up at all.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1846706#msg1846706

"The 1971 JPL document giving the equations used to model roundtrip and one-way signals between a space probe and the earth prescribed the use of a sun-centered isotropic-lightspeed frame. Clearly, both the probe and the detector (or observer) on the earth are moving in this frame. The equations clearly show that the speed of light was not assumed to be isotropic with respect to the observer. Instead, when a signal was in transit from the probe to the earth, the motion of the earth-observer during the transit time was clearly accounted for. This motion included the earth’s spin, the earth’s orbital velocity, and even the motion of the earth caused by its orbit around the earthmoon center of gravity."

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19710017134.pdf (160 page state of the art technical report requested/commissioned by Nasa, issued by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, pg. 15 18 53 61* 100-101 143*)

"In fact, it can be safely said that no experiment has ever been performed with such agonizing persistence and meticulous precision, and in every conceivable way, as that of determining whether the Earth is indeed moving through space. The haunting fact is: all of them have failed to detect any motion."


"How is it that a treatise riddled with geometrical and mathematical presumptions, in addition to being one of the less-popular and least-studied books of its day, became the world’s most sacrosanct “fact” of existence?"

Because Koppernigk's "treatise" was written by the same group of people who forged the works attributed to Kepler.

The entire Nova Astronomia was faked, each and every entry:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1776670#msg1776670

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1776680#msg1776680

Koppernigk: a fictional character invented at least after 1600 AD:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1643860#msg1643860

"What about optical telescopes during galileo's time? HE saw jupiter's moons' orbit and he HIMSELF made his telescope so how could there be pre-programmed images in there during the 17th century?"

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=63486.msg1719875#msg1719875

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=63486.msg1719879#msg1719879

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=63486.msg1719889#msg1719889


(from Galileo Was Wrong, by Dr. R. Sungenis and Dr. R. Bennett)

“There is a strangely consistent parallel between Copernicus’ character, and the humble, devious manner in which the Copernican revolution entered through the back door of history, preceded by the apologetic remark: ‘Please don’t take seriously – it is all meant in fun, for mathematicians only, and highly improbable indeed’”

"What we call the Copernican revolution was not made by Canon Koppernigk. His book was not intended to cause a revolution. He knew that much of it was unsound, contrary to evidence, and its basic assumption unprovable. ….As a result of all this, Canon Koppernigk’s lifework seemed to be, for all useful purposes, wasted. From the seafarers’ and stargazers’ point of view, the Copernican planetary tables were only a slight improvement on the earlier Alphonsine tables, and were soon abandoned. And insofar as the theory of the universe is concerned, the Copernican system, bristling with inconsistencies, anomalies, and arbitrary constructions, was equally unsatisfactory, most of all to himself. In the lucid intervals between the long periods of torpor, the dying Canon must have been painfully aware that he had failed."

A. Koestler

But this apparent economy of the Copernican system, though it is a propaganda victory that the proponents of the new astronomy rarely failed to emphasize, is largely an illusion…The seven-circle system presented in the First Book of the De revolutionibus, and in many modern elementary accounts of the Copernican system, is a wonderfully economical system, but it does not work. It will not predict the position of planets with an accuracy comparable to that supplied by Ptolemy’s system.

…this brief sketch of the complex system of…Copernicus…indicates the third great incongruity of the De revolutionibus and the immense irony of Copernicus’ lifework. The preface to the De revolutionibus opens with a forceful indictment of Ptolemaic astronomy for its inaccuracy, complexity, and inconsistency, yet before Copernicus’ text closes, it has convicted itself of exactly the same shortcomings. Copernicus’ system is neither simpler nor more accurate than Ptolemy’s. And the methods that Copernicus employed in constructing it seem just as little likely as the methods of Ptolemy to produce a single consistent solution of the problem of the planets. The De revolutionibus itself is not consistent with the single surviving early version of the system, described by Copernicus in the early manuscript Commentariolus. Even Copernicus could not derive from his hypothesis a single and unique combination of interlocking circles, and his successors did not do so…Judged on purely practical grounds, Copernicus’ new planetary system was a failure; it was neither more accurate nor significantly simpler than its Ptolemaic predecessors."

T. Kuhn

"It makes no sense, accordingly, to speak of a difference in truth between Copernicus and Ptolemy: both conceptions are equally permissible descriptions. What has been considered as the greatest discovery of occidental wisdom, as opposed to that of antiquity, is questioned as to its truth value."

H. Reichenbach

"The Copernican system is not a discovery…but a last attempt to patch up an out-dated machinery by reversing the arrangement of its wheels. As a modern historian put it, the fact that the Earth moves is “almost an incidental matter in the system of Copernicus which, viewed geometrically, is just the old Ptolemaic pattern of the skies, with one or two wheels interchanged and one or two of them taken out.”"

A. Koestler

"I have known, too, for a long time, that we have no arguments for the Copernican system, but I shall never dare to be the first to attack it. Don’t rush into the wasp’s nest. You will but bring upon yourself the scorn of the thoughtless multitude. If once a famous astronomer arises against the present conception, I will communicate, too, my observations; but to come forth as the first against opinions which the world has become fond of – I don’t feel the courage.”"

A. von Humboldt

"Einstein was well aware of the anti-Copernican implications of the interferometer experiments. In the words of one of his biographers:

The problem which now faced science was considerable. For there seemed to be only three alternatives. The first was that the Earth was standing still, which meant scuttling the whole Copernican theory and was unthinkable.

Everyone in the physics establishment saw the same implications, and they were beside themselves with consternation. As several authors describe it:

The data [of the interferometers] were almost unbelievable…There was only one other possible conclusion to draw – that the Earth was at rest. This, of course, was preposterous.

In the effort to explain the Michelson-Morley experiment…the thought was advanced that the Earth might be stationary….Such an idea was not considered seriously, since it would mean in effect that our Earth occupied the omnipotent position in the universe, with all the other heavenly bodies paying homage by revolving around it.

Even Albert Michelson couldn’t avoid the implications of his own experiment:

This conclusion directly contradicts the explanation of the phenomenon of aberration which has been hitherto generally accepted, and which presupposes that the Earth moves…”

So shocked was Hubble when he examined the peculiar light coming from the stars that the only thing he could offer to refute an Earth-centered cosmos was to say:

…Such a condition would imply that we occupy a unique position in the universe, analogous, in a sense, to the ancient conception of a central Earth...This hypothesis cannot be disproved, but it is unwelcome and would only be accepted as a last resort in order to save the phenomena. Therefore we disregard this possibility.... the unwelcome position of a favored location must be avoided at all costs.... such a favored position is intolerable...Therefore, in order to restore homogeneity, and to escape the horror of a unique position…must be compensated by spatial curvature. There seems to be no other escape.

After Hubble, all kinds of interesting objects and forces were being found in man’s telescope, e.g., quasars, gamma-ray and X-ray bursters, cosmic background microwave radiation, and a wide assortment of galaxies and star clusters. To the utter consternation of the world’s scientists, each of the newfound discoveries kept revealing the same piece of startling information – that Earth was right smack in the center of it all."

"Whatever the name, it is a fact that no other scientific hypothesis comes close to the effect that removing the Earth from the center of the universe has had upon the thinking and aspirations of mankind."

"But among all the discoveries and corrections probably none has resulted in a deeper influence on the human spirit than the doctrine of Copernicus….Possibly mankind has never been demanded to do more, for considering all that went up in smoke as a result of realizing this change: a second Paradise, a world of innocence, poetry and piety: the witness of the senses, the conviction of a poetical and religious faith. No wonder his contemporaries did not wish to let all this go and offered every possible resistance to a doctrine which in its converts authorized and demanded a freedom of view and greatness of thought so far unknown, indeed not even dreamed of."

J.W. von Goethe

"One can imagine the sheer embarrassment modern science would face if it were forced to apologize for 500 years of propagating one of the biggest blunders since the dawn of time. This is not the Middle Ages, a time in which mistakes can be excused due to primitive scientific tools and superstitious notions. This is the era of Newton, Maxwell, Faraday, Darwin, Einstein, Edison, Planck, Hubble, Hawking, and scores of other heroes of science. If heliocentrism is wrong, how could modern science ever face the world again? How could it ever hold to the legacy left by these scientific giants if it were forced to admit it was wrong about one of its most sacrosanct and fundamental beliefs? Admitting such a possibility would put question marks around every discovery, every theory, every scientific career, every university curriculum. The very foundations of modern life would crumble before their eyes. Not only would Earth literally become immobile, but it would figuratively come to a halt as well, for men would be required to revamp their whole view of the universe.


Galilei and Kepler, fictional characters invented at least after 1750 AD:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1638725#msg1638725


Koestler remarks on the effect of Commentariolus: “…the first pebble had fallen into the pond and gradually, in the course of the following years, the ripples spread by rumour and hearsay in the Republic of Letters. This led to the paradoxical result that Canon Koppernigk enjoyed a certain fame, or notoriety, among scholars for some thirty years without publishing anything in print, without teaching at a university or recruiting disciples. It is a unique case in the history of science. The Copernican system spread by evaporation or osmosis, as it were”.


The Karlsson effect, the redshift is systematically quantised in discrete values along preferred peaks.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1937730#msg1937730 (two consecutive messages)

Flat earth geocentrism, the ultimate proof:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1938384#msg1938384 (three consecutive messages)

Ten page summary of Galileo Was Wrong (1,200 pages) by Dr. R. Sungenis:

http://worldnpa.org/abstracts/abstracts_5969.pdf

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 07, 2017, 01:34:26 PM
FAKE FIRST LAW OF PLANETARY MOTION DERIVED FROM THE FORGED LAW OF UNIVERSAL GRAVITATION

In fact, a strong argument for the validity of Newton’s laws of motion and gravity was that they could be used to derive Kepler’s laws.

https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/earth-atmospheric-and-planetary-sciences/12-201-essentials-of-geophysics-fall-2004/lecture-notes/ch2.pdf

But the entire Nova Astronomia was faked/falsified, each and every entry:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1776670#msg1776670

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1776680#msg1776680

“After detailed computational arguments Donahue concluded the results reported by Kepler . . . were not at all based on Brahe’s observational data; rather they were fabricated on the basis of Kepler’s determination that Mars’s orbit was elliptical."

"The fabricated data appear in calculated positions for the planet Mars, which Kepler used as a case study for all planetary motion. Kepler claimed the calculations gave his elliptical theory an independent check. But in fact they did nothing of the kind."

''He fudged things,'' Dr. Donahue said, adding that Kepler was never challenged by a contemporary. A pivotal presentation of data to support the elliptical theory was ''a fraud, a complete fabrication,'' Dr. Donahue wrote in his paper. ''It has nothing in common with the computations from which it was supposedly generated.''

http://radio.astro.gla.ac.uk/a1dynamics/ellproof.pdf

(https://image.ibb.co/hKmYdn/fake1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/hOnH4S/fake2.jpg)

A perfect match.

Newton's fake law of universal gravitation leads of course to the three body problem paradox:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1774581#msg1774581


The Earth does not orbit the Sun in the shape of an elliptical path: the solar gravitational potential is not being recorded/registered by the GPS satellites:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1846706#msg1846706

http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Ronald_Hatch/Hatch-Clock_Behavior_and_theSearch_for_an_Underlying_Mechanism_for_Relativistic_Phenomena_2002.pdf

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 08, 2017, 02:58:14 AM
RAILGUN EXPERIMENT DISPROVES RELATIVISTIC ELECTROGMAGNETISM

Dr. Peter Graneau's railgun recoil experiment was published in the Journal of Physics D (IOP article/Institute of Physics):

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0022-3727/20/3/023

(https://image.ibb.co/dbO1W7/rail1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/jBuKJn/rail2.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/iCoUJn/gran1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/hZO74S/gran2.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/dxvRyn/gran3.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/dmRoB7/gran4.jpg)

See also:

http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles/Pre2001/V00N15PDF/V00N15ISS.pdf

More details, including an analysis of other physicists' response to the experiment:

https://archive.org/stream/NewtonianElectrodynamics/Newtonian%20Electrodynamics#page/n0/mode/1up  (pg. 169-172)


The original set of Maxwell's equations DOES NOT contradict the Galilean transformations:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1918701#msg1918701


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 10, 2017, 03:19:14 AM
WHITTAKER SCALAR POTENTIAL WAVES

"E.T. Whittaker is one major player and part of 20th century physics akin to Poincare or Lorentz. Whittaker was, in 1954, selected by the Fellows of the Royal Society to receive the Copley Medal, the highest award granted by the scientific Royal Society of London, "for his distinguished contributions to both pure and applied mathematics and to theoretical physics". Back in 1931 Whittaker had received the Royal Society's Sylvester Medal "for his original contributions to both pure and applied mathematics"."

The achievements of the 1903 and 1904 papers published by Whittaker:

A scalar potential is comprised of a lattice of bidirectional longitudinal waves (ether/Tesla strings).

Electromagnetic or gravitational fields and waves can be decomposed into two scalar potential functions.

The unification of quantum mechanics, general relativity, ether theory into one single subject: ELECTROGRAVITY.

How to construct a scalar interferometer: a standing scalar wave structure.

An extended version of the Aharonov-Bohm effect.

The discovery of the fact that internal EM is generally completely inside the scalar potential, existing as “infolded” harmonic sets of EM antiparallel wave/antiwave pairs.   This internal EM was in Maxwell’s original quaternion equations.

The superluminal speed of gravitational waves.


(https://image.ibb.co/i7wSM7/whit.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/fb0RES/whit1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/bUu3uS/whit2.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/jxjQ8n/whit3.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/fGbu17/whit4.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/iJFhon/whit5.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/kQexM7/l_101_all.png)
(https://image.ibb.co/euWYuS/l_1000_all.png)

"Whittaker proved the existence of a "hidden" set of electromagnetic waves traveling in two simultaneous directions in the scalar potential of the vacuum -- demonstrating how to use them to curve the local and/or distant "spacetime" with electromagnetic radiation. This key Whittaker paper thus lays the direct mathematical foundation for an electrogravitic theory/technology of gravity control.
 
In the second paper, Whittaker demonstrated how two "Maxwellian scalar potentials of the vacuum" -- gravitationally curving spacetime -- could be turned back into a detectable "ordinary" electromagnetic field by two interfering "scalar EM waves"... even at a distance."

Whittaker accomplished this by demonstrating mathematically that,

"the field of force due to a gravitating body can be analyzed, by a spectrum analysis’ as it were, into an infinite number of constituent fields; and although the whole field of force does not vary with time, yet each of the constituent fields is an ondulatory character, consisting of a simple-disturbance propagated with uniform velocity ... [and] the waves will be longitudinal (top) ... These results assimilate the propagation of gravity to that of light ... [and] would require that gravity be propagated with a finite velocity, which however need not be the same as that of light [emphasis added], and may be enormously greater ..."

“Whittaker, a leading world-class physicist himself, single-handedly rediscovered the "missing" scalar components of Maxwell's original quaternions, extending their (at the time) unseen implications for finally uniting "gravity" with the more obvious electrical and magnetic components known as "light."

"In 1903-1904 E.T. Whittaker published a fundamental, engineerable theory of electrogravitation (EG) in two profound papers. The first (W-1903) demonstrated a hidden bidirectional EM wave structure in the scalar potential of vacuum, and showed how to produce a standing scalar EM potential wave -- the same wave discovered experimentally four years earlier by Nikola Tesla.

W-1904 shows that all force field EM can be replaced by interferometry of two scalar potentials, anticipating the Aharonov-Bohm effect by 55 years and extending it to the engineerable macroscopic world. W-1903 shows how to turn EM into G-potential and directly engineer the virtual particle flux of ether. W-1904 shows how to turn G-potential back into force-field EM, even at a distance."

E.T. Whittaker, "On the Partial Differential Equations of Mathematical Physics," Math. Ann., Vol. 57, 1903, p. 333-355 (W-1903)

http://www.cheniere.org/misc/Whittak/ORIw1903.pdf

E.T. Whittaker, "On an Expression of the Electromagnetic Field Due to Electrons by Means of Two Scalar Potential Functions," Proc. Lond. Math. Soc., Series 2, Vol.1, 1904, p. 367-372 (W-1904)

http://hemingway.softwarelivre.org/ttsoares/books_papers_patents/books%20papers%20patents%20(scientis/whittaker/whittaker%20et%20-%20on%20an%20expre.pdf

"In his 1903 paper Whittaker showed that a standing scalar potential wave can be decomposed into a special set of bidirectional EM waves that convolute into a standing scalar potential wave.

The very next year, Whittaker's second paper (cited above) showed how to turn such G potential wave energy back into EM energy, even at a distance, by scalar potential interferometry, anticipating and greatly expanding the Aharonov-Bohm effect. Indeed, Whittaker's second paper shows that the entire present force-field electromagnetics can be directly replaced with scalar potential interferometry. In other words, scalar EM includes and extends the present restricted vector subset of Maxwell's original theory.
 
Specifically, any EM force field can be replaced by two scalar potential fields and scalar interferometry. The combination of this paper and the 1903 Mathematische Annalen paper not only includes the Aharonov-Bohm effect, but specifies a testable method for producing a macroscopic and controlled Aharanov-Bohm effect, even at large distances."


The seminal Aharonov-Bohm paper:

https://journals.aps.org/pr/pdf/10.1103/PhysRev.115.485

"In 1959 two physicists, Yakir Aharonov and David Bohm, conducted a seminal "electrodynamics" laboratory experiment ("Significance of Electromagnetic Potentials in Quantum Theory," The Physical Review, Vol. 115, No. 3, pp. 485-491; August, 1959). Aharonov and Bohm, almost 100 years after Maxwell first predicted their existence, succeeded in actually measuring the "hidden potential" of free space, lurking in Maxwell's original scalar quaternion equations. To do so, they had to cool the experiment to a mere 9 degrees above Absolute Zero, thus creating a total shielding around a superconducting magnetic ring [for a slightly different version of this same experiment; the oscillation of electrical resistance in the ring is due to the changing electron "wave functions" -- triggered by the "hidden Maxwell scalar potential" created by the shielded magnet].

Once having successfully accomplished this non-trivial laboratory set up, they promptly observed an "impossible" phenomenon:

Totally screened, by all measurements, from the magnetic influence of the ring itself, a test beam of electrons fired by Aharonov and Bohm at the superconducting "donut," nonetheless, changed their electronic state ("wave functions") as they passed through the observably "field-free" region of the hole -- indicating they were sensing "something," even though it could NOT be the ring's magnetic field. Confirmed now by decades of other physicists' experiments as a true phenomenon, this "Aharonov-Bohm Effect" provides compelling proof of a deeper "spatial strain" -- a "scalar potential" -- underlying the existence of a so-called magnetic "force-field" itself.”"

Subquark G force:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1852870#msg1852870


The Tunguska explosion is an experimental proof of the existence of the Whittaker scalar potential waves.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 11, 2017, 01:22:34 AM
WHITTAKER SCALAR POTENTIAL WAVES II


The hidden structure of the electrogravitational potential is a set of bidirectional longitudinal waves.

These waves constitute/make up the electrogravitational potential.

The electrogravitational field is an effect caused by the em/g potential.

The bidirectional waves: time and anti-time, entropy and negentropy, normal thermodynamics and reverse thermodynamics, dextrorotatory strings and laevorotatory strings.

The time wave is the gravitational wave.

Tesla used only this hidden structure of the potential to transmit energy.

The original Maxwell equations expressed in quaternion form contained both the vector field and the scalar potential.


During the Chicago World's Fair of 1893, the Westinghouse exhibit set up by Tesla was visited by Hermann von Helmholtz, the first director of the Physico-Technical Institute of Berlin and one of the leading scientists of his time. When Tesla "asked the celebrated physicist for an expression of opinion on the feasibility of the [transmission] scheme. He stated unhesitatingly that it was practicable." In 1897, Lord Kelvin visited New York and stopped at the Tesla laboratory where Tesla "entertained him with demonstrations in support of my wireless theory."

Suddenly [Kelvin] remarked with evident astonishment: 'Then you are not making use of Hertz waves?'

'Certainly not', I replied, 'these are radiations.' ... I can never forget the magic change that came over the illustrious philosopher the moment he freed himself from that erroneous impression. The skeptic who would not believe was suddenly transformed into the warmest of supporters. He parted from me not only thoroly convinced of the scientific soundness of the idea but strongly exprest his confidence in its success."


(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e3/Double_Helix.jpg/800px-Double_Helix.jpg)

"Whittaker 1904 showed that all EM fields and waves can be decomposed  into two scalar potential functions. It follows that, by assembling  two such scalar potential functions in beams, one can produce a  "scalar potential interferometer" where the potential beams intersect  at a distance. In that interference zone, ordinary transverse EM  fields and energy appear."

"Whittaker, a leading world-class physicist himself, single-handedly  rediscovered the "missing" scalar components of Maxwell's original  quaternions, extending their (at the time) unseen implications for  finally uniting "gravity" with the more obvious electrical and  magnetic components known as "light." In the first paper, Whittaker  theoretically explored the existence of a "hidden" set of  electromagnetic waves traveling in two simultaneous directions in the  scalar potential of the vacuum -- demonstrating how to use them to  curve the local and/or distant aether with electromagnetic  radiation. This key Whittaker paper thus lays the direct  mathematical foundation for an electrogravitic theory/technology of  gravity control. In the second paper, Whittaker demonstrated how two  "Maxwellian scalar potentials of the vacuum" -- gravitationally  curving aether -- could be turned back into a detectable "ordinary"  electromagnetic field by two interfering "scalar EM waves"... even at  a distance. "

"A "scalar" potential is a  bundle of bidirectional longitudinal waves, as shown by Whittaker in  his 1903 paper which stated that a standing scalar potential wave can  be decomposed into a special set of bidirectional EM waves that  convolute into a standing scalar potential wave. As a corollary, a set  of bidirectional EM waves, stress waves, can be constructed to form a standing scalar potential wave in space.  Since all potentials represent trapped energy density of vacuum, they  are gravitational in nature.

Because it represents a "standing wave"  whose magnitude represents the variation in the local energy density  of the vacuum, the Whittaker scalar potential wave represents a  standing wave of variation in the local curvature of vacuum, sharply  in contradiction to the assumptions of present electromagnetics and  general relativity. It also represents a standing wave of the  variation of the local gauge.

Turning G-Potential Back to EM
The very next year, Whittaker's second paper showed how to turn such  Gpotential  wave energy back into EM energy, even at a distance, by scalar  potential interferometry, anticipating and greatly expanding the  Aharonov-Bohm effect. Indeed, Whittaker's second paper shows that the  entire present force-field electromagnetics can be directly replaced  with scalar potential interferometry. In other words, scalar EM includes and extends the present restricted vector subset of Maxwell's  original theory.

In 1903-1904 E.T. Whittaker (W)  published a fundamental, engineerable theory of electrogravitation  (EG) in two profound papers. The first (W-1903) demonstrated a hidden  bidirectional EM wave structure in the scalar potential of vacuum, and  showed how to produce a standing scalar EM potential wave -- the same wave experimentally four years earlier by Nikola Tesla.  W-1903 is a hidden variable theory that shows how to deterministically  curve the local and/or distant aether using EM. W-1904 shows that all force field EM can be replaced by interferometry of two scalar  potentials, anticipating the Aharonov-Bohm effect by 55 years and  extending it to the engineerable macroscopic world. W-1903 shows how  to turn EM into G-potential, curve local and/or distant aether,  and directly engineer the virtual particle flux of vacuum. W-1904 shows how to turn G-potential and curvature of aether back into  force-field EM, even at a distance. The papers implement Sakharov's  1968 statement that gravitation is not a fundamental field of nature,  but a conglomerate of other fields. Separately applied to electromagnetics (EM), quantum mechanics (QM), and general relativity  (GR), an extended superset of each results. The three supersets are  Whittaker-unified, so that a testable, engineerable, unified field  theory is generated. EM, QM, and GR each contained a fundamental error  that blocked unification, and these three errors are explained. The  Schroedinger potential can also be structured and altered, indicating the direct engineering of physical quantum change. Recently Ignatovich  has pointed out this hidden bidirectional EM wave structure in the  Schroedinger potential, without referencing Whittaker's 1903 discovery  of the basic effect.

http://inspirehep.net/record/253823/files/JINR-E4-87-880.pdf

The following is an extremely simplified summary of what scalars are,  how they relate to Maxwell's equations, an explanation of how to unify  the three major disciplines of physics, specify what's wrong with the  three present versions of those disciplines that has prevented their  unification, and how this was in Maxwell's original quaternion equations (some 200 of which are actually his theory, not the pale  four vector equations written by Heaviside and Gibbs which misses the  boat with respect to structured scalars.

Physically a scalar thing is a thing that (1) is a  vector in time, which is hidden from direct observation, (2)  externally is just a magnitude spatially, and (3) has an internal spatial vector structure, and therefore a hyperspatial or virtual-  state vector structure. A vector is a thing in motion in a dimension  (through a frame), whether in space, hyperspace, or time. Rigorously  it is not possible to exclusively separate the notions of vector and  scalar, because any scalar, to persist, is automatically a vector in  time.

These concepts or vector and scalar are normally not nearly so well  clarified in standard physics and mathematics texts, unfortunately.

From a physics viewpoint, one of the big problems with the present  vector mathematics --  which is well-known not to be a complete system  of mathematics in the first place --  is that the presence of a bunch  of vectors that sum to zero is just treated as a zero or absence of  any vectors at all. That is, the absence of any internal vectors at  all is made synonymous to the presence of a bunch of internal vectors  that are fighting each other to a draw. What this does is throw away  the internal energy and internal ordered structuring of the medium --  specifically, the energy of all the vector fighters that is continually going on inside the local medium -- inside spacetime  itself. Physically that's quite wrong, and one is throwing away  exactly half the energy of the situation. There is a very real  physical difference between a system of real vectors that fight to a  draw and so do not translate en masse, and the absence of any vectors  and vector-fighting at all. The difference is composed of stress and  its internal vector patterns -- the internal energetic engines in  local spacetime and local rest mass -- in short, the energy trapped in the local medium.

The Aharonov-Bohm effect, where potentials alone can interfere, even  in the absence of EM force fields, and produce real force effects in  charged particle systems. That is, the sole agent of the interference  of scalar potentials can induce EM changes, according to the  experimentally proven Aharonov-Bohm effect, even in the total absence  of EM force fields.

Since 1959, it has been known in quantum mechanics that the EM force  fields are not primary agents at all. We know that classical EM theory  is completely wrong on this. QM shows that it's the potentials that  are primary, not the force fields. In fact, it can be shown that the E-  field and B- field do not exist as such in vacuum; only the potential for the E-field and the B-field exist in vacuum. Feynman pointed that  out, but nearly all of his modern cohorts seem not to have recognized  that fact. Indeed, vacuum is just a conglomerate of potentials,  nothing more, nothing less.

To sum this up another way: The present vector analysis (as applied to electromagnetics) discards the internal, trapped EM energy of local  aether. Now if the internal trapped energy of spacetime varies from  place to place, that is called a curved aether, relativistically  speaking. And when the aether is curved, there is communication of  energy between the internal, infolded, virtual EM energy state and the external, translating, observable EM energy state. Curved one way, the  local aether is a sink, with external energy pouring into it  continually, and disappearing from observation of the external state.  Curved the other way, the local aether is a source, with energy  pouring out of it continually, and appearing in observation in the  external state.

What the present vector system of EM does, therefore, is throw out the  ability to use the very strong EM force as an agent to curve local aether. The very mathematics itself, a priori, assumes and  guarantees a locally flat aether. And in an uncurved region of aether, for example, you are never going to make an over-unity  machine -- a so-called "free energy" machine that will give you more  energy out than you put in -- because the application of the vector  theory a priori guarantees the elimination of any hidden sources from  the local aether medium. If you're going to tap the trapped  vacuum energy, and make a so-called "free energy" device, you're going  to have to curve the local aether. That is the only way to produce  a local energy source in the vacuum, from which a current issues.  Notice that, when we put a paddlewheel in a river, we produce a free  energy device because we tap some of the energy in the flow. But we  tap a current, we do not just tap a potential per se. The entire  secret of tapping vacuum energy, to build a free energy device, is to  produce a current in the local vacuum potential that is self-  sustained, and then tap that current.

So the present EM theory throws away exactly half of the energetics of  the situation involved. From time to time yet another physicist  discovers that astonishing fact, and publishes a paper on it to point  it out. Nobody does anything about it, however, because no one has the  foggiest notion of what to do. So everybody just lets it pass and  nothing is changed.

Let us go into details and describe the physics of the Whittaker  internalized EM energy structure of the scalar potential. Fundamental  changes are made to two "untouchable" primary sciences: general  relativity and quantum mechanics. In so doing, one unites and extends  both of them into a common unified approach, and drastically enriches the present conception of the physical exchanges in, of, between,  among, and within physical systems. The foundations changes to general  relativity allow the incorporation of a hidden variable theory (the  Whittaker internalized EM energy structure of the potential).

In a scalar EM potential the EM energy communicates vertically, which  is harmonic translation of frequency energies, or time-wise. The time-wise two-wave EM energy communication represents a stress upon the  rate of flow of local observer time; hence it represents gravitational  stress. Further, the local rate of flow of time is determined by this  local time-stress of vacuum potential. One can easily engineer the  harmonic bidirectional wave structure of the vacuum potential When one  does so, then one also (1) curves local aether, (2)  deterministically structures that local curvature with selected hidden-variable EM engines, (3) changes the local rate of flow of time, (4) gravitationally affects local systems, and (5) dynamically structures that local gravitational change to affect different system structures at will."


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 11, 2017, 05:49:50 AM
WHITTAKER SCALAR POTENTIAL WAVES III

"Whittaker figured out using partial differential equations what the waveform structure functions and dynamics of gravitational field effects are. And he demonstrated in his papers that gravitational field effect is a product of finer scale interactions. It has a waveform, it can be mitigated by the imposition of external forces, it is predictable and it operates according to certain rules."

"Whittaker’s decomposition of potentials and fields. In 1903 and 1904, E. T. Whittaker published two fundamental papers of interest to (i) the "infolding" of longitudinal wave (LW) electrodynamics inside the scalar potential, and also (ii) the expression of any EM field or wave as comprised of two potentials with appropriate differential functions applied.

For any EM field or wave: Suppose the two potentials are taken as scalar potentials (as advanced by Whittaker in 1904), and each of these two “basis potentials” is also first decomposed into longitudinal EM waves as shown by Whittaker in 1903, and then the appropriate differential functions are applied to each of the two decompositions, yielding the necessary EM field or wave pattern. Then all EM potentials, fields, and waves are shown (i) to be sets of ongoing EM energy flows in the form of longitudinal EM waves comprising the basis scalar potential(s), and (ii) to be comprised of internal longitudinal EM waves and strong internal structuring.

Scalar Interferometry: It follows that longitudinal EM wave interferometry (e.g., interfering the inner structures of two scalar potential beams in a distant interference zone in space), can create any known EM field or wave or pattern."

The hidden internal wave structures exist in all scalar potentials.

For example, Ziolkowski has pointed out what is actually Whittaker's 1903 infolded bidirectional planar waves inside the acoustic scalar wave, in work on acoustic missiles.

[See Richard Ziolkowski, "Localized transmission of wave energy," Proc. SPIE Vol. 1061, Microwave and Particle Beam Sources and Directed Energy Concepts, Jan. 1989, p. 396-397. Ed.] A Soviet scientist, Ignatovich, has pointed out the same remarkable bidirectional wave structure inside the scalar potential associated with the Schroedinger wave equation itself. [See V.K. Ignatovich, "The remarkable capabilities of recursive relations," American Journal of Physics, Vol. 57, No. 10, Oct. 1989, p. 873-878. Ed.]

Richard W. Ziolkowski, "Exact Solutions of the Wave Equation With Complex Source Locations," Journal of Mathematical Physics, Vol. 26, 1985, p. 861; "Localized Transmission of Wave Energy," Proc. SPIE, Vol. 1061, Microwave and Particle Beam Sources and Directed Energy Concepts, 1989, p. 396-397; "Localized Transmission of Electromagnetic Energy," Physical Review A, Vol. 39, p. 2005; "Localized Wave Transmission Physics and Engineering," Physical Review A, 1992, (in Press); "Localized wave transmission physics and engineering," Proc. SPIE Conference on Intense Microwave and Particle Beams II, Los Angeles, CA, vol. 1407, Jan. 1991, p. 375-386. See Richard W.Ziolkowski, Amr M. Shaarawi, and Ioannis M. Besieris, Nuclear Physics B (Proc. Suppl.), Vol. 6, 1989, p. 255-258; R.W. Ziolkowski, and D.K. Lewis, D.K., "Verification of the Localized Wave Transmission Effect," Journal of Applied Physics, Vol. 68, 1990, p.6083; Richard W. Ziolkowski, Ioannis M. Besieris, and Amr M. Shaarawi, "Localized Wave Representations of Acoustics and Electromagnetic Radiation," Proceedings of the IEEE, 79(10), Oct. 1991, p. 1371-1378; I.M. Besieris, A.M. Shaarawi, and R.W. Ziolkowski, "A bidirectional travelling plane wave representation of exact solutions of the scalar wave equation," Journal of Mathematical Physics, 30(6), 1989, p. 806; A.M. Shaarawi, I.M. Besieris, and R.W. Ziolkowski, "A novel approach to the synthesis of nondispersive wave packet solutions to the Klein-Gordon and the Dirac equations," Journal of Mathematical Physics, 31(10), 1990, p. 2511; "A nondispersive wave packet representation of photons and the wave-particle duality of light," UCRL-101694, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, 1989; "Diffraction of a classical wave packet in a two slit interference experiment," UCRL-100756, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 1989; "Localized energy pulse trains launched from an open, semi-infinite, circular waveguide," Journal of Applied Physics, 65(2), 1989, p. 805; R.W. Ziolkowski, D.K.Lewis and B.D.Cook, "Experimental verification of the localized wave transmission effect," Physical Review Letters, 62(2), 1989, p. 147; R.W. Ziolkowski and D.K. Lewis, "Verification of the localized wave transmission effect," Journal of Applied Physics, 68(12), 1990, p. 6083; M.K. Tippett and R.W. Ziolkowski, "A bidirectional wave transformation of the cold plasma equations," Journal of Mathematical Physics, 32(2) 1991, p. 488; A.M. Vengsarkar, I.M. Besieris, A.M. Shaarawi, and R.W. Ziolkowski, "Localized energy pulses in optical fiber waveguides: Closed-form approximate solutions," Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 1991.

https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/bitstream/handle/10919/47018/1.528301.pdf?sequence=1

https://iri.columbia.edu/~tippett/pubs/Tippett1991.pdf

"Question So how about general relativity? How does it fit in?

A:  A similar thing also happened to general relativity, believe it or not! Einstein unwittingly restricted general relativity to a subset of the theory he intended to write. This over-restriction was again an indirect result of the fundamental Heaviside/Gibbs error in electromagnetics.

Unfortunately, Einstein's view of electromagnetics approximated the classical view. In classical EM theory, EM and gravitation were mutually exclusive. That is, the strong EM force was not usable as an agent to curve spacetime.

Therefore, as a curvature agent, Einstein only considered the weak gravitational force due to the attraction of mass. Now the G-force is far, far weaker than the E-force. For two electrons, for example, the attractive G-force between them is on the order of only 10exp-42 times as strong as the electrical repulsion. The G-force is very, very weak! If only the weak G-force is considered for curving spacetime, then there will never be an observable spacetime curvature, except in the immediate vicinity of a very large mass - such as on the surface of the sun or a star.

Einstein reasoned that the laboratory, and the observer/scientist and instrument, would never be on the surface of the sun or of a star. Therefore, he reasoned, the local spacetime -- where the lab, the observer, and the instruments are -- would never be curved. The local spacetime would always be flat.

Unfortunately, Einstein then made a fundamental error. He overgeneralized his thought examination. He stated one of his fundamental postulates of general relativity as "The local spacetime is always flat." This is overly restrictive, and did not follow from his thought process. His postulate can be more accurately stated as follows "The local spacetime is always flat, whenever only the weak gravitational force is used for the agent of curvature and the local region of interest is not near a large collection of mass."

Notice the difference in the two statements of the postulate. Einstein's overstatement does not allow the far stronger EM force to be used for curvature. In effect, his own overstatement excluded electromagnetics from curvature unity with gravitation, in his own general relativity theory. Ironically Einstein then tried for the rest of his life to fit electromagnetics back in there - never realizing that his own too-strenuous statement of the flat local spacetime postulate doomed all his efforts to failure.

On the other hand, the corrected statement of his postulate admits the following corollary "When a very strong force such as the electromagnetic force is used for the agent of curvature, the local spacetime may be curved, even though the local region of interest is not near a large collection of mass."

As can be seen, Einstein unwittingly wrote only a subset of his intended theory. Correct restatement of his overstated postulate of uncurved spacetime dramatically extends general relativity, and unites it with electromagnetics in a unified field theory."

"Whittaker showed that a scalar EM potential is comprised of bidirectional EM wave pairs, where the pairs are harmonics and phase-locked together. In each coupled wave/antiwave pair, a true forward-time EM wave is coupled to a time-reversal of itself -- its phase conjugate replica antiwave.

To understand scalar EM, as we said, you must understand that there are actually two kinds of electromagnetics. One is -- so to speak -- only on the external "surface magnitude' of the vacuum potential, and the other is in the interior of the vacuum potential. The exterior kind is spatial in nature; the interior kind is hyperspatial in nature.
The exterior kind of EM is caused or due to the potential magnitudes and their gradients, interacting with charged particles (forcefields); that's the "normal" kind. In that kind the theoretical EM model's focus is on the forcefields as causes, with the potentials themselves just regarded as mathematical conveniences. Certainly that "normal" EM does not contain any sort of organized EM structure inside, and composing, the scalar EM potential. It just models the scalar potential at a point as a magnitude, and the vector potential at a point as a magnitude and direction. Notice it thus models only local action; it does not model any sort of action at a distance. The EM action is considered -- and described in the classical EM model -- as existing at a point in space and time. Further, the local spacetime itself is considered not to have any direct causative EM interaction there. In other words, there are assumed to be no local vacuum engines -- no Whittaker activation of mass or the local vacuum.

There's also an internal EM, normally completely inside the scalar potential, which exists as "infolded" harmonic sets of EM antiparallel wave/antiwave pairs. Whittaker 1903 describes that kind of EM. This internal EM was in Maxwell's original quaternion equations, hidden in the scalar component resultant that remained when the directional components of quaternions interacted to form directional zero resultants. The scalar component resultant of the interaction often still remained, and infolded inside itself (i.e., it then consisted of) scalar and vector functions of the yet-present-and-interacting component vectors.

Today that part of Maxwell's original theory just appears in classical EM Heaviside/Gibbs theory as a vector zero resultant, which is erroneously discarded as if it were a complete absence of EM. It is no such thing; it is merely the absence of EM translation of charged particles. It indeed is a patterned EM-induced gravitational stress in local spacetime, and it is a little "vacuum engine" capable of working directly on the atomic nucleus. If you want to know what all the fuss about the difference between Maxwell's 200-odd quaternion equations EM theory and the Heaviside/Gibbs four vector equations curtailment/subset, just look at the difference between a zero vector result and a quaternion resultant, in an interaction where the vector resultant is zero but the scalar component of the quaternion resultant remains. Specifically, look mathematically at the internal functional nature of that remaining scalar resultant -- the part that's thrown away in the present theory.

Note that the internal EM is more than just a model of conditions at a point. In addition to that, it prescribes a hyperspatial, bidirectional flow of EM transverse wave energy at the point, into and out of it, into it from afar and away from it back to afar, on an infinite number of phase-locked frequencies. In other words, the internal EM energetically connects conditions at a point with essentially all the other points in the universe. And when we interfere two such scalar potentials, we are actually interfering both of those sets of an infinite number of bidirectional EM waves. (See Whittaker's second paper, 1904). It doesn't matter where the interference zone occurs; it can be a million miles away, or a light-year away. The interference accomplishes "outfolding," and creates "normal" or "exterior" EM effects. Specifically, it creates force fields and patterns of them -- both static and dynamic -- on charged particle systems. The internal EM thus prescribes and models action at a distance, and incorporates the "normal" exterior EM as a special case of local scalar interferometry. Whittaker rigorously proved this mathematically.

To first order, the G-potential is a function of the trapped local EM energy density of the vacuum (bidirectional longitudinal waves).

Not only is the mass potential a scalar EM potential, but it is also a gravitational potential. Note that the concept of the mass potential is a unifying field concept, for unifying gravity and EM fields.

The beauty of the mass potential concept is fourfold: (1) Now mass has a universal kind of organized EM internal structure, given by Whittaker's 1903 paper, that comprises the mass in the first place, (2) the hidden internal EM structure of the mass potential can be changed and engineered at will, electromagnetically, by external means and directly, (3) we now have direct electrogravitation, opening up the vista of directly engineering antigravity.

(https://image.ibb.co/e6ndTn/whitt1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/nL98Tn/whitt2.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/nPPmES/whitt3.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/jiGiuS/whitt4.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/dbaXon/whitt5.jpg)

E.T. Whittaker, "On the partial differential equations of mathematical
physics," Mathematische Annalen, Vol 57, 1903, pages 333-355. 
 
  "In this paper Whittaker demonstrates that all scalar EM potentials have
  an internal, organized, bidirectional EM plane-wave structure. Thus
  there exists an electromagnetics that is totally internal to the scalar
  EM potential. Since vacuum/spacetime is scalar potential, then this
  internal EM is in fact "internal" to the local potentialized vacuum/
  aether."

E.T. Whittaker, "On an expression of the electromagnetic field due to
electrons by means of two scalar potential functions," Proceedings of
the London Mathematical Society, Series 2, Vol 1, 1904, pages 367-372. 

  "In this paper Whittaker shows that all of classical electromagnetics 
  can be replaced by scalar potential interferometry. This paper
  anticipated the Aharonov-Bohm (AB) effect by 55 years, and drastically 
  extended it as well. Indeed, it prescribes a macroscopic AB effect that 
  is distance-independent, providing a direct and engineerable mechanism
  for action-at-a-distance. It also provides a testable hidden-variable
  theory that predicts drastically new and novel effects."

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 11, 2017, 10:11:44 AM
WHITTAKER SCALAR POTENTIAL WAVES IV

"In his 1903 Mathematische Annalen paper, Whittaker demonstrates a standing, spatially-fixed wave of pure potential with an infolded, highly dynamic, hidden EM substructure containing hidden bidirectional pairs of EM waves/energy.

In each pair of infolded EM waves, the two coupled longitudinal waves flow in opposite directions inside the standing potential wave. Further, their speed is not limited to the normal speed of light in vacuum."

Scalar interferometry

"A most useful device is obtained if one uses a scalar inferometer where the two transmitters transmit beams which intersect at a distance. In the interference zone, an energy bottle is created.

By biasing the transmitter reference potentials well above that of the distant energy bottle, EM energy emerges in that zone, in that case the interferometer is operating in the Exothermic mode. By biasing the transmitter reference potentials well below that of the distant energy bottle, EM energy is extracted from the distant zone and emerges from the transmitter, in that case the inferometer is operating in the Endothermic mode.

If the transmitters transmit continuously, the effect in the distant zone is continuous.
 
If each transmitter transmits a pulse, and the two pulses meet in the distant intersection zone, then an explosive emergence or extraction of energy occurs at the distant interference zone, depending on whether the inferometer is operating in the exothermic or endothermic mode.

In the Exothermic mode, the ground potential of the transmitter is biased well above the ground potential of ambient vacuum, energy enters the transmitter and "disappears", to "reappear" in the distant interference zone.

If continuous wave transmission is used, the energy continuously appears in the distant zone.

If pulse transmission is used and timed so that the two scalar pulses meet in the distant zone, energy explosively appears there."

Tesla - Tunguska

http://www.tfcbooks.com/articles/tunguska.htm

http://www.teslasociety.com/pictures/wardenc.jpg (The Famous Tesla Tower erected in Shoreham, Long Island, New York was 187 feet high, the spherical top was 68 feet in diameter)

N. Tesla:

My apparatus projects particles which may be relatively large or of microscopic dimensions, enabling us to convey to a small area at a great distance trillions of times more energy than is possible with rays of any kind.  Many thousands of horsepower can thus be transmitted by a stream thinner than a hair, so that nothing can resist.  This wonderful feature will make it possible, among other things, to achieve undreamed-of results in television, for there will be almost no limit to the intensity of illumination, the size of the picture, or distance of projection.

Tesla said his transmitter could produce 100 million volts of pressure with currents up to 1000 amperes which is a power level of 100 billion watts.
 
If it was resonating at a radio frequency of 2 MHz, then the energy released during one period of its oscillation would be 100,000,000,000,000,000 (1016) Joules of energy, or roughly the amount of energy released by the explosion of 10 megatons of TNT.

Such a transmitter, would be capable of projecting the energy of a nuclear warhead by radio.

There are three N.Y. Times articles in which Tesla suggests the capacity of a Wardenclyffe-type plant to transmit a destructive impulse of electrical energy. Tesla's 1899 investigations in the area of wireless propagation in Colorado, which involved the transmission of an electric wave complex of two or more superimposed frequencies, at times led to the production of the ball lightning phenomenon.

New York Times, March 19, 1907

TESLA'S WIRELESS TORPEDO
Inventor Says He Did Show That It Worked Perfectly

As to projecting wave-energy to any particular region of the globe, I have given a clear description of the means in technical publications. Not only can this be done by the means of my devices, but the spot at which the desired effect is to be produced can be calculated very closely, assuming the accepted terrestrial measurements to be correct.

NIKOLA TESLA
New York, March 19, 1907


The Electrical Engineer - London
Dec. 24, 1909, p. 893

NIKOLA TESLA`S NEW WIRELESS

Mr. Nikola Tesla has announced that as the result of experiments conducted at Shoreham, Long Island, he has perfected a new system of wireless telegraphy and telephony in which the principles of transmission are the direct opposite of Hertzian wave transmission.  In the latter, he says, the transmission is effected by rays akin to light, which pass through the air and cannot be transmitted through the ground, while in the former the Hertz waves are practically suppressed and the entire energy of the current is transmitted through the ground exactly as though a big wire.  Mr. Tesla adds that in his experiments in Colorado it was shown that a very powerful current developed by the transmitter traversed the entire surface of the Earth and returned to its origin in an interval of 84 one-thousandths of a second, this journey of 24,000 miles being effected almost without loss of energy.

New York Times, Dec. 8, 1915, p. 8, col. 3

TESLA'S NEW DEVICE LIKE BOLTS OF THOR

"It is perfectly practicable to transmit electrical energy without wires and produce destructive effects at a distance. I have already constructed a wireless transmitter which makes this possible, and have described it in my technical publications, among which I may refer to my patent 1,119,732 recently granted. With transmitters of this kind we are enabled to project electrical energy in any amount to any distance and apply it for innumerable purposes, both in peace and war. Through the universal adoption of this system, ideal conditions for the maintenance of law and order will be realized, for then the energy necessary to the enforcement of right and justice will be normally productive, yet potential, and in any moment available, for attack and defense. The power transmitted need not be necessarily destructive, for, if existence is made to depend upon it, its withdrawal or supply will bring about the same results as those now accomplished by force of arms."

NIKOLA TESLA

(http://www.cheniere.org/books/part1/fig10.jpg)

"In the pulse mode, a single intense scalar pulse form is fired, using two truncated Fourier transforms, each involving several frequencies, to provide the proper 3-dimensional shape. This is why two scalar antennas separated by a baseline are required. After a time delay calculated for the particular target, a second and faster pulse form of the same shape is fired from the interferometer antennas. The second pulse overtakes the first, catching it over the target zone and pair-coupling with it to instantly form a violent EMP of ordinary vector (Hertzian) electromagnetic energy."

To activate the Wardenclyffe tower, Tesla used the power derived from his ball lightning objects in the lab (a single ball lightning sphere, 3 cm in diameter, provides 1 MW).

Alternatively, an array of Moray generators could be used.

Tesla also used remote viewing.

"Nikola Tesla planned a very special use for his endothermic scalar interferometer, he planned to produce what he called his "big eye to see at a distance."

The system used to accomplish this is only weakly endothermic, so that only a small amount of energy is extracted from the distant target, also, the beams are "scanned" by an open receiver, timewise, from side to side and top to bottom.

By scanning yet another single beam through the intersection zone and phasing its pulses, an even better representation can be obtained, thus the receiver produces a representation of the energy extracted from various locations within the distant endothermic zone, by displaying the received signals on an appropriately scanned screen, a representation of the distant scene can be created. This is a special kind of "microwave interferometry," and - with modern techniques - the imagery obtained can be surprisingly good.

With development, it might even become as good as the image presently obtained by side looking acquisition radars."

Ball lightning is due to scalar electromagnetic interferometry which can produce a controlled pattern of electromagnetic energy at a distance.

The energy sphere created by the Whittaker scalar waves will attract the telluric currents (longitudinal subquark waves) which will be diverted from their usual path to eventually form a self-sustaining oscillation in the form of a ball lightning object.


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 12, 2017, 01:22:33 AM
TUNGUSKA JUNE 30, 1908: WHITTAKER SCALAR POTENTIAL WAVES V

The definitive work on the subject is The Tunguska Mystery by Vladimir Rubtsov (more than 30 years spent as a researcher on the matter). The book includes each and every important aspect of the Tunguska event, from the geochemical analysis to the exact shape of the map of the region which reveals the geometry of the shock wave of the explosion.

It proves, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that there were TWO BALL LIGHTNING OBJECTS flying over the Tunguska region on June 30, 1908 (7:00 a.m. - 7:13 a.m.), coming from two different directions: south to north, and east to north-west. Their collision caused the huge explosion at the epicenter. Also it demonstrates that no comet, meteorite (stone/iron/magnetic) could have caused the explosion.

Initially, the research done by Dr. Felix Zigel revealed that, given the eyewitness reports coming from both the southern and the eastern regions, the ball lighting sphere must have changed course abruptly over a distance of 600 km.

LeMaire maintains the "accident-explanation is untenable" because "the flaming object was being expertly navigated" using Lake Baikal as a reference point. Indeed, Lake Baikal is an ideal aerial navigation reference point being 400 miles long and about 35 miles wide. LeMaire's description of the course of the Tunguska object lends credence to the thought of expert navigation:

The body approached from the south, but when about 140 miles from the explosion point, while over Kezhma, it abruptly changed course to the east. Two hundred and fifty miles later, while above Preobrazhenka, it reversed its heading toward the west. It exploded above the taiga at 60º55' N, 101º57' E (LeMaire 1980).

The fight path of the cosmic object, as reconstructed from eyewitness testimony and ballistic wave evidence. Felix Zigel and other space experts agree that, prior to exploding, the object changed from an eastward to a westward direction over the Stony Tunguska region. The arc at the bottom of the map indicates the scope of the area where witnesses either saw the fiery object or heard the blast.


The information acquired by the Florensky and Zolotov expeditions about the ballistic shock effect on the trees provides a strong basis, in some scientists' view, for a reconstruction of an alteration in the object's line of flight. In the terminal phase of its descent, according to the most recent speculations, the object appears to have approached on an eastward course, then changed course westward over the region before exploding. The ballistic wave evidence, in fact, indicates that some type of flight correction was performed in the atmosphere.


The same opinion was reached by Felix Zigel, who as an aerodynamics professor at the Moscow Institute of Aviation has been involved in the training of many Soviet cosmonauts. His latest study of all the eyewitness and physical data convinced him that "before the blast the Tunguska body described in the atmosphere a tremendous arc of about 375 miles in extent (in azimuth)" - that is, it "carried out a maneuver." No natural object is capable of such a feat.

(https://image.ibb.co/jRMzZS/tunguska.jpg)

Two spheres travelling eastward, then abruptly changing course heading to the west to the epicenter.


http://www.qconference-athens-2011.grazian-archive.com/aspacekeytotheri/rubtsov-paperx.pdf (a 20 page summary of the Tunguksa Mystery book)

(https://image.ibb.co/grOJTn/tung01.jpg)

The Tunguska trees have been leveled over a butterfly-like area 70 km across and 55 km long. Over this area, the trees were found lying mainly in a radial direction. However, there are in the leveled forest two bands of leveled trees that form feeble but noticeable herring-bone patterns. One of them is running from the east-south-east to the west-north-west; the second nearly from east to west (lines AB and CD). These appear to be imprints of bow waves of two bodies that flew over the taiga in these directions.

The idea of two “Tunguska meteorites” is also confirmed by reports of eyewitnesses. The total number of eyewitness testimonies is about 700 (Vasilyev et al., 1981). The Tunguska space body was seen at a distance of up to 1000 kilometers from the place of its explosion. There are, however, two main areas of eyewitness reports.

(https://image.ibb.co/ipDDuS/tung1.jpg)

First this is the southern sector where the Tunguska space body had been seen by inhabitants of settlements situated on the banks of the Angara river, and second the eastern sector (the upper reaches of the Lower Tunguska and Lena rivers). Data obtained inside each sector made it possible to create a statistically  reliable and coherent image of the Tunguska phenomenon, but these two images are different. In the south the phenomenon (including thunder-like sounds) lasted half an hour and more. The brightness of this Tunguska space body (let’s call it “southern”) was comparable to the Sun. The body looked white or bluish. It had a short tail of the same color. After its flight there remained in the sky iridescent bands resembling a rainbow and stretching along the path of the body’s motion. And it flew south to north.

In the east the brightness of the “eastern” Tunguska space body was much lower than the Sun. Its color was red, and the shape was that of a ball or “artillery shell” with a long tail. Usually eyewitnesses said simply: a “red sheaf” was flying. It was swiftly moving in the western direction, leaving no trace behind. The duration of this phenomenon did not exceed a few minutes.

Both space bodies did maneuver.

At a distance from the Southern swamp the “southern” body flew approximately south to north, but it approached the swamp from the east-southeast. Judging from that, it must have turned to the left for about 70 degrees shortly before the explosion.

(https://image.ibb.co/k8Vhon/tung2.jpg)

As for the “eastern” object, it also maneuvered at a considerable distance from the Southern swamp. Materials collected in the eastern sector appear to testify that. There are five “eastern” reports in which eyewitnesses describe how the flying body changed its direction of flight. Here for example is the testimony of Vladimir Penigin who was born in 1893 and saw personally the Tunguska space body. His point of observation was on the right bank of the Lena river (some 500 kilometers from the epicenter to the east-south-east).

He describes: “Then I was a boy and helped to bring manure to the fields. We were upstream from the village. The fiery flying body was well seen. It resembled an airplane without wings, or a flying sheaf. It was as long as an airplane and flew as high, but more swiftly. The body was as red as fire or a tomato. It was flying horizontally, not descending, and passed in front of the cliff of Tsimbaly, at about two thirds of its height. Then the body covered some two kilometers more and made a sharp turn to the right, at a very acute angle”.
(Vasilyev et al., 1981)


Victor Konenkin discovered that the flying Tunguska space body had been seen not only to the south from the Great Hollow, but to the east as well, up to 500 km from the site.

Konenkin was born and grew up in the village of Preobrazhenka, on the riverside of the Nizhnyaya (Lower) Tunguska River, where in the long winter evenings he heard so often the tales of his older neighbors about the striking event of half a century before. In 1962, the teacher decided to find out what the enigmatic flying object had looked like and how it had flown. He traveled to dozens of villages on the Lower Tunguska and its tributaries, interrogating the surviving eyewitnesses. If the eyewitnesses still lived at the same settlement where they had seen the TSB, Konenkin asked them to come to the place of their observation. They took with them a compass and an angle gauge. The eyewitnesses showed Konenkin at which point in the heavenly sphere they had noticed the fiery body for the first time and where it had disappeared.

Konenkin’s investigations enabled him to determine where the TSB had traversed the Lower Tunguska River. The task was accomplished very simply. This part of the river flows almost strictly from south to north, so that eyewitnesses located upstream (farther south) from the place where the TSB was traversing the river saw it flying from right to left, while those downstream (farther north from the intersection) saw the TSB flying from left to right. After processing the data collected, it turned out that the TSB had flown over the river near the village of Konenkin’s Preobrazhenka. And its inhabitants did confirm this, saying that the fiery object had flown directly over their village in 1908.

So a simple method obtained a result that must be correct. But there appears a problem: the village Preobrazhenka is situated at a distance of 350 km from the Tunguska epicenter and almost directly to the east. Most previous eyewitness reports were gathered to the south of the epicenter – up to a distance of about 1,000 km. How, then, could the TSB have approached the Great Hollow simultaneously from the east and also from the south?

The information collected by Victor Konenkin was so startling that it needed verification. Several expeditions – sent by KMET, ITEG, and AAGS – left for the Lower Tunguska, and they confirmed that Konenkin’s data were correct. They also gathered additional eyewitness reports themselves. To the 35 accounts collected by Konenkin, another 150 were added.

(https://image.ibb.co/caEKZS/eyew1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/efdk8n/eyew2.jpg)

The most reliable traces of the Tunguska phenomenon are material ones – the area of leveled forest, first of all. And we know that the second Fast’s TSB trajectory, determined from the axis of symmetry of this area, does run from the east to the west. Also in the same direction runs the TSB trajectory determined from the axes of symmetry of the zones of light burn and the thermoluminescent anomaly. These facts do demonstrate that over the Great Hollow the TSB was flying from the east to the west. Consequently, it is the eastern set of eyewitness testimonies that definitely has direct relation to the Tunguska phenomenon.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1677590#msg1677590 (Tunguska ball lightning theory)


The complete demonstration that TWO BALL LIGHTNING SPHERES coming from two different directions, not only maneuvered over the region (no natural object would be capable of such a feat), but also caused the Tunguska event explosion.

This is a very large scale interferometer based exactly on the Whittaker scalar wave theory, and as we have seen in the previous message, it was caused by Nikola Tesla operating the trajectories of the two spheres from the Wardenclyffe tower.

(https://image.ibb.co/fpJJTn/tung03.jpg)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 12, 2017, 10:20:09 PM
TUNGUSKA JUNE 30, 1908 II

The most important discovery concerning the powerful high-altitude explosion at Tunguska was the chemical analysis of the soil and peats of the region.

(https://image.ibb.co/bGhe3y/tung4.jpg)

http://www.qconference-athens-2011.grazian-archive.com/aspacekeytotheri/rubtsov-paperx.pdf

A very systematic search for chemical anomalies in Tunguska soils and peats has been made by specialists of the Independent Tunguska Exploration Group. They have found an increased concentration of some rare earths (lanthanum, ytterbium, cerium and yttrium). Soon it turned out that the samples enriched by rare earths are found only around the epicenter of the Tunguska explosion and in the north-western direction from it. This chemical anomaly was spread through soils, plants and peat, having a peak in the peat stratum dated 1908.

It was found that the pattern of ytterbium’s distribution at Tunguska follows the projection of the “southern” TSB’s path on the ground. Similar shapes have been formed at Tunguska for the surface distribution of lanthanum, lead, silver and manganese (Zhuravlev & Demin, 1976). Only these five elements have patterns of distribution in Tunguska soils and peats that follow the projection of the TSB path on the ground, and only ytterbium follows this path strongly enough to be considered as the most likely main ingredient of the TSB substance.

This is an amazing outcome, one should note. This soft silvery-white rareearth metal, discovered in 1878, is now used mainly for improving the hardness of stainless steel, as well as in making high-power lasers. Definitely, if the chief chemical component of the TSB was ytterbium it hardly could have been a natural space body.

In the 1990s, Dr. Sergey Dozmorov, a specialist in the chemistry of rare earths, who ran a chemical laboratory at a research institute in the Siberian city of Omsk, became interested in this enigma. He tested samples of soil, taken at Tunguska, looking for all lanthanides, not only of lanthanum, cerium and ytterbium. Dozmorov discovered that apart from ytterbium these samples were enriched by thulium, europium and terbium as well. And their ratio had been sharply disrupted. The contents of terbium exceeded the norm by 55 times, that of thulium by 130 times, that of europium by 150 times, and that of ytterbium by 800 times. Such things never happen in nature – only in special alloys. Even being a cautious scientist, and not a sensation-seeking journalist, Sergey Dozmorov had to conclude that:

“Together with the known data on the above-average barium content in the area of the Tunguska explosion, the results obtained may mean that there were in the Tunguska space body some systems that contained a superconducting high-temperature ceramic made on the basis of a combination of barium – a lanthanide – and copper. Such a ceramic keeps superconductivity up to the temperature of liquid nitrogen (that is, minus 196 degrees Celsius) and can be used for constructing effective energy and information storage devices. Obviously, such a substance cannot be natural”. (Dozmorov, 1999)

Now, due to Dozmorov’s discovery, we can say with a good degree of certitude that the bodies that flew over Tunguska in June 1908 could be artificial. And very likely, extraterrestrial. They flew, maneuvering, towards one point from different directions; one of them exploded due to its internal energy, the explosion being accompanied by hard radiation, and its substance contained a superconducting ceramic.

(https://image.ibb.co/b06TwJ/ytt1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/hkU93y/ytt2.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/gGPnqd/ytt3.jpg)

Note that the Tunguska radioactivity was studied not by amateurs, but by the most distinguished Russian radiochemists, in particular by Academician Boris Kurchatov, the father of Soviet radiochemistry, and his close associate Dr. Vladimir Mekhedov.


Transmutation of chemical elements using ball lightning:

http://www.q-mag.org/short-abstracts-of-17th-conference-on-cold-nuclear-transmutation-of-chemical-elements-and-ball-lightning-in-sochi-russia-sept-26.html

https://blog.synthestech.com/russian-conference-on-cold-nuclear-transmutation-and-ball-lightning-ended-c5ca6c886b7f

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LewisEtheballlig.pdf

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/4912/1abc2f1ef763dde1d3f5f7173d44ec990126.pdf

http://www.condensed-plasmoids.com/history.html


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1676400#msg1676400 (Tunguska event, six consecutive messages)

If the light from the Sun could not reach London due to curvature and/or any light reflection phenomena, then certainly NO LIGHT from an explosion which occurred at some 7 km altitude in the atmosphere could have been seen at all, at the same time, on a spherical earth.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 13, 2017, 04:31:23 AM
DARK FLOW III

http://www.kashlinsky.info/anima/skash.nsf/prepro?OpenForm&ParentUNID=20A8A87B7FB62FCE882578CB000C8703

Dark flow was described in very clear terms by the group of people who forged the works attributed to Isaac Newton:

Newton still thought that the planets and Sun were kept apart by 'some secret principle of unsociableness in the ethers of their vortices,' and that gravity was due to a circulating ether.

Isaac Newton speculated that gravity was caused by a flow of ether, or space, into celestial bodies. He discussed this theory in letters to Oldenburg, Halley, and Boyle.

Large overall dark flow on scales hundreds of million of light years in size! Our Universe from this perspective is a dark flow.

"Aether is physically displaced by matter.

The galaxy clusters in the following article are not traveling with  dark matter. The galaxy clusters are moving through the aether. The  galaxy clusters displace the aether.

'Hubble Finds Ghostly Ring of Dark Matter'
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hubble/news/dark_matter_ring_feature.html

"Astronomers using NASA's Hubble Space Telescope got a first-hand view  of how dark matter behaves during a titanic collision between two  galaxy clusters. The wreck created a ripple of dark mater, which is  somewhat similar to a ripple formed in a pond when a rock hits the  water."

The 'pond' consists of aether. The moving 'particles' are the galaxy  clusters. The 'ripple' is a gravitational wave. The 'ripple' is an  aether displacement wave.

The above is physical evidence of a moving 'particle' having an  associated aether displacement wave.

'Interpretation of quantum mechanics by the double solution theory -
Louis de BROGLIE'

http://aflb.ensmp.fr/AFLB-classiques/aflb124p001.pdf

"any particle, even isolated, has to be imagined as in continuous  “energetic contact” with a hidden medium"

The hidden medium is the aether. The "energetic contact" is the state  of displacement of the aether."

Louis de Broglie:

To answer this question, any particle, even isolated, has to be imagined as in continuous “energetic contact” with a hidden medium, which constitutes a concealed thermostat. This hypothesis was brought forward some fifteen years ago by Bohm and Vigier, who named this invisible thermostat the “subquantum medium”.

The "hidden medium" is nothing more than Whittaker's hidden structure of plane longitudinal waves:

"In his 1903 Mathematische Annalen paper, Whittaker demonstrates a standing, spatially-fixed wave of pure potential with an infolded, highly dynamic, hidden EM substructure containing hidden bidirectional pairs of EM waves/energy.

In each pair of infolded EM waves, the two coupled longitudinal waves flow in opposite directions inside the standing potential wave. Further, their speed is not limited to the normal speed of light in vacuum."


'Dark Halo Around Our Galaxy Looks Like Squished Beach Ball'
http://www.space.com/7746-dark-halo-galaxy-squished-beach-ball.html

"Dark matter seems to shroud the remaining visible matter in giant  spheres called haloes."

The Milky Way's halo is displaced aether.

"But the new study found that the Milky Way's halo isn't exactly  spherical, but squished. In fact, its beach-ball form is flattened in  a surprising direction perpendicular to the galaxy's visible, pancake-shaped spiral disk."

All of the aether displaced by the Milky Way matter pushes back toward  the Milky Way. The pressure exerted toward the matter by the aether  displaced perpendicular to the plane of the galaxy's spiral disk offset. It is the aether which is displaced outward relative to the  plane of the spiral disk which pushes back and exerts inward pressure toward the center of the galaxy. This forces the matter closer  together which results in the displaced aether looking like a squished  beach ball.

Matter does not move with dark matter. Matter moves through and  displaces the aether.

'Offset between dark matter and ordinary matter: evidence from a  sample of 38 lensing clusters of galaxies'
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16739.x/abstract

"We compile a sample of 38 galaxy clusters which have both X-ray and  strong lensing observations, and study for each cluster the projected  offset between the dominant component of baryonic matter centre  (measured by X-rays) and the gravitational centre (measured by strong  lensing). Among the total sample, 45 per cent clusters have offsets [greater than] 10 arcsec. The [greater than] 10 arcsec separations are  significant, considering the arcsecond precision in the measurement of  the lensing/X-ray centres. This suggests that it might be a common  phenomenon in unrelaxed galaxy clusters that gravitational field is  separated spatially from the dominant component of baryonic matter. It  also has consequences for lensing models of unrelaxed clusters since  the gas mass distribution may differ from the dark matter distribution  and give perturbations to the modelling. Such offsets can be used as a  statistical tool for comparison with the results of Lambda cold dark  matter ( CDM) simulations and to test the modified dynamics."

The offset is due to the galaxy clusters moving through the aether."

"The clusters of galaxies are headed along the dark flow path because the Universe is, or
the local Universe we exist in is in, a jet.

Dark flow is the aether emitted into the Universal jet. Dark energy is  the change in state of the aether emitted into the Universal jet."

Dark flow = Dark energy = Dark matter = Aether/Ether flow

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1964696#msg1964696 (Dark Flow II)


Now, the concepts of dark flow, dark energy, dark matter and Whittaker's scalar waves have to be linked together into a single theory which would explain the astrophysics of galaxies and clusters of galaxies.


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 13, 2017, 09:45:19 AM
BIRKELAND CURRENTS: WHITTAKER SCALAR POTENTIAL WAVES VI

(http://www.everythingselectric.com/wp-content/uploads/birkeland-currents-5.jpg)

"Plasma in space usually appears as a cloud of partially charged gas and dust.
 
When clouds are in motion they become ionized. Clouds in relative motion induce electric currents within them. The currents generate magnetic fields that confine the plasma into coherent filaments known as Birkeland currents.
 
The charged particles in the currents spiral along the resulting magnetic fields, appearing as electrical vortices. The forces between these spinning Birkeland currents pull them close together and wind them around each other into “plasma ropes”.

Birkeland currents squeeze galactic plasma into thin filaments that remain collimated over great distances.
 
Light-years-long jets and so-called “radio lobes” can extend for many times a galaxy’s diameter, for example. A circuit is induced within any one galaxy that causes diffuse electric charge to flow from the galactic poles toward the galaxy’s equatorial plane and spiral into its nucleus.

The forces exerted by electrified plasma contained in the twisting filaments of Birkeland currents dominate the Universe. They circulate in a cosmic circuit that flows into our field of view and then out into the void with electromagnetic attraction between them that is billions of times more intense than gravity."

Electric Plasma Universe

The new Plasma cosmology is based largely on electromagnetic forces - up to 39 orders of magnitude stronger than gravity - and has no need for dark matter or dark energy.

Plasma is a conglomerate of charged particles that respond collectively to electromagnetic forces. It is considered a fourth state of matter distinct from solid, liquid, and gas. Plasmas can be created and studied in the laboratory, and their properties can be scaled up over many orders of magnitude.

Swedish plasma physicist Hannes Alfvén (1908-1995), awarded the Nobel Prize in physics for his work on the dynamic behaviour of electrically conducting fluids including plasmas, was a pioneer proponent of the Electric Plasma Universe. He was the first to point out that X-rays and γ-rays detected by the special telescopes orbiting in space are produced by magnetized plasmas.

Field-aligned Birkeland currents create strings of galaxies

Along the boundaries between cells, filaments and sheets of plasma organize into Birkeland currents, named after Norwegian researcher Kristian Birkeland (1867-1917), who deduced that the flow of electrons from the sun was the source of the Northern lights at the beginning of the 20th century. Magnetic field aligned electric (Birkeland) currents were discovered in Earth’s magnetosphere in 1974; and auroras are now attributed to the filamentation of charged plasma sheets following Earth’s magnetic field lines into vortex current bundles. Birkeland currents exist also on the galactic and supergalactic scales, and are very effective at aggregating matter.

Birkeland current and accretion of matter

A Birkeland current is an electric current aligned with a magnetic field. Any current flowing in a conductor or filament will induce a magnetic field B around it. The lines of equal magnetic flux density will be in the form of rings around the current axis, with magnetic flux density decreasing away from the axis. The interaction of the current with its own magnetic field will cause a pressure to develop radially inward on the current filament according to the vector product of current I and magnetic field B written as (I x B). This is referred to as a Z-pinch.

Birkeland currents interact to form systems of galaxies, according to Anthony Peratt, plasma physicist at Los Alamos National Laboratory New Mexico in the United States, and a leading proponent of the Electric/Plasma Universe. Birkeland currents in astrophysical plasmas with dimensions ranging from 102 to nearly 1021 m are thought to carry currents of 105 to 1019 A (amperes). The entire filamentous circuit is expected to be hundreds of megaparsec long with complex patterns of fields and currents. (A parsec is an astronomical unit equal to 3.26 light-years or 3.08567758 x 1016 m, so a Mpc (megaparsec) is 3.26 million light years.)

Galaxies form along the filaments, and this explains the chains of galaxies that seem to be linked like pearls on a string. Large masses of galaxies also formed along the original plasma cell boundaries, accounting for the “Great Walls” and the grand sheets of galaxies that have been observed.

“The two Birkeland filaments (also concentrating matter within their magnetically pinched volume) torque around each other, changing the morphology of the core plasma (flattening the ellipse) and eventually evolving into trailing arms as electric current, axial to the arms, flows into the core of the galaxy. At that point the two Birkeland filaments merge with the core. So the core of a galaxy derives from whatever intergalactic plasma was trapped between the two (or more) Birkeland filaments and the arms of the spiral derive mostly from the pinched Birkeland filaments themselves.

“The rotating Birkeland filaments impart the initial rotational momentum to the galaxy-sized plasma structure. As the charged plasma structure rotates, there arises a concomitant magnetic field with a typical “dynamo” signature.

“Current continues to run through the galaxy along the equatorial plane as part of a larger intergalactic circuit. This current as it passes through the magnetic field mentioned above drives further rotational energy as the galaxy responds as a homopolar motor. This is what drives the “anomalous” rotational velocities observed in the outer parts of galaxies.

“Further magnetic fields arise in the galaxy as a result of the intergalactic currents running in along the equatorial plane. The currents running radially along the equatorial plane create local magnetic fields that squeeze the plasma into Birkeland filaments. This brings definition to the spiral arms. Further filamentation and higher current densities power star formation in the spiral arms.”

http://www.dharmacafe.com/new-science/continuous-creation-from-electric-plasma-versus-big-bang-universe/


http://plasmauniverse.info/papers.html (Plasma cosmology, papers published by Dr. A.L. Peratt)


The fallacies of the emergent gravity hypothesis:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1612.09582.pdf

The errors inherent in the MOND hypothesis (Modified Newtonian Dynamics):

http://immanuelvelikovsky.com/NewtonEinstein&Veli.pdf (pg. 243, 250-253)


Ampere's force law is a subquark vortex theory exemplified visually in the classic work Spintronics:

SPINTRONICS, secret world of magnets, the most thorough work on the double helix theory of the magnetic field (double helix of the telluric currents):

https://freeenergycommunity.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/the-secret-world-of-magnets-spintronics-2006-howard-johnson.pdf

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg759332#msg759332 (magnetricity: ether magnetism)

Ampere's ideas on ether theory:

https://www.princeton.edu/ssp/joseph-henry-project/galvanometer/explaining-the-phenomenon/amperes-theory/


The cosmic microwave background radiation consists of Birkeland currents.

"For instance, you might want to take a closer look at what all-sky surveys tell us about the interstellar plasma structures we can observe at the 21-cm wavelength (oftentimes called HI). Gerrit Verschuur has published extensively on this subject in his books "Interstellar Matters" and "The Invisible Universe", as well as numerous peer-reviewed publications. And he is quite clear that the structure of this plasma is in fact filamentary, as would be expected for a plasma conducting electrical currents ...

"Preliminary results from high resolution HI mapping of gas and, dust in an apparent HI "cloud" indicate that the neutral gas and dust within and around its boundary is itself highly filamentary" (Interstellar Neutral Hydrogen Filaments at High Galactic Lattitudes and the Bennett Pinch)

Furthermore, Verschuur has observed critical ionization velocities (CIVs) to be associated with these interstellar filaments. When a neutral gas (so thin that collisional interactions can be ignored) meets a plasma such that the kinetic energy of their relative velocity is equal to the ionization potential of the neutral gas, then the kinetic energy is converted into ionization of the neutral gas. This was incidentally suggested by Alfvén in 1942 and later discovered in the lab in the 1970’s.

Verschuur furthermore states in Galactic Neutral Hydrogen Emission Profile Structure:

"Analysis of Galactic neutral hydrogen emission profiles that have been corrected for sidelobe radiation confirm the existence of three distinct component line width regimes identified by Verschuur & Magnani in 1994. In addition, a fourth becomes recognizable in the data in directions of low total column density. The line width regimes are around 50 km s~1 (component 1a), 31 km s~1 (component 1b), 13 km s~1 (component 2), and 5.2 km s~1 for the narrow lines arising from cool H I (component 3). In this paper, the new data are presented and compared with previously published results. The possible origin of the distinct line width regimes is briefly examined, and it is concluded that a new interpretation is needed, one that involves a plasma phenomenon known as the critical ionization velocity, which will be fully discussed in a subsequent paper."

In another paper, On the Critical Ionization Velocity Effect in Interstellar Space and Possible Detection of Related Continuum Emission, he states:

"Interstellar neutral hydrogen (HI) emission spectra manifest several families of linewidths whose numerical values (34, 13, and 6 km/s) appear to be related to the critical ionization velocities (CIVs) of the most abundant interstellar atomic species. Extended new analysis of HI emission profiles shows that the 34-km/s-wide component, which probably corresponds to the CIV for helium, is pervasive. The 34-km/s-wide linewidth family is found in low-velocity (local) HI profiles and in the so-called high-velocity clouds (HVCs). In addition, published studies of HI linewidths found in the Magellanic Stream, Very High Velocity Clouds, and Compact HVCs, all of which are believed to be intergalactic, have noted that the typical values are of the same
order. If the CIV effect does play a role in interstellar space, it may be expected to produce locally enhanced electron densities where rapidly moving neutral gas masses interact with the surrounding plasma. Evidence that suggests that this phenomenon is occurring in interstellar space is presented. It manifests as a spatial association between peaks in HI structure offset with respect to peaks in high-frequency radio continuum data obtained with the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe."

In his book, The Invisible Universe, he provides some background on HI and the widespread presence of these filaments:

"The neutral hydrogen atom consists of a proton with an electron in an orbit about it. Both the proton and the electron have a property called spin, which can be in the same direction (called parallel spin) or in opposite directions (antiparallel) relative to one another. The total energy contained by the atom in these two conditions is different. When the spin state flips from the parallel condition to the antiparallel, which contains less energy, the atom gets rid of the excess energy by radiating a spectral line at a frequency of 1420.405 MHz, generally known as the 21-cm line referring to its wavelength in the radio band. The 21-cm line is the signature of HI and makes the gas observable to astronomers on earth." (The Invisible Universe: The Story of Radio Astronomy, Gerrit L. Verschuur, p52)

"It wasn't until some 50 years after the detection of the HI signal that a comprehensive all-sky survey of the HI spectral line was completed under the guidance of W. Butler Burton at the University of Leiden … The completed project is known as the Leiden-Argentina-Bonn (LAB) survey. To give the reader some feel for the enormous scope of this project, the LAB Survey observed 400,000 directions and obtained a spectrum with 1,000 frequency channels at each location … Figure 6.1 is an all-sky HI map made from the LAB Survey data where the color is a measure of the total number of hydrogen atoms along the full line-of-sight through the Galaxy in any given direction … An intriguing feature of this map is the presence of arcs or filaments (long streamers) visible as great threads of emission, whose shapes are almost certainly controlled by magnetic fields between the stars." (The Invisible Universe: The Story of Radio Astronomy, Gerrit L. Verschuur, p52-53)

In that same source, he also explains the predicament of the "anomalous high-velocity clouds" ...

"Not all is understood about the distribution of HI in the Milky Way. For example, large areas of sky are found to contain HI [hydrogen] moving at velocities that are not expected if the gas is confined to the plane of the Galaxy. In particular, when a radio telescope is pointed above or below the galactic plane, only relatively local gas traveling at velocities between +-20 km/s with respect to zero, defined in terms of the average random motion of stars near the sun, should be observed. However, HI at very high negative velocities, which indicates motion toward us, is found at high galactic latitudes. These structures are known as high-velocity clouds, although detailed maps of such features show them to be filamentary instead of cloud-like. Their distance and origin continue to be the subject of controversy. The bulk of these HI structures in the northern sky follow an arc defined by a weak radio shell found in radio surveys …" (The Invisible Universe: The Story of Radio Astronomy, Gerrit L. Verschuur, p55)"

http://plasmauniverse.info/downloadsCosmo/Verschuur-CIV-HI-TPS-Aug2007b.pdf


"Self-organized Critical Transport" with the "Bulk Flow" of plasma

"Plasmas are characterized by the long-ranged electromagnetic force i.e. all charged particles are affected by all the other particles no matter how far they may be."

Now from the book "Plasma Astrophysics":

"In toroidal plasmas the toroidicity (the geometrical effect) induces to couple modes with each other at adjacent resonant surfaces. This leads to a chain of modes successively tied together, so much so to form a (even) macroscopic radial mode. If this large mode structure manifests itself, the spatial scale for transport across the magnetic field is characterized not by the Larmor radius, but by the larger patch or the macroscopic scale such as the temperature (or density) scale length. This leads to a relaxation of the plasma profile over this macroscopic length. If the plasma is driven by external or internal sources of heat ect., depending upon the strength of sources and the size of scale length, different equilibrium temperature (or density) profiles and temporary features (such as relaxation, oscillations) will arise."

In other words, this "dark flow" may well be one seriously large self-organized flow of plasma with co-moving "modes" of plasma systems within it (the observed galaxy clusters). This is also referred to in Plasma Physics as a "bulk flow" of plasma.


Dark flow = dense dark Birkeland currents

Dark matter = dark Birkeland currents:

http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2008/arch08/080723darkcurrents.htm

http://electric-cosmos.org/electricplasma.htm

Plasma waves, longitudinal waves, scalar waves:

http://www.k-meyl.de/go/Primaerliteratur/Scalar-Waves.pdf

The Whittaker longitudinal helical waves from the scalar potential which in turn create the magnetic fields and the Birkeland currents.

The torsion spirals of the Whittaker bidirectional waves become visible plasma.

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Continuous_Creation_from_Electric_Plasma.php


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 15, 2017, 01:23:20 PM
THE SAGNAC EFFECT = THE AHARONOV-BOHM EFFECT


(https://image.ibb.co/isFhOy/sagbohm1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/kJwvbJ/sagbohm2.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/mryrGJ/sagbohm5.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/nkbxOy/sagbohm6.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/hpmxOy/sagbohm7.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/g1EZ3y/sagbohm8.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/dmUOwJ/sagbohm9.jpg)


http://zfn.mpdl.mpg.de/data/Reihe_A/44/ZNA-1989-44a-1145.pdf

Substratum Interpretation of the Sagnac and the Aharonov-Bohm effect
Dr. Friedwardt Winterberg

Ph.D., Physics 1955 Max Planck Institute, Goettingen, Germany (Adv: Prof. W. Heisenberg)
1968-Present Professor of physics, University of Nevada Reno
1955-1959 Group leader theoretical physics division at nuclear research reactor in Hamburg, Germany, under President Eisenhower's "Atoms for Peace" program
Elected member International Academy of Astronautics, Paris, France.
Member of American Physical Society.
Recipient of the 1979 Hermann Oberth Gold Medal (the highest award in astronautical research given for his work on nuclear rocket propulsion).
At 26 years of age in 1955, laid the foundation for GPS system, proposing to put atomic clocks into artificial satellites.
More than 260 single author papers in refereed journals, two books, with many citations, including citations by the NY Times, Scientific American, Physics Today et al., 55 publications since 1992.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 16, 2017, 12:30:01 PM
THE SAGNAC EFFECT = THE AHARONOV-BOHM EFFECT II

Superpotential = Ether = boson string lattice at the Planck length/scale

Aether = medium through which the boson strings propagate

Boson = photon = neutrino

A boson is a cavity resonator.

The boson is the Kaluza-Klein electrogravitational particle.


Potential = bidirectional longitudinal boson waves

Gravitational Potential = dextrorotatory longitudinal boson wave

Electric Potential = laevorotatory longitudinal boson wave

A subquark contains some 14 billion bosons (double torsion vortex).

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1774536#msg1774536


The longitudinal waves create transverse waves (wave particle duality is solved at once in ether quantum mechanics: longitudinal strings of bosons travel through transverse subquark waves).

(https://image.ibb.co/hroBiy/cornsag2.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/dB8cOy/cornsag3.jpg)

Essays on the Formal Aspects of Electromagnetic Theory, Dr. Patrick Corneille, pg. 138-183

G. Bekefi, Radiation processes in plasma, J. Wiley and Sons, 1966


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4323049/

The Aharonov-Bohm effect and its applications to electron phase microscopy, A. Tonomura (state of the art proofs of the Aharonov-Bohm effect)

E.T. Whittaker proved mathematically the existence of the boson longitudinal waves, and the relationship between the potentials and the electromagnetic field.

He also proved the global Aharonov-Bohm effect: interferometry on a global scale (evidenced by the Tunguska explosion caused by the collision of two ball lightning spheres).

The Aharonov-Bohm effect proves the existence of the potential, the hidden structure of the universe made up of longitudinal boson waves.

"The optical whirlwind effect of an artificial rotation of an overall system really shows itself, without unexpected compensation, as an effect of the first order of the movement in comparison with the ether.  The experience directly reveals […] the linear delay […] that the overall rotation of the optical system produces in the ether between the two systems of inverse waves T and R during their propagation around the circuit."

G. Sagnac

"So what is making one of the light  beams travel slower? Sagnac said it was due to the ether impeding its  velocity - a resistance that is easily generated by rotating the table. So  predictable and precise are these results that the “Sagnac effect,” as it is  commonly called, is used routinely in today’s technology for the purpose of sensing rotation, as well as in mechanical gyroscopes."

The equivalence of the Aharonov-Bohm effect and of the Sagnac effect means that the existence of ether as it pertains to the Sagnac experiment is totally proven.

http://zfn.mpdl.mpg.de/data/Reihe_A/44/ZNA-1989-44a-1145.pdf

Dr. F. Winterberg proved the gravitational Aharonov-Bohm effect and linked it directly to the Sagnac effect: in both cases, the phase shift is caused by a swirling motion of the ether.

Gravitational Aharonov-Bohm effect:

https://physics.aps.org/synopsis-for/10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.230404

http://physics.ipm.ac.ir/seminars/2013/11dec13/pdf/1.pdf

"The Anderson Experiments proved in 1932, that Absorption of a Gamma-ray energy quantum of 1.02 million electron volts (1.02 MeV) in any point of space makes a free electron and positron pair appear there. When such a pair of particles disappears in any point of space, there are two (at least) quanta emitted, of total energy 1.02 MeV. These results were and are misinterpreted by relativists, claiming that here radiation turns into electrons and positrons, creates them, and that electrons and positrons turn, or annihilate into energy.  But, "appearance" does not necessarily mean "creation". Moreover, never was a single electron or positron created out of empty space nor annihilated into empty space, even with the now available energies up to a million MeV. Clearly, 1.02 MeV cannot create in empty space an electron and a positron, if up to million MeV energies cannot create there even one of these particles. Hence, these particles must be existing in space, bound to one another by the 1.02 MeV energy."

Electron = dextrorotatory subquark
Positron = laevorotatory subquark

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1922302#msg1922302

“After years of careful experiments, Dr. Kozyrev and his colleagues found that in a left-hand rotating system the time flow is positive-it adds energy. In a right-hand system the time flow is negative. ... In Dr. Kozyrev's view our world is a left-hand system and it has a positive time flow that adds energy to our universe."


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 17, 2017, 02:31:17 AM
LONGITUDINAL BOSON STRINGS WITHIN TRANSVERSE SUBQUARK WAVES

"...the failure of the world's physicists to find such a (satisfactory) theory, after many years of intensive research," says Dirac, "leads me to think that the aetherless basis of physical theory may have reached the end of its capabilities and to see in the Aether a new hope for the future".

Paul Dirac, the Nobel Prize winner in physics in 1933
Scientific American, The Evolution of Physicists Picture of Nature, May 1963

(https://image.ibb.co/jCBaAd/hodson1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/jRb8Vd/hodson2.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/nyvVbJ/hodson3.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/cZG3wJ/hodson4.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/kHhtwJ/hodson5.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/f6yNqd/hodson6.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/cfeCqd/hodson7.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/fqYu3y/hodson8.jpg)

Science of Seership, Geoffrey Hodson

In the interspace between the copper atoms there was more or less solid etheric matter, consisting of many small particles not related to one another and not packed in any special way. These particles were heart-shaped, and appeared to answer to the descrip­tion of Ultimate Physical Atoms (E1).

When the current was put on a sudden state of tension was noticed, and all movement in the inter­space appeared to cease. The heart-shaped particles immediately placed themselves laterally in lines along the wire, the point of one being attracted towards the hollow of the next. Along the line of the locked heart-shaped particles there was a continuous passage of very much smaller astral particles.

Summarizing what has been so far achieved, we find that:

1.     The nature and direction of the current has been observed, i.e., That an electric current consists of a flow of astral ultimate particles along lines of locked E1 atoms (physical ultimate particles) from the negative to the positive pole of the battery.


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1401101#msg1401101

(https://www.alliancesforhumanity.com/matter/matter_files/image006.jpg)

E1 = subquark ether level
E2 = quarks
E3 = mesons
E4 = baryons
E5 = atom itself

An electric current brought to bear upon the Anu checks their proper motions, i.e., renders them slower; the Anu exposed to it arrange themselves in parallel lines, and in each line the heart-shaped depression receives the flow, which passes out through the apex into the depression of the next, and so on. The Anu always set themselves to the current. Fig. 4. In all the diagrams the heart-shaped body, exaggerated to show the depression caused by the inflow and the point caused by the outflow, is a single Anu.

(https://www.alliancesforhumanity.com/matter/matter_files/image009.jpg)

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr01.htm

The exact number of these bubbles included in an ultimate physical atom is not readily ascertainable, but several different lines of calculation agree in indicating it as closely approximating to the almost incredible total of fourteen thousand millions.

Bubble of light = boson = photon = neutrino

Given that the gaps in the periodic table represented by these anticipated un-
stable elements were known to Besant & Leadbeater, how can we be sure that
their descriptions were based upon real  objects and were not fabricated  ac-
cording  to their expectations?  Knowing which  groups of  the periodic  table
these  undiscovered  elements belong  to could  have  enabled them  to  deduce
what shape their atoms ought to have, having decided upon a rule to link atom-
ic shapes to groups. But the values of  the atomic weights of  these elements
were unknown to science at the time when Besant and Leadbeater published
observations of them and yet the "number weights" (defined shortly) that they
calculated for  these  elements  agree with  their  chemical atomic  weights  to
within one unit. It is highly implausible that this measure of agreement could
have  come about by  chance in  every case. Furthermore, analysis (Phillips,
1994) of the particles reported to have been observed in the supposed atoms of
these elements undiscovered by science at the time reveals such a high degree
of agreement with the theory presented in this paper to explain micro-psi ob-
servations of atoms that neither deliberate fabrication nor hallucinations influ-
enced by knowledge of the gaps in the periodic table are realistic explanations
of these elements being examined before their scientific discovery.  These two
considerations strongly suggest that the descriptions by Besant and Leadbeat-
er of the supposed atoms of these elements must have been based upon physi-
cal objects, for there is simply no more plausible alternative that can explain
such a measure of agreement.

Chadwick (neutron), Pauli (neutrino), Gell-Mann (quarks), Higgs (boson), ALL of these physicists COPIED their "discoveries" from a single source.

The entire theory of strings was copied from the pages of this work.

Each and every element and isotope correctly described (in 1908) DECADES before they were even discovered: promethium (1945), astatine (1940), francium (1939), protactinium (1921), technetium (1937), deuterium, neon-22 nuclide (1913).

A clear description of strings, bosons, quarks, subquarks, positrons, DECADES before these concepts even came into existence.


Extrasensory Perception of Subatomic Particles by Dr. Stephen Phillips (UCLA, Cambridge), an extraordinary analysis of the discoveries listed in the Occult Chemistry:

https://web.archive.org/web/20120128042636/http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_09_4_phillips.pdf


Achievements of the Occult Chemistry treatise (subquark ether quantum physics):

Baryons, mesons, quarks and /subquarks/preons were described over 50 years before conventional science.

It stated that matter is composed of strings 80 years before string theory.

It described the existence of positrons 30 years before they were detailed.

It reported the Higgs field over 50 years before Peter Higgs.

It presented the existence of isotopes 5 years before their discovery.


A proton is made up of NINE laevorotatory subquarks - an electron is actually comprised of NINE dextrorotatory subquarks (called now preons).

However, modern science has mistakenly named a SINGLE dextrorotatory subquark as an electron and has ascribed THE TOTAL charge of the NINE corresponding subquarks as the total negative charge of a single electron, thus confusing the whole matter.

A boson = a neutrino = a photon and does have mass.

Let us remember that in one extension to the Standard Model, left- and right-handed neutrinos exist. These Dirac neutrinos acquire mass via the Higgs mechanism but right-handed neutrinos interact much more weakly than any other particles.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1676115#msg1676115


It is to be noted that each of us has the innate ability to view matter at a quantum level (during dreams), the theosophists who wrote the Occult Chemistry and the Science of Seership were able to retain this proficiency during the day as well.

Subquark = UPA particle = Anu

"Named after the British physicist Peter Higgs, the Higgs particle was first described 55 years ago — that is, about five years before Higgs and five other physicists proposed its existence — by the Theosophist and clairvoyant Geoffrey Hodson (1886-1983) who possessed the same ability to view matter at a quantum level as did the authors of the Occult Chemistry."

"On January 26, 1959, G. Hodson remarked:

"The sight I have of these objects is, I think, improved from the earlier observations. They're surrounded by a field of spinning particles going round them. The one I've got hold of is like a spinning top — the old-fashioned spinning top, but imagine that with (spinning rapidly) a mist or field round it of at least half its own dimension, of particles spinning in the same direction much smaller than itself. The Anu is not only the heart-shaped corrugated form that I have described, it is the centre of a great deal of energy and activity and within it. Outside it, as I have said, there's this rushing flood of particles, the corrugations themselves are alive with energy and some of it is escaping — not all of it, but some of it, and this gives it a tremendously dynamic look. Inside, it's almost like a furnace, it is like a furnace (I don't mean in heat) of boiling activity — organised by the bye, yes, in some form of spiral fashion admittedly, but there's a great deal of activity of free, minuter particles."

These particles much smaller than UPAs that Hodson described as forming a "mist or field" that circulated a UPA are Higgs bosons.

On April 8, 1957, whilst examining the diamond in a ring, Hodson said:

"My first sight inside the diamond is of the funnels only, like a cluster of funnels, two sets. It is possible to see the two pyramids as if slightly separated so that the base of an upper one can be envisaged, visualised, almost seen, though cohesion is apparent and all eight funnels are radiating from a common centre. Now, I want to record again the experience of the whole phenomenon being pervaded by countless myriads of minutest conceivable, physically inconceivably minute points of light which I take to be free anu and which for some reason are not caught up in the system of atoms at all but remain unmoved by it and pervade it. These are everywhere. They pervade everything, like ... Strangely unaffected by the tremendous forces at work in the atom and rushes of energy, and so forth, they don't seem to get caught up in those or be affected much by them. If at all. They remain as a virgin atmosphere in which the phenomenon is taking place."

Frequently reported seeing clairvoyantly myriads of minute points of light pervading the space occupied by atoms that his vision had focussed upon, as well as everywhere around him, whether his eyes were open or shut. For example, Hodson said:

"I wonder if you or your colleagues would care to comment to me upon the commonest phenomenon that I see, all the time, unless I make an effort to shut it out, and now when I emerge from my clairvoyant investigation it fills the whole air, world and universe, and it consists of countless myriads of the smallest possible points you can imagine, the whole air is filled with it. It is all in extremely rapid movement. Sometimes it makes little lines of groups of them. Sometimes it is a kind of shimmer. But it is all granular. Whatever there is granular. Minutely granular, far inconceivably beyond anything, a pin's point would be enormously large in relationship to this, if one could see a pin's point. It's extremely minute. And they are everywhere. And they've always been, ever since etheric clairvoyance showed itself to me at all, always the world, the air, everything I look at is pervaded and surrounded by these countless myriads of minute points."

These were not "free anu," as he assumed (he never checked whether they really were UPAs by magnifying individual points of light). Nor were they just molecules in the air, for he categorically asserted that they appeared to his vision to be many orders of magnitude smaller than UPAs, which, as subquark states of superstrings, would be much more minute than even atomic nuclei, let alone atoms and molecules. Instead, his faculty of remote viewing the subatomic world was revealing the sea of Higgs bosons that fill space. Far from the core of a vortex, the density of the Higgs field is constant and the Higgs vacuum state is superconducting. It varies rapidly towards zero in the region of the core, where the Higgs field becomes a normal conductor. This was the "mist or field" composed of much smaller particles that he noticed revolving around the UPA, namely, the string-like, vortical excitations of the ambient, superconducting Higgs field in the vicinity of magnetic monopole sources of the colour flux that is squeezed into and channelled along the normally conducting core of these vortices.

Here, therefore, is unambiguous evidence that a well-known clairvoyant was able to notice vortical motion around the basic units of matter of numerous, smaller particles filling all space as a "field" five years before physicists proposed this type of particle and decades before string theorists discovered vortex solutions in the Higgs field in their analysis of the confinement of quarks by the string model version of QCD."

(http://www.smphillips.mysite.com/images/reasons%20why%20Besant's%20&%20Leadbeater's%20claims%20are%20genuine.gif)

(http://www.smphillips.mysite.com/images/Comparison%20of%20micro-psi%20&%20scientific%20discoveries.gif)

"The processional motion (wobble) of hydrogen triangles was described in 1924 (The Theosophist, vol. 45) during a study of the hydroxyl group (atoms of hydrogen and oxygen bonded together) in the water molecule: It was said: "Each triangle rotates flat, and whilst rotating. sways a little up and down, as the lid of a pot rotates before it finally settles down" (Occult Chemistry, 3rd ed., p. 206). This is a description of Larmor precession, for the hydrogen triangles are protons endowed with a spin and a magnetic dipole moment (i.e., they are like a bar magnet, which aligns itself to a magnetic field). The remarkable significance of this is that Besant & Leadbeater described the spin precession of a proton in a magnetic field a year before George Uhlenbeck and Samuel Goudsmit introduced the concept of 'electron spin,' which posits an intrinsic rotational angular momentum for this particle. The observation was made therefore before the proton was realised to possess a spin as well! Neither Besant & Leadbeater nor physicists could have known in 1924 that some electrically charged subatomic particles have an intrinsic spin that endows them with an intrinsic magnetic moment, causing them to wobble in a magnetic field. Here is clear and undeniable evidence of the objective nature of their micro-psi visions.

It was described earlier how the MPA of a second species of the inert gas neon with a number weight of 22.33 was described in 1908 by Besant & Leadbeater, about four years before the experimental physicist Francis Aston separated the neon-20 and neon-22 isotopes with his new mass spectrograph, although at the time he thought wrongly that he had discovered a new element. Aston, of course, got the scientific credit, winning the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1922. But, despite their error in assuming that they had paranormally observed atoms, Besant & Leadbeater were the first people to discover that neon had two forms, even publishing a number weight of 22.33 that was appropriate for the Ne-22 isotope."



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 17, 2017, 08:42:50 AM
LONGITUDINAL BOSON STRINGS WITHIN TRANSVERSE SUBQUARK WAVES II

(http://www.smphillips.mysite.com/images/Dibaryon%20&%20Hydrogen%20MPA%20compared.gif)

https://phys.org/news/2011-07-unseen.html

"The image on the left, above, provided by the RIKEN scientific research institute in Japan depicts the six quarks making up the H dibaryon. The three coloured spheres denote the three colour states of a quark, labelled red, green & blue.

The image on the right can be interpreted as the deuteron (the nucleus of the stable isotope of hydrogen), created prior to observation by the micro-psi selection of a hydrogen molecule, which resulted in its two protons fusing together to form a deuteron after one of them changed into a neutron."

Using Jülich's accelerator COSY, German researchers confirmed in 2011 the possibility of dibaryons by discovering strong evidence for the existence of a short-lived resonance composed of six quarks.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/06/140606102043.htm

http://www.smphillips.mysite.com/deuterium.html

"The description of Adyarium was published in 1932, which was the year when James Chadwick discovered the neutron and Heisenburg proposed that it is present in atomic nuclei. It would be another 32 years before physicists Murray Gell-Mann and George Zweig proposed the theory of quarks. The fact that Besant & Leadbeater reported Adyarium to break up into six positive triplets and six negative triplets, i.e., six up quarks and six d quarks — precisely what the quark model predicts for the composition of the two protons and two neutrons in two deuterons — is incontrovertible evidence that quarks were remote-viewed."

(http://www.smphillips.mysite.com/images/QCD%20calculation%20of%203-quark%20flux%20tube%20compared%20with%20hydrogen%20triplet.gif)

Results for so-called "lattice QCD" calculations of the energy density of the flux tubes connecting three quarks were discussed in 2003 at the International Conference on Color Confinement and Hadrons in Quantum Chromodynamics. They are shown below. The Y-shaped profile of the colour-coded density contours of the flux lines with quarks at their ends is strikingly similar to a diagram of a hydrogen triplet that appears in the 1908 edition of Occult Chemistry, in which Y-shaped lines of force "of a magnetic nature" terminate on UPAs.

http://www.smphillips.mysite.com/occult-chemistry-07.html

(https://image.ibb.co/b255ty/ochem.jpg)

"One of the central and crucial observations made by Besant and Leadbeater was that a hydrogen atom was composed of 18 subatomic particles which they christened as ‘Ultimate physical atoms’ or UPAs. Likewise they reported that the atoms of other elements also comprised of identical types of UPAs whose numbers increased in multiples of 18. Note that much of all this was done well before Rutherfords discovery of the atomic  nucleus in 1911, in other words before the dawn of the ‘nuclear era’!. In the early 20s came the highly successful Bohr-Schrodinger model of the atom, according to which a hydrogen atom comprised of a single proton around which orbited a single electron.

During the mid 70's, a theoretical physicist from Cambridge University in England, by the name of Stephen Phillips who was carrying out PH.D. studies in 'particle physics' at the University of California in Los Angeles (UCLA), came across a copy of a book titled the 'Physics of the secret doctrine' by Kingsland wherein there was a diagram of the hydrogen atom as seen and recorded by Besant and Leadbeater. Physicists will recall that in 1963 a breakthrough in understanding elementary particles and nuclear structure came about through the postulation of a class of subnuclear particles called 'Quarks' independently by Gell‑Mann and Zweig. When Phillips saw Besant's diagram of the hydrogen atom he was astounded beyond belief as he realized that these clairvoyants had given out the 'quark' and indeed the 'subquark' structure of the nucleus as early as in 1895!

Phillips was so fascinated and overwhelmed by the exhaustive studies of Besant and Leadbeater, that he immediately embarked on a detailed analysis and interpretation of their findings, culminating in the publication of his 250 page book titled 'Extra sensory perception of quarks' in 1980.

Early on during their 'micro‑psi' investiga­tions, Besant and Leadbeater observed that different specimens of the same element were composed of identical microscopic objects which they christened as 'Micro Psi Atoms' or MPAs. They presumed that MPAs were atoms of the particular element under study, in their normal state, undisturbed by the act of random selection and psychokinetic (PK) perturbation.

The MPAs of elements as they appeared to them during 'micro psi visualization' comprised of symmetrically arranged groups of particles or 'points of light’ bound together in such rapid complex orbital motion that they presented initially only a blurred unfocussed image. But with practice and using a'special form of will‑power' they could slow down their motion sufficiently enough to observe the details. Throughout the investigations Leadbeater specialized in the study of the geometrical arrangement of the constituents of the MPAs and in identifying and counting their number whilst Annie Besant examined the configuration of the 'lines of force' linking and holding together groups of particles. These investigators could tune the magnifying power of their micro‑psi vision over a wide range and thereby resolve the images of particles into clusters of 'points of light', each of which were discerned to be discrete three dimensional objects. As the structure and configuration of each of these ultimate objects were identical, independent of the element under study, they surmised that these were the fundamental building blocks of all matter, and called them as 'Ultimate Physical Atoms’ or UPAs.

At this point it is worth clearly distinguish­ing between MPAs and UPAs. Besant and Leadbeater presumably identified MPAs with 'What physicists now refer to as the 'nucleus' of the atom, although in 1895 when they first commenced their investigations Rutherford had not yet discovered the atomic nucleus. There were as many MPAs as there are elements. UPAs on the other hand are the sub nuclear particles of which all nuclear matter is made of. As observed by Besant and Leadbeater there is essentially only one type of UPA, but this occurs either as a 'male' (or positive) version or a 'female' (or negative) version, which are mirror images of each other.

The clairvoyant investigators found that the MPAs of different elements had different shapes. Interestingly, barring a few exceptions, the shape of an MPA was correlated with the position of the element in the 'periodic table' of elements. (The reader may refer to any elementary text book on atomic physics or physical chemistry to know more about the Periodic Table of Elements if they wish). Thus the MPAs of all elements belonging to a particular group of the periodic table and consequently possessing similar chemical properties have similar shapes. The seven shapes into which the MPAs were categorised are titled by them as: 'spike', 'dumb‑bell', 'tetrahedron', 'cube', 'octahedron', 'bar' and 'star'. The geometrical symmetry of the MPAs simplified Leadbeater's task of counting the number of UPAs in an MPA, considering that the heavier elements had several thousands of UPAs in their MPAs. By 1907 when the first edition of 'Occult chemistry' was published Besant and Leadbeater had examined nearly 60 elements and altogether by the end of their monumental research work spanning 38 years they had recorded for posterity the details of 111 MPAs.

As already mentioned Besant and Leadbeater counted 18 UPA particles in the Micro Physical Atoms (MPA) of Hydrogen gas. A striking feature of their observations was that the number of UPAs increased approximately in multiples of 18 as the atomic weight of the element increased. By the turn of the last century science had progressed sufficiently enough that the atomic weights of most of the elements of the periodic table had been determined on a scale normalized to unity for hydrogen. When Besant and Leadbeater found that for several elements the number of UPAs in an MPA was an integral multiple of 18, they divided the number of UPAs counted by them by 18 to obtain an estimate of the 'atomic weight' of the elements. The 1919 edition of 'Occult chemistry' compares the micro‑psi atomic weight so obtained (specified to the second decimal place!) with the scientific atomic weight, and points out the remarkable agreement between the two.

Besant and Leadbeater began studying the atoms of elements systematically in increasing order of atomic weight starting from Hydrogen. When they reached neon (element no. 10) they were rather puzzled to observe that there were two varieties of neon MPAs having slightly different number of UPAs each, namely 360 and 402. They called these as Neon and 'Meta‑Neon' and recorded their micro‑psi atomic weights as 20.00 and 22.33 by dividing the number of UPAs in the MPA by 18. Similar behaviour was noted in the MPAs of Argon, Krypton, Xenon and even Platinum.

The scientifically minded readers may have guessed by now that Besant and Leadbeater had essentially stumbled upon the phenomenon referred to by atomic science as 'isotopes', five years before Aston's discovery of the same in 1912 using his newly invented instrument known as mass spec­trograph!

From the observed shapes of the MPAs and deduced micro‑psi atomic weights, these investigators were able to place the element under study properly in the periodic table of elements. In most cases, when the identity of the element was known to them already, the above method confirmed that their observations were accurate. In a few cases however the elements they investigated were not listed in the periodic table and in fact there were unfilled gaps in the table in the relevant locations. Thus these clairvoyant researchers accidentally discovered five elements which were unknown to science at the time of their work. These elements which have since been identified by science are: Promethium ('Illenium'), Astatine ('element no 85'), Fran­cium ('element no 87), Protoactinium ('element no 91') and Technetium ('Masuroium'). The names in brackets are the names assigned by Besant and Leadbeater in their original publication. It is thus obvious that these clairvoyants were surprisingly accurate in their estimates of atomic weights and the proper Placement of the elements studied, in the periodic chart."

Walter Russell, one of Tesla's best friends, created a new periodic table of elements, taking into account the ELEMENTS FORMED BY THE E2, E3 AND E4 subquark configurations (see previous message). That is, there are plenty of other elements before Hydrogen.

http://www.meta-synthesis.com/webbook/35_pt/russell_1.gif

http://www.meta-synthesis.com/webbook/35_pt/russell_2.gif

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 19, 2017, 05:09:29 AM
THE MAXWELL-LODGE EFFECT = THE AHARONOV-BOHM EFFECT

(https://image.ibb.co/c0CeLd/ton1.jpg)

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.726.6101&rep=rep1&type=pdf

The Maxwell-Lodge effect: significance of electromagnetic potentials in the classical theory

G. Rousseaux, R. Kofman, and O. Minazzoli

The Aharonov-Bohm effect has been the starting point of the reconsideration of the reality of the vector potential within quantum physics. We argue that the Maxwell-Lodge effect is its classical equivalent: what is the origin of the electromotive force induced in a coil surrounding a (finite) solenoid fed by an alternative current? We demonstrate theoretically, experimentally and numerically that the effect can be understood using the vector potential while it cannot using only the fields.

“What? Do you mean to tell me that I can tell you how
much magnetic field there is inside of here by measuring
currents through here and here – through wires which
are entirely outside – through wires in which there is no
magnetic field... In quantum mechanical interference experiments
there can be situations in which classically there
would be no expected influence whatever. But nevertheless
there is an influence. Is it action at distance? No, A is
as real as B-realer, whatever that means.”

R. Feynman


“throughout most of 20th century the Heaviside-Hertz form of Maxwell’s equations were taught to college students all over the world. The reason is quite obvious: the Heaviside-Hertz form is simpler, and exhibits an appealing near symmetry between E and H. With the widespread use of this vector-potential-less version of Maxwell’s equations, there arouse what amounted to a dogma: that the electromagnetic field resides in E and H. Where both of them vanish, there cannot be any electromagnetic effects on a charged particle. This dogma explains why when the Aharonov-Bohm article was published it met with general disbelief. . . E and H together do not completely describe the electromagnetic field, and. . . the vector potential cannot be totally eliminated in quantum mechanics. . . the field strengths underdescribe electromagnetism.”

C.N. Yang, Nobel prize laureate

We proposed a complete description of the Maxwell-Lodge effect which conclusion is the necessity to use the vector potential to interpret it. The electromotive force induced by a changing current in a solenoid through an outer coil is due to the vector potential outside the solenoid. The effect has nothing to do with either the propagative component of the magnetic field, a possible inclination of the coils forming the solenoid or the leak magnetic field due to the finite length of the solenoid. Then, we propose the vector potential, usually considered as a “mathematical tool”, to become a “real field” in the sense introduced by Richard Feynman.


http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/apr/article/view/26623/17220

The Physical Entity of Vector Potential in Electromagnetism

Vladimir A. Leus, Ray T. Smith and Simon Maher

The scalar and vector potentials were introduced into electromagnetic physics in the second half of the nineteenth century. The chief aim was to use them as auxiliary mathematical quantities in order to solve certain practical problems. Nevertheless the discovery of the Aharonov-Bohm effect (1959) in quantum mechanics has suggested that vector potential rather than magnetic field is the causal agent in such an effect. Recent research on the Maxwell-Lodge paradox--induction of voltage in the loop circling a long solenoid carrying alternating current--has confirmed that induction occurs in a region of space effectively free from magnetic field. This again reinforces the idea of vector potential as a physical entity rather than the auxiliary artificial quantity of classical electrodynamics. The present investigation is intended to provide some degree of corroboration of the previous result. The experimental arrangement consists of a ‘special’ transformer containing movable, single turn coils wound onto rectangular frames. The primary coil is powered from a signal generator providing alternating current over a variable frequency range while the secondary output voltage is connected across a C.R.O./precision voltmeter. Measurements of transformer e.m.f. were carried out at several frequencies in the range 100 Hz–20 kHz and with various conditions of shielding around the primary and secondary coils. Certain additional experiments were carried out with a long solenoid and torus solenoid supplied with different core materials. Experimental results for induced e.m.f’s are presented and in special cases correlated with the calculated values of mutual inductance. Overall the results tend to confirm the primacy of vector potential over magnetic field as an explanation of the phenomenon.

 “...the vector potential appears to give the most direct description of the physics. This becomes more apparent the more deeply we go into quantum theory. In the general theory of quantum electrodynamics, one takes the vector and scalar potentials as the fundamental quantities in a set of equations that replace the Maxwell equations: E and B are slowly disappearing from the modern expression of physical laws; they are being replaced by A and φ

(Feynman et al, 1989, chapter 15, section 5, The Feynman Lecture on Physics (Vol. 2), 1989)

So are we still entitled to ask has the vector potential A any physical significance? According to Maxwell’s point of view it is a condition for motion of stress in a medium already existing in space (aether). Consequently, by acceptance of vector potential as a physical entity we seem to return to the aether of the 19th century that is, in fact, the aether of Maxwell, Lorentz and Lodge, but now seen from a somewhat different perspective. The discovery of the Aharonov-Bohm effect in 1959 seemed to provide further evidence for the significance of vector potential. The shift in the fringe pattern between two electron beams passing across and either side of a long current carrying solenoid should not exist if it is assumed that only the magnetic field can affect the electrons. Nevertheless a mathematical treatment involving both vector potential and the Schrodinger equation demonstrated that a quantum force is present even when the magnetic field is zero.

Weber's action at a distance electrodynamics theory cannot be true: the mathematical proof of the existence of the longitudinal waves was published by E.T. Whittaker in 1903 and in 1904.

(https://image.ibb.co/iktfRJ/maxcurl1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/hR3VRJ/maxcurl2.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/cqtfRJ/maxcurl3.jpg)

Quantum Aharonov-Bohm effect:

https://www.nature.com/articles/17755

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3599092/

https://arxiv.org/pdf/cond-mat/0102096.pdf


Both electromagnetic and gravitational fields are caused by the e/m and gravitational potentials (longitudinal subquark waves) and by the superpotentials (boson strings which propagate within the longitudinal waves).

The existence of ether (potentials and superpotentials) is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, both mathematically and experimentally.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 20, 2017, 07:40:15 AM
TOPOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS OF THE AHARONOV-BOHM EFFECT
(https://image.ibb.co/jxjFty/ahabofig.jpg)

The Aharonov-Bohm effect is related to the concepts of multiple-connectedness and non-Abelian groups in topology, fundamental notions which provide a much better understanding of the theoretical aspects of the problem. The Heaviside equations can be described by using a U(1) invariant theory; however, the potentials can only be described using a SU(2) electromagnetics representation. The superpotentials have to be described using the O(3) invariant electrodynamic theory.

Topology and the Physical Properties of Electromagnetic Fields
Terence W. Barrett

http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles/Pre2001/V07NO1PDF/V07N1BAR.pdf


O(3) Invariance of the Aharonov-Bohm effect

http://www.upitec.org/OmniaOpera/omnia-opera-616.pdf

http://www.atomicprecision.com/OmniaOpera/omnia-opera-504.pdf


Aharonov–Bohm Effect and Magnetic Monopoles

http://bolvan.ph.utexas.edu/~vadim/Classes/2011f/abm.pdf


(https://image.ibb.co/evfifd/barrett1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/jjFifd/barrett2.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/jCBdDy/barrett3.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/hyEb0d/barrett4.jpg)


The opposing views regarding the Aharonov-Bohm effect have not taken into consideration the topological aspects the theory and have tried to describe the effect within the context of classical electrodynamics U(1) invariant theory.

Even so, their papers were debunked without using topology as a mathematical tool:

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1605/1605.05470.pdf

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0708/0708.2428.pdf

Confirmation of the Aharonov-Bohm effect:

https://www.physik.uni-muenchen.de/lehre/vorlesungen/wise_09_10/quantum_matter/lecture/Schwarzschild1986.pdf


The Aharonov-Bohm effect is a LOCAL theory, where the effect is being observed during experiments carried out within a laboratory.

The Whittaker-Aharonov-Bohm effect is a GLOBAL result: it can be created via scalar interferometry and observed at a distance of thousands of kilometers from the laboratory (the Tunguska event).


A most interesting consequence of the Whittaker-Aharonov-Bohm effect, as it pertains to the gravitational potential and superpotential, is the fact that TERRESTRIAL GRAVITY IS AN EXTERNAL FORCE which acts upon matter created by the longitudinal dextrorotatory gravitational subquark wave (potential): the mass of an object does NOT attract anything at all.

“This implies an important conclusion: bodies of different volumes that are in the same gradient medium acquire the same acceleration.

Note that if we keep watch on the fall of bodies of different masses and volumes in the Earth’s gravitation field under conditions when the effect of the air resistance is minimized (or excluded), the bodies acquire the same acceleration. Galileo was the first to establish this fact. The most vivid experiment corroborating the fact of equal acceleration for bodies of different masses is a fall of a lead pellet and bird feather in the deaerated glass tube. Imagine we start dividing one of the falling bodies into some parts and watching on the fall of these parts in the vacuum. Quite apparently, both large and small parts will fall down with the same acceleration in the Earth’s gravitation field. If we continue this division down to atoms we can obtain the same result. Hence it follows that the gravitation field is applied to every element that has a mass and constitutes a physical body. This field will equally accelerate large and small bodies only if it is gradient and acts on every elementary particle of the bodies. But a gradient gravitation field can act on bodies if there is a medium in which the bodies are immersed. Such a medium is the ether medium. The ether medium has a gradient effect not on the outer sheath of a body (a bird feather or lead pellet), but directly on the nuclei and electrons constituting the bodies. That is why bodies of different densities acquire equal acceleration.

Equal acceleration of the bodies of different volumes and masses in the gravitation field also indicates such an interesting fact that it does not matter what external volume the body has and what its density is. Only the ether medium volume that is forced out by the total amount of elementary particles (atomic nuclei, electrons etc.) matters. If gravitation forces acted on the outer sheath of the bodies then the bodies of a lower density would accelerate in the gravitation field faster than those of a higher density.

The examples discussed above allow clarifying the action mechanism of the gravitation force of physical bodies on each other. Newton was the first to presume that there is a certain relation between the gravitation mechanism and Archimedean principle. The medium exerting pressure on a gravitating body is the ether.”




Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 20, 2017, 12:55:49 PM
THE GRAVITATIONAL AHARONOV-BOHM EFFECT = THE SAGNAC EFFECT

http://zfn.mpdl.mpg.de/data/Reihe_A/44/ZNA-1989-44a-1145.pdf

Substratum Interpretation of the Sagnac and the Aharonov-Bohm effect
Dr. Friedwardt Winterberg

The existence of the potential poses a huge problem for heliocentrism.

The Whittaker birectional longitudinal waves form the gravitational potential (right-handed spin) and the electromagnetic potential (left-handed spin).

We are being told that the spherical earth has BOTH a magnetic field and a gravitational field.

"A Gravity-based Theory

There is, however, another theory that does not rely on the concept of an aether, but is very closely aligned with the aether theories discussed thus far. The late Emeritus Professor of Electrical Engineering Petr Beckmann proposed that the outdated term "aether" could be replaced with the more modern term "gravity." Clearly, a gravitational field would have characteristics very similar to a partially entrained aether. Both would cause the bending of light rays. Gravity would be strongest near the surface of the planet where the partially entrained aether was most dense. Light would still behave in the same manner, if the speed of light is constant with respect to the source of the dominant gravitational field. This would square with all of the known experimental data because in nearly every case, the observer has always been tied to the Earth-bound frame of reference—so we substitute the word "gravity" for the word "aether." Obviously gravity exists and we know that, although gravity is "emitted" by the Earth, it does not rotate with it. So this is a very plausible replacement for a partially entrained aether. It also stands to reason if we speculate that light is actually a disturbance in the gravitational field.

Dr. William Cantrell"

The local aether model (potential) thus becomes also the gravitational potential for the rotating spherical Earth.

However, this aether (potential) envelope is stationary: that is, the Earth rotates within this spherical shell of aether/ether.

(https://image.ibb.co/e5drYy/ether1.jpg)

Let us remember that this local aether model HAS TO BE adopted given the fact that the orbital Sagnac effect is not being recorded by the GPS satellites.

But the gravitational potential and the electromagnetic potential form a bidirectional wave in double torsion fashion, as proven by E.T. Whittaker.

One of the them cannot be stationary (the aether/gravitational potential) while the other one (the electromagnetic potential) rotates along with the Earth around its own axis: the waves would be decoupled in an instant.

BOTH potentials have to travel together: this can happen only in the case of a stationary Earth, where the bidirectional waves propagate/rotate above the surface.

The ether drift has been recorded/measured even by the Michelson-Morley experiment of 1887: the experiment did record the ROTATIONAL ether drift, but not the ORBITAL ether drift.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1780340#msg1780340

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 22, 2017, 09:59:56 AM
THE ELECTROGRAVITATIONAL FIELD OF THE STATIONARY EARTH

Modern science assumes that the gravitational field and the magnetic field of the Earth represent two different physical phenomena: one is stationary ( the gravitational field does not rotate along with the supposed rotation of the Earth), the other one (the magnetic field) is rotating with the Earth around its own axis.

(http://images.slideplayer.com/19/5795021/slides/slide_4.jpg)

Moreover, the magnetic field is visually represented as follows:

(https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/styles/full_width_feature/public/images/607968main_geomagnetic-field-orig_full.jpg)

The lines of force issue forth from the south pole, arc through space, and re-enter at the other end, the north pole.

https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sunearth/news/gallery/Earths-magneticfieldlines-dipole.html

The dynamo theory of the origin of the magnetic field of the Earth is erroneous:

http://davidpratt.info/inner1.htm#s5


The magnetic field of the Earth HAS TO rotate together with the Earth:

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/127766/does-the-geomagnetic-field-rotate

The gravitational field of the Earth does not rotate with the Earth:

Earth also rotates on its axis, and it rotates through its gravitational field.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2011/02/tom-bethell/relativity-and-the-priesthood-of-science/

https://web.archive.org/web/20140903074446/http://www.realityreviewed.com/Restoring%20forces.htm (restoring forces paradox = lateral gravity of the atmosphere necessary to explain its supposed rotation)


The first scientist to discover that the magnetic field consists of a DOUBLE CURRENT/FLOW OF PARTICLES (NORTH TO SOUTH, BUT ALSO SOUTH TO NORTH) was Edward Leedskalnin.

http://www.leedskalnin.com/

http://keelynet.com/unclass/magcurnt.txt (Magnetic Current by E. Leedskalnin)

"Magnetic current is the same as electric current is a wrong expression. Really it is not one current they are two currents, one current is composed of North Pole individual magnets in concentrated streams, and the other is composed of South Pole magnets in concentrated streams, and they are running one stream against the other stream in whirling, screw like fashion, and with high speed."

The experimental proof was given by Howard Johnson in his Spintronics treatise:

SPINTRONICS, secret world of magnets, the most thorough work on the double helix theory of the magnetic field (double helix of the telluric currents):

http://freenrg.info/Misc/The_Secret_World_Of_Magnets.pdf

(https://image.ibb.co/dzvKmJ/ma2_zps4ijijfcw.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/diVr0d/ma3_zpsyg7asb12.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/mQxM0d/ma1_zpstnoewm3f.jpg)

There is a flow of bosons through POSITRON WAVES (LAEVOROTATORY SUBQUARKS), and also a current of bosons through  ELECTRON WAVES (DEXTROROTATORY SUBQUARKS).

The electrogravitational field has magnetic waves AND ALSO gravitational waves.

This is the missing part of the unified field theory.

E.T. Whittaker proved mathematically the existence of the electrogravitational potential, the bidirectional longitudinal waves.

They travel/propagate in double torsion fashion.

No physicist to date has observed this crucial fact: the magnetic wave and the gravitational wave form a single structure, the electrogravitational field. The gravitational potential consists of bosons which flow through dextrorotatory subquarks (electrons), and the electromagnetic potential is made up of bosons which propagate through laevorotatory subquarks (positrons).

This fact then allows us to immediately state that the Earth does not and could not rotate around its own axis: it is stationary.

Since the electrogravitational field is comprised of the two waves in a double torsion form (the gravitational + the electromagnetic waves) THEY HAVE TO ROTATE TOGETHER AT THE SAME RATE, in order for its effects to be observed/recorded.

One (the gravitational field) cannot be stationary, while the other (the magnetic field) rotates at a certain rate: the bidirectional waves which comprise this lattice would be decoupled in an instant.

THEY HAVE TO ROTATE TOGETHER. In the case of heliocentrism, one of them HAS TO BE STATIONARY, WHILE THE OTHER ONE ROTATES.

The effects of the electrogravitational field:

NIPHER EXPERIMENTS:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1852840#msg1852840

The relationship between gravitation and the electric field was first observed experimentally by Dr. Francis Nipher. Nipher's conclusion was that sheilded electrostatic fields directly influence the action of gravitation. He further concluded that gravitation and electrical fields are absolutely linked.

BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1913909#msg1913909

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1852363#msg1852363


Neutron Interferometry: the Aharonov-Bohm effect

https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.71.307

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1109.4887.pdf

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1411.3627.pdf

http://www.iaea.org/inis/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/24/003/24003927.pdf

https://authors.library.caltech.edu/7139/1/LEEprl98.pdf

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168900299010384

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 24, 2017, 02:28:05 AM
NEW RADICAL CHRONOLOGY OF HISTORY

The historians are supposed to concern themselves with chronology. However, without a sufficient mathematical education – and in the case of chronological studies, sufficient means fundamental – the historians are forced to evade the solution and even the discussion of the rather complex chronological issues.

Every historical oddness and contradiction becomes carefully concealed from the public attention; in dangerous and slippery places the historians put on a “professional” mien, saying that “everything is really okay” and they shall “give you a full explanation” later on.


Dr. G. Nosovsky

Flat earth theory cannot be true in the context of the official chronology of history. The heliocentrical precessional movement of the Earth argument is all it takes to put in end to the flat earth movement. We are told that Hipparchus proposed that the axis around which the heavens seemed to rotate (shifted gradually, though very slowly). Then, the first astronomer known to have continued Hipparchus's work on precession is Ptolemy in the second century AD. Next, in medieval Islamic astronomy, precession was known based on Ptolemy's Almagest, and by observations that refined the value. Finally, the Renaissance and late Renaissance astronomers (from Kepler to Cassini to Flamsteed) also make pertinent observations relating to the precession of the equinoxes.

A seemingly unbeatable argument which proves that the Earth did orbit the Sun at least in the period 200 BC - 1700 AD, based on the axial precession astronomical observations/recordings listed above.

That is why the flat earth believers who take for granted the official line of history have no chance whatsoever when they are faced with this type of reasoning which, without making use of the new radical chronology of history, is really irrefutable.

Biblical historians have to deal with the fact that there are undeniable proofs that the Epistles attributed to Paul, Peter and James could not possibly have been written during the 1st century AD, not to mention the dating of the Gospels themselves (the 600 page treatise, The Jesus Puzzle by Earl Doherty, as an example). Or with the undeniable contradictions and anachronisms which are to be found in the Gospels and Acts texts. Or with the fact that the legends concerning many pagan deities (Egypt, Babylon, Persia, Greece, India) coincide incredibly well with the main features of the storyline found in the Gospels.

A.T. Fomenko did a disservice to the new chronology field of study by claiming that Christ lived in the 11th century AD. Given the huge success of his History: Fiction or Science? books, and his credentials in advanced mathematics, the researchers in the field, not to mention the readers of his series of publications, found it difficult to separate the obvious and correct mathematical proofs which prove that everything prior to 1,000 AD pertaining to ancient/medieval history was forged and falsified, and the correctness of Fomenko's reconstruction of history in the period 1,000 AD - 1,600 AD, which is plain wrong. By not having understood that the dating of the destruction of both Pompeii and Herculaneum really occurred in the 18th century, or not having taken into account the proofs offered by Dr. Christoph Pfister (the pioneer in the field of the new radical chronology of history) Fomenko was practically forced to invent a fictitious history for the period 1,000 AD - 1,600 AD, which of course included his take on the Nativity/Resurrection, and which affected in a negative manner the faith of many people, especially those living in eastern Europe (orthodox denomination).


Gauss' Easter formula applied to historical dating:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg758652#msg758652 (also includes the Dead Sea scrolls controversies)


The forgery of Dionysius Exiguus's biography, the ultimate proof:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1638504#msg1638504

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1674662#msg1674662

Fomenko and Nosovsky did not take into account the evidence that Exiguus' dating of the Resurrection in 1,095 AD (ecclesiastical/paschal moon, Saturday, March 24, 1,095 AD) was related to the fact that the group of conspirators who made the actual calculations in the Easter table attributed to Exiguus simply got tired of computing backwards through time the calendar conditions and left the final mathematical determination for the year 1,095 AD knowing full well that no one was going to research the actual date until much later in time.

Christ lived and was crucified at Constantinople some 250 years ago, this is the most extraordinary finding of the new radical chronology of history. The legends concerning ALL other pagan deities were invented AFTER the Resurrection, some few decades later (as were the forged Nag Hammadi manuscripts).


Gregorial calendar reform hoax:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1638725#msg1638725

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1674108#msg1674108


Christ in Constantinople:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1641885#msg1641885

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1673763#msg1673763


The Passover contradictions:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1619746#msg1619746



Pompeii and Herculaneum, destroyed by the eruption of the Vesuvius volcano at least after 1,750 AD:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1683424#msg1683424 (five consecutive messages)


The use of the arctangent infinite series at Gizeh:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1834389#msg1834389 (four consecutive messages)


Christoph Pfister archive:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1830487#msg1830487


Stone Age Hoax/Dinosaurs at Pompeii

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1567565#msg1567565

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1413765#msg1413765


Egyptian Pteranodon/Mysteries of the Egyptian Zodiacs:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1412429#msg1412429


Great Wall of China, constructed after 1900 AD:


http://www.breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=27892#27892 (not so ancient china 1)

http://www.breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=27945#27945 (not so ancient china 2)

http://www.breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=27981#27981 (not so ancient china 3)

http://de.geschichte-chronologie.de/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=83:chronological-revolution-part-1&catid=2:2008-11-13-21-58-51&Itemid=90 (section Glorious Chinese History is a Fake) - on google search with eugen gabowitsch a historical analysis )


Mozart, Bach, Euler, B. Franklin:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1483598#msg1483598

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1483917#msg1483917

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1484659#msg1484659


Edwin Johnson's The Pauline Epistles treatise (absolute proofs that no one in Europe had any knowledge of the Gospels/Epistles prior to 1,500 AD):

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1827111#msg1827111

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1641253#msg1641253


How to calculate the SOLAR precession on a flat earth:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1726000#msg1726000



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 25, 2017, 11:26:51 AM
THE BOHREN EXPERIMENT

(http://www.cheniere.org/images/EMfndns1/sm%20Bohren1.jpg)

Craig F. Bohren, Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Meteorology at Pennsylvania State University. He is an author of about 100 articles mostly on atmospheric optics, radiative transfer, and light scattering.

"How can a particle absorb more than the light incident on it?", Am. J. Phys., 51(4), Apr. 1983, p. 323-327

Under nonlinear conditions, a particle can absorb more energy than is in the light incident on it.

http://www.cheniere.org/references/bohren/index.htm

See also H. Paul and R. Fischer, (Comment on “How can a particle absorb more than the light incident on it?’},” Am. J. Phys., 51(4), Apr. 1983, p. 327 which replicated the Bohren experiment independently and validated its results (page 5 from the link).

"C.F. Bohren proved that a resonant particle collects and emits up to 18 times as much energy as is input to it by conventional accounting."
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 26, 2017, 02:35:55 AM
THE BOHREN EXPERIMENT II

(http://www.cheniere.org/images/meg/f4.jpg)

(John D. Kraus, Electromagnetics, Fourth Edn., McGraw-Hill, New York, 1992)

"A drawing of the huge Poynting energy flow filling all space around the conductors, with almost all of it not intercepted.

From the beginning, Poynting only considered that component of the energy flow that actually enters the circuit. He considered only the "boundary layer" right on the conductor surfaces, so to speak. Heaviside considered that component that enters the circuit, and also uncovered and recognized the gigantic component in the surrounding space that does not enter the circuit but misses it entirely.

Heaviside had absolutely no explanation for the enormous and startling magnitude of this energy flow that "misses the surface charges of the conductors and is wasted". One can see an elementary illustration of the "point intensity" of this Poynting diverged energy flow component.

Most of that available energy flow is not intercepted and thus not diverged into the circuit to power it. The remaining huge component discovered by Heaviside is not shown on Kraus's diagram.

Each of Kraus' contours of energy flow in space, around those power line conductors, shows only that part of the energy flow in space that is being drawn into the circuit. It does not show the remaining huge energy flow that (i) is not intercepted, (ii) does not enter the circuit, and (iii) is wasted. Presently no texts illustrate this Heaviside nondiverged energy flow component.


In the 1880s, Poynting and Heaviside independently (and rather simultaneously) discovered EM energy flow through space.

J. H. Poynting, "On the transfer of energy in the electromagnetic field."
Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. A, Vol. 175, 1884, p. 343-361

O. Heaviside, "Electromagnetic Induction and Its Propagation," The Electrician, 1885, 1886, 1887, and later. A series of 47 sections, published section by section in numerous issues of The Electrician during 1885, 1886, and 1887

With respect to circuits, from the beginning Poynting assumed only that small amount of
EM energy flow that enters the circuit. Here are Poynting's {28} own words:

“This paper describes a hypothesis as to the connexion between current in
conductors and the transfer of electric and magnetic inductions in the
surrounding field. The hypothesis is suggested by the mode of transfer of
energy in the electromagnetic field, resulting from Maxwell’s equations
investigated in a former paper (“Phil. Trans.,” vol. 175, pp. 343-361,
1884). It was there shown that according to Maxwell’s electromagnetic
theory the energy which is dissipated in the circuit is transferred through
the medium, always moving perpendicularly to the plane containing the
lines of electric and magnetic intensity, and that it comes into the
conductor from the surrounding insulator, not flowing along the wire.”


J. H. Poynting, “On the connexion between electric current and the electric and magnetic inductions in the surrounding field,” Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond., Vol. 38, 1984-85, p. 168

As can be seen, Poynting considered only the energy flow actually entering the wire, and
subsequently being dissipated in the circuit. Poynting also got the direction of the flow
wrong, later to be corrected. Hence Poynting never considered the huge EM energy flow component around the circuit that is not diverged, misses the circuit entirely, does not contribute to the energy dissipated by the circuit.

Heaviside's theory was an extension of what Poynting had considered, and he also
corrected Poynting as to the direction of flow. Heaviside was fully aware of the enormity
of the "dark energy" flow missed by Poynting, but had absolutely no explanation as to
where such a startlingly large EM energy flow—pouring from the terminals of every
dipole, generator, or battery—could possibly be coming from. Consequently he was very
cautious in referring to it, usually doing so only obliquely in terms of the angles and
components. In Heaviside's own words:

“It [the energy transfer flow] takes place, in the vicinity of the wire, very
nearly parallel to it, with a slight slope towards the wire… . Prof.
Poynting, on the other hand, holds a different view, representing the
transfer as nearly perpendicular to a wire, i.e., with a slight departure
from the vertical. This difference of a quadrant can, I think, only arise
from what seems to be a misconception on his part as to the nature of the
electric field in the vicinity of a wire supporting electric current. The lines
of electric force are nearly perpendicular to the wire. The departure from
perpendicularity is usually so small that I have sometimes spoken of them
as being perpendicular to it, as they practically are, before I recognized
the great physical importance of the slight departure. It causes the
convergence of energy into the wire.”


O. Heaviside, Electrical Papers, Vol. 2, 1887, p. 94

As can be seen, Heaviside was fully aware that the energy flow diverged into the wire
was only a minuscule fraction of the total. And he was fully aware that the remaining
component was so huge that the energy flow vector remaining—after the divergence of
the Poynting component into the circuit—was still almost parallel to the conductors.
However, he had no explanation at all of where such an enormous and baffling energy
flow could possibly originate.

Had Heaviside strongly stated the enormity of the nondiverged component of the energy
flow, he would have been viciously attacked and scientifically discredited as a perpetual
motion advocate. So his words were measured and cautious, but there is no doubt that he
recognized the enormity of the nondiverged EM energy flow component.

Lorentz Disposed of the Problem Rather than Solving It

Lorentz entered the EM energy flow scene to face the terrible problem so quietly raised
by Heaviside. Lorentz understood the presence of the Poynting component, and also of the Heaviside component, but could find no explanation for the startling, enormous magnitude of the EM energy pouring out of the terminals of the power source (pouring from the source dipole) if the Heaviside component was accounted. Had he developed and retained this enormous dark energy flow component, even the Lorentz would have been castigated as a perpetual motion advocate.

Unable to solve the dark energy flow problem by any rational means, Lorentz found a
clever way to avoid it. He reasoned that the nondiverged Heaviside component was
"physically insignificant" (his term) because it did not even enter the circuit. Since it did
nothing, he reasoned that it could just be discarded.

So Lorentz simply integrated the entire energy flow vector (the vector representing
the sum of both the Heaviside nondiverged component and the Poynting diverged
component) around an assumed closed surface enclosing any volume of interest. A priori
this mathematical procedure discards the dark Heaviside energy flow component because
of its nondivergence. It retains only the intercepted Poynting diverged component that
enters the circuit.

A century later, electrodynamicists are still happily avoiding the dark energy flow
problem by continuing to use the Lorentz integration procedure to dispose of all but
the Poynting component that enters the circuit and is then dissipated by the circuit. As a
result, the "Poynting energy flow" has come to be loosely regarded as "the" entire EM
energy flow, though electrodynamicists find it necessary to give stringent warnings about
it. E.g., Panofsky and Phillips state it this way:

"…only the entire surface integral of N [their notation for the Poynting
vector] contributes to the energy balance. Paradoxical results may be
obtained if one tries to identify the Poynting vector with the energy flow
per unit area at any point."

W. K. H. Panofsky and M. Phillips, Classical Electricity and Magnetism, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1962, 2nd edition, p. 181

Most electrodynamicists note the freedom to add a vector—few call it an energy flow
vector, though that is the type of vector being discussed, and one must add apples to
apples—which has zero divergence. Jones states:

"It is possible to introduce the Poynting vector S, defined by S = E×H,
and regard it as the intensity of energy flow at a point. This procedure is
open to criticism since we could add to S any vector whose divergence is
zero without affecting [the basic integration procedure's result]."

D. S. Jones, The Theory of Electromagnetism, Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1964, p. 52

Jackson says it even more plainly, and also uses Lorentz's "no physical significance" argument for disposing of any energy flow vector with a zero divergence.

Quoting:

"...the Poynting vector is arbitrary to the extent that the curl of any vector
field can be added to it. Such an added term can, however, have no
physical consequences."

J. D. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics, 2nd Edn., John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1975, p. 237

Needless to say, any energy flow vector which is the curl of a vector field will have zero
divergence, by elementary vector algebra. In short, to be pertinent at all, it must be an
energy flow vector (since energy flow is what S = E×H is all about. Since the curl of any vector has no divergence a priori, then any energy flow vector that is a curl of a vector field will be part of the Heaviside dark energy flow component, rather than part of the Poynting energy flow component. It will also be discarded by Lorentz's closed surface
integration.

Jackson errs in assuming such a divergence free vector (energy flow) can have no
physical consequences. That is true so long as one does not intercept and diverge—and
utilize—some of the otherwise nondiverged energy flow. If one inserts intercepting
charges into that nondiverged energy flow component, the charges will immediately
diverge some of the formerly nondiverged energy flow around them and hence "collect
additional energy". "

(http://www.cheniere.org/images/EMfndns1/LorentzInt%20sm.jpg)

[The Lorentz concept of integrating the Poynting vector around a closed cylindrical surface surrounding a volumetric element. This is the procedure which arbitrarily selects only a small diverged component of the energy flow associated with a circuit—specifically, the small Poynting component being diverged into the circuit to power it—and then treats that tiny component as the "entire" energy flow. Thereby Lorentz arbitrarily discarded all the extra huge Heaviside curled energy transport component which is usually not diverged into the circuit conductors at all, does not interact with anything locally, and is not used.]

"The total energy flow in space surrounding the conductors has two components as follows:

1) A tiny Poynting component of the energy flow directly along the surface of the
conductors strikes the surface charges and is diverged (deviated) into the conductors to power the circuit.

2) The huge nondiverted Heaviside component filling all space around the circuit, misses the circuit entirely.

The Heaviside nondiverged energy flow component was arbitrarily discarded by H.A. Lorentz, who integrated the energy flow vector itself around a closed surface enclosing any volumetric element of interest. This discards any nondiverted (nondiverged) energy flow components, regardless of how large, and retains only the diverted (diverged) component, regardless of how small.

Effectively Lorentz arbitrarily changed the energy flow vector into its diverted flow component vector—a fundamental non sequitur. In one stroke he discarded the bothersome Heaviside component, reasoning that it was "physically insignificant" because—in single pass circuits—it does not enter the circuit and power it.

This is rather like arguing that all the wind on the ocean that does not strike the sails of a
single sailboat, is "physically insignificant." A moment's reflection shows that the "insignificant" remaining wind can power a large number of additional sailing vessels. A very large amount of energy can be extracted and used to do work, if that "physically insignificant" wind is intercepted by additional sails.

Suppose Lorentz had not arbitrarily discarded the huge Heaviside energy flow component
surrounding the circuit and not contributing to its power. In that case, electrodynamicists in the 1880s would have been confronted with the dilemma of explaining where such an enormous flow of energy—pouring forth out of the terminals of every generator and battery—could possibly have come from.

To avoid strong attack and suppression from the scientific community on grounds of
advocating perpetual motion and violation of energy conservation, in the 1880s there was no other choice but to discard the Heaviside component on some pretext. So Lorentz simply discarded the vexing component. He could not solve the problem so he got rid of it.

Lorentz further reduced the already seriously reduced symmetrized Heaviside equations, in order to specifically eliminate the newly discovered giant Heaviside curled EM energy flow that – unknown to our present electrical engineers – accompanies every Poynting energy flow component (which is diverged into the circuit to power it), but is itself (the curled component) not diverged and thus is just wasted because it normally does not interact.

Lorentz altered the actually-used energy flow vector by throwing away that giant Heaviside component quite arbitrarily. Thus the Heaviside giant curled EM energy flow component is no longer accounted or even recognized in electrical engineering, but it still physically accompanies every accounted Poynting energy flow component in every EM system or circuit.


Heaviside and Poynting independently discovered EM energy flow theory.  Poynting conceived only that small component of the energy flow which enters the conductors.  On the other hand, Heaviside recognized that all space around the circuit's conductors was filled with EM energy flow.  A small "boundary layer sheath" component of this energy flowing outside the circuit moves right along the surface of the wires, where it strikes the surface charges and is diverged into the circuit.  This small Poynting energy flow component enters the circuit and provides the energy subsequently dissipated in the circuit's loads and losses.

However, the "sheath layer" Poynting component is only a tiny fraction of the truly enormous energy flow pouring out of the generator or battery terminals and flowing through surrounding space, with most of it missing the circuit entirely.

Lorentz considered this huge nondiverged Heaviside flow component "physically insignificant" (his term) and logically felt free to neglect it because it did not enter the circuit and did not contribute to powering the loads and losses.  However, in aether theory  any change in spatial energy density represents a curvature of the aether (potentials/Whittaker longitudinal waves), hence produces gravitational effects.

Bohren's experiment collects 18 times more energy from the usually nondiverged Heaviside component, just by resonating the charge and thereby sweeping out a greater geometrical reaction cross section than the static charge that is used to calculate the Poynting flow component.  It follows that "the" field and "the" potential input to the intercepting charge have far more energy "in the vicinity of" an interacting point static charge and of a unit dipole than what is accounted for in the conventional EM model where the magnitudes of the fields and potentials are erroneously taken as being the magnitudes of the energy diverted from them by a unit point static charge.  This enormous extra energy, however, does not participate in the interaction and is the "dark energy" component recognized by Heaviside and then erroneously discarded by Lorentz."


" Heaviside himself recognized the gravitational implications of his extra component of energy flow, which is in closed circular loops. Beneath the floorboards of his little garret apartment, years after his death, handwritten papers were found where Heaviside used this component for a unified EM approach to gravitation.

See E. R. Laithwaite, “Oliver Heaviside – establishment shaker,” Electrical Review,
211(16), Nov. 12, 1982, p. 44-45.

Laithwaite felt that Heaviside’s postulation that a flux of gravitational energy combines with the (ExH) electromagnetic energy flux, could shake the foundations of physics.

Quoting from Laithwaite: “Heaviside had originally written the energy flow as S = (ExH) + G, where G is a circuital flux. Poynting had only written S = (ExH). Taking p to be the density of matter and e the intensity of a gravitational force, Heaviside found that the circuital flux G can be expressed as pu + ce, where u represents the velocity of p and c is a constant.”


To prove the existence of the Heaviside flow, Bohren performed the experiment where the intercepting charges in the circuit are in resonance, and thus "sweep out" a larger geometrical cross section of interception of the impinging energy flow. These charges do sweep beyond the static unit charge cross section conventionally assumed in the definitions of field intensity (e.g., of the fields E and H in the Poynting vector S in S = (E x H). If the defining unit point charges are in resonance and sweep out a greater cross section, then the assumed Poynting vector S, for the static case, changes in magnitude by some ratio k for the resonant case to the vector SR, so now SR = k1E x k2H = k3(E x H). Since k3 is just the ratio of the actual geometrical cross section swept out by the charge to the standard geometrical cross section swept out by the static charge, then for a static charge k3 = 1.0, and for a resonant charge k3 >1.0. Hence the Bohren experiment, with k3 = 18 or so, produces 18 times as much collected (Poynting) energy "out" as we erroneously think we input by normal calculations ignoring the input Heaviside nondiverged component."



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 27, 2017, 11:06:21 AM
BIRKELAND CURRENTS II

(https://i2.wp.com/aetherforce.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/birkeland-currents-4.jpg?fit=800%2C400)

"Plasma in space usually appears as a cloud of partially charged gas and dust.

When clouds are in motion they become ionized. Clouds in relative motion induce electric currents within them. The currents generate magnetic fields that confine the plasma into coherent filaments known as Birkeland currents.


The charged particles in the currents spiral along the resulting magnetic fields, appearing as electrical vortices. The forces between these spinning Birkeland currents pull them close together and wind them around each other into “plasma ropes”.

Birkeland currents squeeze galactic plasma into thin filaments that remain collimated over great distances.

Light-years-long jets and so-called “radio lobes” can extend for many times a galaxy’s diameter, for example. A circuit is induced within any one galaxy that causes diffuse electric charge to flow from the galactic poles toward the galaxy’s equatorial plane and spiral into its nucleus.

The forces exerted by electrified plasma contained in the twisting filaments of Birkeland currents dominate the Universe. They circulate in a cosmic circuit that flows into our field of view and then out into the void with electromagnetic attraction between them that is billions of times more intense than gravity."

(https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Cygnus_loop_Veil_600x288.jpg)

Braided current sheets glow softly in visible and infrared light along the Cygnus Loop of the Veil Nebula. Image credit: W. P. Blair, R. Sankrit (Johns Hopkins University / NASA)

(https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/double_helix_nebula_278x336.jpg)

Twisted current filaments in the Double Helix Nebula near the center of the Milky Way, in infrared light. Image credit: NASA/JPL – CalTech/UCLA

(http://www.holoscience.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Star-birth-filaments-600x367.jpg)

“An incredible network of filamentary structures” seen in a cloud of cold gas in the constellation of the Southern Cross. The ESA report dated 2 October 2009. “That a dark, cool area such as this would be bustling with activity, was unexpected. But the images reveal a surprising amount of turmoil: the interstellar material is condensing into continuous and interconnected filaments glowing from the light emitted by new-born stars at various stages of development.”


“That parallel currents attract each other was known already at the times of Ampere. It is easy to understand that in a plasma, currents should have a tendency to collect to filaments. In 1934, it was explicitly stated by Bennett that this should lead to the formation of a pinch. The problem which led him to the discovery was that the magnetic storm producing medium (solar wind with present terminology) was not flowing out uniformly from the Sun. Hence, it was a problem in cosmic physics which led to the introduction of the pinch effect…

However, to most astrophysicists it is an unknown phenomenon. Indeed, important fields of research, e.g., the treatment of the state in interstellar regions, including the formation of stars, are still based on a neglect of Bennett’s discovery more than half a century ago… present-day students in astrophysics hear nothing about it.”

Dr. Hannes Alfven, Nobel prize laureate

“In conclusion, it seems that astrophysics is too important to be left in the hands of theoretical astrophysicists who have gotten their education from the listed textbooks. The multibillion dollar space data from astronomical telescopes should be treated by scientists who are familiar with laboratory and magnetospheric physics, circuit theory, and, of course, modern plasma physics. More than 99 percent of the Universe consists of plasma, and the ratio between electromagnetic and gravitational forces is 1039.”

—H. Alfvén, NASA Conference Publication 2469, 1986, p. 16

"Space is filled with a network of currents which transfer energy and momentum over large or very large distances. The currents often pinch to filamentary or surface currents. The latter are likely to give space, as also interstellar and intergalactic space, a cellular structure.”

—Hannes Alfvén


Mercury Birkeland currents

https://web.archive.org/web/20120128023316/https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/messenger/multimedia/magnetic_tornadoes.html

Mars plasma flux transfer event

The slow destruction of the planet’s atmosphere was caused by huge rope-like tendrils of magnetic rotations, scientists say, as they reveal data that showed that Mars has huge aurora akin to the Earth’s northern lights.

... Instruments on board the Maven craft found that ions were escaping from the planet at a much quicker rate during solar bursts, or coronal mass ejections. Watching one such event in March, it saw huge magnetic rotations that were flying out into space — and that ions were spewing out into space along those huge magnetic ropes.

Nasa Mars announcement: Red Planet’s atmosphere was blown away by huge bursts of gas from the Sun, scientists suggest.

Plasma Flux Transfer Events between Saturn and the Sun

A twisted magnetic field structure, previously never seen before at Saturn, has now been detected for the first time ... When the Sun’s magnetic field interacts with the Earth’s magnetic field (the magnetosphere), a complex process occurs called magnetic reconnection which can twist the field into a helical shape. These twisted helically structured magnetic fields are called flux ropes or “flux transfer events” (FTEs) and are observed at Earth and even more commonly at Mercury ...

https://web.archive.org/web/20180512121552/https://www.ucl.ac.uk/mathematical-physical-sciences/images/news/Saturn_3D_final6.jpg

(https://image.ibb.co/doucgo/st.jpg)

Nebula Birkeland currents

A new image of the (Mon R2) nebula confirms that it is filamentary in nature, leading to the conclusion that Birkeland currents are present. The filaments that spiral through and away from Mon R2 are named after Kristian Birkeland, who first proposed their existence in the late 1800s. Those currents form scalable plasma structures that can transmit electric power all around the galaxy.

Gas cannot be heated until it gives off intense radiation (extreme ultraviolet and X-rays) without electrical input. Waves of ionized particles detected by ESA comprise the flow of electric charge, so Birkeland currents can form, causing electromagnetic Bennett pinches (z-pinches) that can squeeze plasma with such force that it rapidly compresses. Electric charge flowing into those regions can then force the plasma to erupt in a discharge. Nebulae are plasma formations behaving as the laws of electric discharges and circuits dictate.

No further study is required when one considers the Electric Star hypothesis. Rather than mechanical action (heated gas), Mon R2’s radiation is due to electric currents powering its interior stars. Electrical sheaths (double layers) that are normally invisible receive greater input from galactic Birkeland currents in which they are immersed, entering the “glow discharge” state.

In conclusion, increased flux density pulls matter from the surrounding space (and other stars) into Birkeland current filaments that electrically ignite nebular gasses in Mon R2.

(https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Feathery_filaments_in_Mon_R2-550x561.jpg)

Filaments are revealed in this new image of Mon R2. Credit: ESA/Herschel/PACS/SPIRE/HOBYS Key Programme consortium


This beautiful example of a “planetary nebula” shows the classic features of a plasma z-pinch. The current density in the Birkeland current filaments is sufficient to cause the plasma to enter “glow mode.” The polar “circuit” is composed of concentric cylinders of parallel Birkeland current filaments. The polar double layers are regions of high electric field and radio “noise.” The cylinders pinch down at the star in the characteristic hourglass shape.

(http://www.holoscience.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/Planetary-Nebula-600x332.jpg)

Planetary nebula M2-9. Credit: B. Balick (U. of Washington) and NASA.

(http://www.holoscience.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/Cosmic-Tornado.jpg)

Cosmic Tornado HH49/50 “Tornado” is the description of this jet blasting down from the top of this Spitzer Space Telescope image. Credit: J. Bally (Univ. of Colorado) et al., JPL-Caltech, NASA. Inset: HH34 is another example where the plasma “beading” is clearly visible in the stellar jet. Credit: ESO.

“these [magnetohydrodynamic] theories had initially very little contact with experimental plasma physics, and all the awkward and complicated phenomena which had been treated in the study of discharges in gases were simply neglected…

The cosmical plasma physics of today is far less advanced than the thermonuclear research physics. It is to some extent the playground of theoreticians who have never seen a plasma in a laboratory. Many of them still believe in formulae which we know from laboratory experiments to be wrong. The astrophysical correspondence to the thermonuclear crisis has not yet come.

I think it is evident now that in certain respects the first approach to the physics of cosmical plasmas has been a failure. It turns out that in several important cases this approach has not given even a first approximation to truth but led into dead-end streets from which we now have to turn back.”

Dr. Hannes Alfven

"Glowing, braided filaments are sometimes visible in “jets” that blast out from stars and some galaxies. Those filaments are called Birkeland currents, and they are the visible portion of enormous electric circuits that form a large-scale structure in the Universe. The circuits generate magnetic fields that can be mapped, so the helical shape characteristic of Birkeland currents is known, since it can be seen.

Gases obey Newtonian laws of kinetic motion with molecules bumping into each other or accelerated by "shock waves" imparted by other particles. Plasma, on the other hand, behaves according to the laws of electricity. Stars are born within twisting Birkeland currents that flow around a circuit through the galaxy. The z-pinch effect squeezes plasma inside those filaments, igniting stars and forming toroids of electricity around stellar equators.

The long-range (1/r) electromagnetic interaction between pairs of intergalactic current filaments, known as “Birkeland currents,” attracts matter from a vast volume of space. Where two filaments intersect, they form a spiral galaxy through the powerful electromagnetic “Z-pinch” effect. This concept has been tested in the lab and by ‘particle-in-cell’ supercomputer simulations. It shows that the extremely weak and limited-range (1/r2) force of gravity has negligible effect in forming a spiral galaxy."

(http://www.everythingselectric.com/wp-content/uploads/birkeland-currents-9.jpg)

(https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/ESA_Herschel_G64_filament1-550x335.jpg)

Milky Way filament G64. Credit: ESA/Herschel/PACS/SPIRE/Ke Wang et al. 2015.

Birkeland clusters of galaxies

New observations from the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope have revealed the intricate structure of the galaxy NGC 4696 in greater detail than ever before. The elliptical galaxy is a beautiful cosmic oddity with a bright core wrapped in system of dark, swirling, thread-like filaments.

NGC 4696 is a member of the Centaurus galaxy cluster, a swarm of hundreds of galaxies all sitting together ... These filaments knit together and spiral inwards towards the centre of NGC 4696, connecting the galaxy's constituent gas to its core.

(http://www.everythingselectric.com/wp-content/uploads/birkeland-currents-19-300x240.jpg)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 07, 2018, 01:57:31 AM
SACRED CUBIT ZETA FUNCTION

"The zeta function is probably the most challenging and mysterious object of modern mathematics, in spite of its utter simplicity."

"We may – paraphrasing the famous sentence of George Orwell – say that 'all mathematics is beautiful, yet some is more beautiful than the other'. But the most beautiful in all mathematics is the zeta function. There is no doubt about it."

"A variety of evidence suggests that underlying Riemann's zeta function is some unknown classical, mechanical system whose trajectories are chaotic and without [time-reversal] symmetry, with the property that, when quantised, its allowed energies are the Riemann zeros. These connections between the seemingly disparate worlds of quantum mechanics and number theory are tantalising."

Quantum mechanics and prime numbers:

https://www.ias.edu/ideas/2013/primes-random-matrices

http://www.its.caltech.edu/~matilde/GeomPhysPrimes.pdf

https://medium.com/@JorgenVeisdal/the-riemann-hypothesis-explained-fa01c1f75d3f


How B. Riemann applied the saddle-point method to obtain the asymptotic form of the correction terms:

https://michaelberryphysics.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/berry483.pdf

Thus, almost casually, without fanfare, in an achievement unmatched from his day to ours, Riemann established the leading-order correction to the main sum in, so that:

The Riemann-Siegel formula:

(https://image.ibb.co/hai3fd/riem10.jpg)


The Riemann zeros are related to each other, the computer assisted proof published by Dr. Yuri Matiyasevich (solved Hilbert’s tenth problem):

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.764.208&rep=rep1&type=pdf

The finite Dirichlet series from the title are defined by the condition that they vanish at as many initial zeroes of the zeta function as possible. It turned out that such series can produce extremely good approximations to the values of Riemann’s zeta function inside the critical strip. In addition, the coefficients of these series have remarkable number theoretical properties discovered in large scale high accuracy numerical experiments.

The calculations were performed with very high precision of over ten thousand decimal places.

We want to underline the necessity for performing computations with very high accuracy, which was crucial in discovering the patterns presented here, that would not be detected otherwise. The calculations performed were costly, of order of 200,000 CPU hours, which were made possible by collaborative work of mathematicians, computer scientists, programmers and support engineers.

http://www.academia.edu/19447024/An_artless_method_for_calculating_approximate_values_of_zeros_of_Riemanns_zeta_function

http://www.mpim-bonn.mpg.de/preblob/5368

(https://image.ibb.co/icqMYy/matiy1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/h8Dm0d/matiy2.jpg)


Using the Riemann-Siegel formula to approximate the first two zeros:
(https://image.ibb.co/jZf5ty/riem5.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/ehfARJ/riem6.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/d2drYy/riem7.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/cLjR0d/riem8.jpg)


(https://image.ibb.co/d4GjmJ/riem9.jpg)

http://rgmia.org/papers/v9n2/rs-rgmia.pdf

APPROXIMATION OF THE SUM OF RECIPROCAL OF IMAGINARY PARTS OF ZETA ZEROS

http://ijmcs.future-in-tech.net/9.1/R--GhusayniRH.pdf


S. Ramanujan’s highly composite numbers version of the Riemann hypothesis:

http://math.univ-lyon1.fr/~nicolas/NicolasSondowRRHCNRHconm.pdf

http://math.univ-lyon1.fr/~nicolas/ramanujanNR.pdf

S. Ramanujan: Highly Composite Numbers

http://ramanujan.sirinudi.org/Volumes/published/ram15.pdf

S. Ramanujan, Collected Papers:

http://www.imsc.res.in/~rao/ramanujan/collectedindex.html

Ramanujan already discovered the zeta functional equation in a much different way than that employed by B. Riemann:

(https://image.ibb.co/dS6ZmJ/rama1.jpg)


https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0801/0801.4072.pdf

A Necessary Condition for the Existence of the Nontrivial Zeros of the Riemann Zeta Function

(a very interesting paper which shows that B. Riemann must have followed a similar kind of argument, using the newly discovered zeta functional equation, to reach the conclusion that all the nontrivial zeros are all located on the ½ line)


The sacred cubit formula for the right triangle, first published in this thread:

(https://image.ibb.co/gRCPmJ/pyt1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/hLqzLd/pyt2.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/gCFumJ/pyt3.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/kSBBYy/pyt4.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/crJx6J/pyt5.jpg)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1855591#msg1855591 (Quantum Riemann’s Zeta Function, parts I – XII, twelve consecutive messages)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1886020#msg1886020 (part XIII)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1941894#msg1941894 (part XIV)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1950765#msg1950765 (parts XV – XVI, two consecutive messages)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1953274#msg1953274 (parts XVII – XVIII, two consecutive messages)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 07, 2018, 05:04:52 AM
SACRED CUBIT ZETA FUNCTION II

The smallest particle, called the tail of a boson, features TWO Riemann zeta functions.

A boson is a cavity resonator.

In the center of the boson we have the two apexes (called parabindu) which rotate as follows:

http://www.eaglespiritministry.com/pd/howto/images/mt_01.gif

One is a shadow of the other.

The virtual (thought-like) pyramid is facing downwards: this is called the aparabindu particle in vedic physics. It produces aether, the medium needed for the sound to propagate.

The upward facing pyramid (also called aparabindu; imagination) produces sound, which activates the shadow/thought pyramid.

“The universe is more like a giant thought than a giant machine and the substance of the great thought is consciousness which pervades all space.”
Sir James Jeans

It is this interplay between the two truncated pyramids together with their apexes which is the source of the colossal energy in a boson.

A subquark has some fourteen billion bosons and again two truncated pyramids with two apexes which provide the same quantum interplay to create its two vortices.

Since now the distance between the truncated pyramids (frustums) and the apexes is greater, the amount of energy contained in a subquark will be smaller than in a single boson.

In much the same way, a quark (three subquarks), a meson (six subquarks), a baryon (nine subquarks), a neutron or a proton (eighteen subquarks) will also highlight the same interaction using the two truncated pyramids and their apexes. As the distance between the frustum and the apex increases, the total energy contained in the particle will be of less magnitude.

Each tail of a boson, boson, antiboson, subquark, quark, meson, baryon, neutron, proton, electron (dextrorotatory subquark) will exhibit the TWO RIEMANN ZETA FUNCTIONS interchange.

That is why the energy levels of atoms feature the random matrix model which is based the average spacing between consecutive zeros of the zeta function.

(https://image.ibb.co/eV24Ld/riem.jpg)

The correlation between the arrangement of the Riemann zeroes and the energy levels of quantum chaotic systems means that the zeta function can describe the very intricate quantum physics on an infinitesimal level.

How then could this extraordinary mathematical relationship arise out of a totally random process described by the big bang theory/stellar evolution hypotheses?

Moreover, we have a precise equation which relates the zeros of the zeta function to prime numbers:

(https://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/explform.jpg)


The striking similarities between the Riemann zeros and the quantum energy levels of classically chaotic systems:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1859126#msg1859126


Five elements of the Gizeh pyramid:

26.7
53.4
80
136.1
534

Applying the five elements proportions to the sacred cubit distance:

63.636363
16.1773
9.5445
6.36363
3.1815

Rotate a model of the Gizeh pyramid clockwise by 90 degrees.

To the right, we have another Gizeh pyramid (the shadow of the first pyramid), which is rotated anticlockwise by 90 degrees, the two pyramid frustums will be facing each other.

Total distance from one subterranean chamber to the other: 534 units.

In the center we have the two apexes of the pyramids forming a merkabah geometrical figure.

Two sothic triangles embed each of the two apexes: the height of the triangle will measure exactly 14.134725 units (the value of the first zero of Riemann's zeta function).

Two other sothic triangles will embed the top portion of the frustums of the two pyramids, again the height of these triangles will measure 14.134725 units.

The distance separating the two sets of triangles, located to the left of the center of the merkabah, will measure exactly 63.6363... units (the sacred cubit distance).

In the same manner the distance separating the two sets of triangles located to the right of the center of the merkabah will also measure 63.6363... units.

(https://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/zeros.jpg)


For the past 150 years, no other mathematician or physicist has paid any attention to the SECOND zeta function featured in the graph above.


For the first sacred cubit distance, to the left of the merkabah, we have TWO ZETA FUNCTIONS: one is travelling to the left, starting from the tip of the sothic triangle which embeds the left part of the apex, all the way to the frustum of the left truncated pyramid.

The second zeta function will start from the tip of the sothic triangle which embeds the frustum of the pyramid located to the left, and travel all the way to the tip of the sothic triangle which is embedding the left part of the apex.

THE HEIGHT OF THE TWO SOTHIC TRIANGLES MEASURES 14.134725..., which is the value of the first zero of the zeta function.

From the left to the right, the first wave of the zeta function will include the zeros from 14.134725 to 77.145.

From right to left, the second wave of the zeta function will include the zeros from 14.134725 to 77.145 pointing the other way.


On the right side of the merkabah we will have the same kind of interplay between the frustum and the apex, featuring again two zeta functions.


That is, each of the two sacred distances will include TWO Riemann zeta functions waves.

14.134725 + 63.6363 = 77.7647

77.7647 + 63.6363 = 141.3947

141.3947 + 63.6363 = 205.0247

205.0245 + 63.6363 = 268.6547

268.6547 + 63.6363 = 332.2847


First two pairs of waves (from the apex facing to the right to the frustum oriented to the right):

First wave to the left: 77.7647 to 14.134725
First wave to the right: 14.134725 to 77.7647

Second wave to the left: 141.3947 to 77.7647
Second wave to the right: 77.7647 to 141.3947 and so on.


Second two pairs of waves (from the apex facing to the right to the frustum oriented to the left):

First wave to the right: 14.134725 to 77.7647
First wave to the left: 77.7647 to 14.134725

Second wave to the right: 77.7647 to 141.3947
Second wave to the left: 141.3947 to 77.7647 and so on.


It is much more important to understand and to decipher the mathematical relationship between the zeros of the zeta function than to find out if the Riemann hypothesis is true.

The truth of the  Riemann hypothesis is a consequence of first gaining a definite knowledge of the zeros of the zeta function:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1859799#msg1859799

The sacred cubit fractal (dividing the critical line into 63.6363... segments, and further using the five elements proportions) is the hidden template of the zeta function.

63.636363
16.1773
9.5445
6.36363
3.1815

9.5445 - 6.36363 = 6.36363 - 3.1815 = 3.1815

3.1815
0.80886
0.477225
0.31815
0.159075

(continued here: https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1950765#msg1950765 )


A list of the zeros featured on the first run of the two zeta functions:

     14.134725142
     21.022039639
     25.010857580
     30.424876126
     32.935061588
     37.586178159
     40.918719012
     43.327073281
     48.005150881
     49.773832478
     52.970321478
     56.446247697
     59.347044003
     60.831778525
     65.112544048
     67.079810529
     69.546401711
     72.067157674
     75.704690699
     77.144840069


Now, we subdivide the sacred cubit distance using the five element fractal, for the first zeta function wave traveling towards the left, see:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1950765#msg1950765

14.1347 +

3.1815  = 17.3162 *
6.363    = 20.4947 *
9.545    = 23.68 *
16.1773 = 30.312 *
2.373    = 32.685 *
4.746    = 35.058
7.1185  = 37.43 } *
12.066  = 42.378 }
1.77      = 44.148 *
3.54     = 45.92 * midpoint
5.309   = 47.687 *
{8.998   = 51.376
{1.319   = 52.695
2.64     = 54.02 *
3.96     = 55.33
6.7106 = 58.086 *
0.984  = 59.07 *
1.968  = 60.05
2.95   = 61.03 *
5.0045 = 63.1 }
0.734  = 63.8 }
1.468  = 64.56 }
2.2     = 65.3 }
3.73   = 66.8 }
1.64   = 68.46 }
2.783  = 69.6
1.224  = 70.83
2.07   = 71.67 *
1.548  = 73.22
1.154  = 74.38 *
0.861  = 75.24
0.692  = 75.93
0.4661 = 76.4
0.3475 = 76.745
0.26   = 77


Now, the subdivision for the SECOND wave propagating toward the right:

14.1347 + 63.63 = 77.7647

77.7647 -

3.1815 = 74.58 *
6.363  = 71.4 *
9.545  = 68.22 * }
16.173 = 61.587 * }
2.373  = 59.2 *
4.746  = 56.84 *
7.1185 = 54.469 * }
12.066 = 49.52 }
1.77  = 47.75 *
3.54 = 45.98 * midpoint
5.309 = 44.2 *
8.998 = 40.52 }
1.319 = 39.2 }
2.64  = 37.88 }
3.96  = 36.56 *
6.7106 = 33.8
0.984  = 32.8 *
1.968  = 31.84
2.95  = 30.86 *
5.0045 = 28.81
0.734 = 28.07
1.468 = 27.34
2.2 = 26.61
3.73 = 25.08
1.64 = 23.43 *
2.783 = 22.23
1.224  = 21.07
2.07  = 20.22 *
1.548 = 18.67
1.154 = 17.52 *
0.861 = 16.66
0.692 = 15.97
0.4661 = 15.5
0.3475 = 15.15
0.26 = 14.9


THE VALUES MARKED WITH A STAR (WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE MIDPOINT) ARE ABOUT THE SAME FOR BOTH SUBDIVISIONS.

THIS IS WHERE THE ZETA ZEROS WILL LIE, AT THE COMMON VALUES OF THE TWO SUBDIVISIONS OF THE SACRED CUBIT DISTANCE.

The values marked with a brace need further subdivisions: we can check that there are further zeros there (and also eliminate the midpoint value) using the both the average spacing of the zeta zeros and the total number of zeta zeros in a certain segment formulas.

As an example:

68.22 - 1.68632 = 66.534
66.534 - 1.2576 = 65.2764 *

A match for the value 65.3 from the other subdivision.

Once we know where the zeta zeros are located we can then further subdivide the sacred cubit distances to get a better estimate, since again the equal values of the two subdivisions will provide the exact point where the zeta zero is placed.


It is the points where the two subdivisions have approximately equal values that form the set of zeta zeros.

That is, the law of five elements of proportions applied to the sacred cubit distance will reveal the values of the zeta zeros.



We use the same logic and equations for the SECOND segment, and so on.

     79.337375020
     82.910380854
     84.735492981
     87.425274613
     88.809111208

14.134725 + 63.6363 + 63.63636 = 141.3947


See: https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1950822#msg1950822


As an example:

77.7647 +

we subdivide the interval 77.7647 + 3.1815

3.1815
0.80886
0.477225
0.31815
0.159075

77.7647 +

0.477225 = 78.242
0.80886 = 78.57

3.1815 - 0.80886 = 2.3726

2.3726
0.60322
0.3559
0.23726
0.11863

78.57 +

0.3559 = 78.926
0.60322 = 79.1732 *

77.7647 +

3.1815 = 80.9462
0.80886 = 81.755
0.60322 = 82.36 *
6.3636 = 84.127
0.80886 = 84.936 *
9.545 = 87.31 *
1.68632 = 88.996 *


Starting from the other end (141.3947), and succesively substracting to reach the 88.71 value:

88.71 * -

1.64 = 87.06 *
2.703 = 85.86
1.224 = 84.7 *
2.07 = 83.85
1.548 = 82.3 *
1.154 = 81.15
0.861 = 80.29
0.692 = 79.6

79.6 -

0.4661 = 79.13 *

79.13 * -

0.3475 = 78.78

78.78 -

0.26 = 78.53

Subdividing the 1.02 to 0.26 interval:

0.76
0.1932
0.114
0.076
0.038

78.53 -

0.1932 = 78.3368

Subdividing the 1.02 interval:

1.02
0.2593 (=0.26)
0.153
0.102
0.051

78.78 -

0.153 = 78.627


The values of 79.1732 and 79.13 form the correct subdivision which is closest to the zeta zero figure of 79.337.


Let us suppose now that for the second segment (77.7647 to 141.3947) we cannot find a similar value for the two subdivisions for the zeta zero 134.75.

That would mean, however, that a similar value could not be found for the second zeta wave, which is oriented to the left, which would be impossible since the first zeta function, pointing to the right, already used a figure very close to that value:

For the zeta zero 21.022

14.1347 + 6.36363 = 20.4977

Adding 0.477 to 6.3636  we get 20.975.

Substracting 2.07 from the other subdivision, we get 135.03.

141.3947 - 135.03 = 6.3647

Adding 0.31815 to 6.3647 we get 134.71.


The subdivision next to the point 14.134725 + 6.3636 was already used at the very start, therefore the subdivision for the second segment must produce an approximately equal value for the 134.75 zeta zero, since we arrive again at the same point of subdivision, located next to 6.3636.

The same logic would apply for any consecutive 14.134725 + nx100sc and 14.134725 + (n+1)x100sc segments.

We can also form a whole segment connecting all of the subdivided segments (each of 14.134725 + nx100sc units in length), that is, the first wave starting to the left, 14.134725 to 14.134725 + nx100sc, and the second wave pointing to the right from 14.134725 + nx100sc to 14.134725.


This is the great advantage of having TWO SETS OF SUBDIVISIONS, COMPARING THE APPROXIMATELY EQUAL VALUES, AND EQUATING THOSE WITH THE VALUES OF THE ZETA ZEROS.


To check and see that indeed the approximate equal values of the two subdivisions always lead to the correct zeta zeros, we can add the sum of the reciprocals of the approximately equal values of the subdivisions:


http://rgmia.org/papers/v9n2/rs-rgmia.pdf

APPROXIMATION OF THE SUM OF RECIPROCAL OF IMAGINARY PARTS OF ZETA ZEROS

http://ijmcs.future-in-tech.net/9.1/R--GhusayniRH.pdf

The sum for the reciprocal values of the imaginary parts of the zeta zeros is O(log2t).

The values of the reciprocal values are easy to get from the subdivision process itself.

Let T1 = 63.636363

The first subdivision:

T1
T1 x 0.025424 x 10
3T1/20
T1/10
T1/20

Second subdivision:

T1 - T1 x 0.025424 x 10 = T1(1 - 10x0.025424)
T1(1 - 10x0.025424)x(0.25424x10)
3T1(1 - 10x0.025424)/20
T1(1 - 10x0.025424)/10
T1(1 - 10x0.025424)/20

For the T1/20 segment:

T1/20
T1x0.025424/20
3T1/400
T1/200
T1/400

And so on (1 sacred inch = 0.025424...; 1 sacred cubit = 25 sacred inches)


In order to get an even better understanding of the entire process of subdivision, we would need to know the exact value of the sacred cubit distance of the smallest particle.

14/22 = 0.63636363...

2/pi = 0.636619722...

(phi/4)1/2 = 0.63601...

286.1/450 = 0.6357777...

14.134725 x 45 = 636.062625....

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1573684#msg1573684

Let us remember also (see the previous message) that Dr. Yuri Matiyasevich proved that zeros of the zeta function examined by him are all related to each other. A change in the subdivision process deviating from the sacred cubit distances would mean that all of the previous values would have to be changed as well; however, the previous values were obtained exactly according to the law of proportion of the five elements.

The Lehmer phenomenon, a pair of zeros which are extremely close, is related to the close proximity of some of the values of the two subdivisions of the 63.6363... segment: very close values right from the first level of the subdivision process such as 111.317 and 111.38.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1950822#msg1950822


List of Riemann zeta function zeros:

https://web.archive.org/web/20170508002056/http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/zeta_tables/zeros1

It is most important to gain an understanding of the hidden pattern of these zeta zeros, exactly how they relate to each other, to discover that these zeros are based on a very precise template of sacred cubit subdivisions (sacred cubit fractal). This hidden pattern provides the best way to understand the full meaning of the Riemann hypothesis.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 08, 2018, 06:34:47 AM
SACRED CUBIT ZETA FUNCTION III

http://www.wseas.us/e-library/conferences/2010/Cambridge/CFH/CFH-22.pdf

Continuum versus Quantum Fields Viewed Through a Scale Invariant Model of Statistical Mechanics

The connection between the Dirac sea, Casimir effect, ether field and Riemann's zeta function.


In fact, physicists are now calling the mysterious quantum system behind the Riemann hypothesis and the spacings of the distribution of the zeta zeros, the riemannium.

https://thespectrumofriemannium.wordpress.com/tag/casimir-effect/


https://arxiv.org/pdf/math-ph/0303014.pdf

Jost function, prime numbers and Riemann zeta function


http://cbpfindex.cbpf.br/publication_pdfs/NF03504.2010_07_12_15_19_24.pdf

The Riemann Zeta Function and Vacuum Spectrum


Casimir effect = Aether pressure

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1616174#msg1616174


Dirac sea = Whittaker potential scalar waves

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1994059#msg1994059


The Whittaker scalar bidirectional longitudinal subquark waves can transmit energy through the boson strings exactly because of the interplay between the two Riemann zeta functions, as described in the previous two messages.


Tibetan acoustic levitation using the 534Hz, 136.1Hz, 80Hz, 53.4Hz and 26.7Hz frequencies:

https://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1388219#msg1388219

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1569140#msg1569140

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr01.htm

The seven bubbles no longer fit exactly under one another, as it were, if one looks along or through the wire endwise; in 100 "spirillae of the lowest order" there ought to be just 700 bubbles; so there are in the seven thinner, coloured wires, but in the three thicker wires there are 704. So the increase is at present 1 in 175. And the same curious little increase holds good in the relation of the different orders of spirillae, In the thinner wires exactly 7 spirillae of one order make 1 of the next higher order, so that 700 "b"s make exactly 100 "a"s and so on; but in the thicker wires 704 "b"s go to 100 '"a"s. and the same curious proportion all through.

The extra bosons (bubbles of light) form a latent lateral octave which can be activated through double torsion, a high electrical field, or sound, so that the antigravitational effect can be put to use.


"The zeta function is probably the most challenging and mysterious object of modern mathematics, in spite of its utter simplicity. . . The main interest comes from trying to improve the Prime Number Theorem, i.e. getting better estimates for the distribution of the prime numbers. The secret to the success is assumed to lie in proving a conjecture which Riemann stated in 1859 without much fanfare, and whose proof has since then become the single most desirable achievement for a mathematician."

M.C. Gutzwiller, Chaos in Classical and Quantum Mechanics, page 308

"Riemann showed the importance of study of [the zeta] function for a range of problems in number theory centering around the distribution of prime numbers, and he further demonstrated that many of these problems could be settled if one knew the location of the zeros of this function. In spite of continued assaults and much progress since Riemann's initial investigations this tantalizing question remains one of the major unsolved problems in mathematics."

D. Reed, Figures of Thought (Routledge, New York, 1995) p.123

"In [his 1859 paper], Riemann made an incidental remark - a guess, a hypothesis. What he tossed out to the assembled mathematicians that day has proven to be almost cruelly compelling to countless scholars in the ensuing years...

...it is that incidental remark - the Riemann Hypothesis - that is the truly astonishing legacy of his 1859 paper. Because Riemann was able to see beyond the pattern of the primes to discern traces of something mysterious and mathematically elegant at work - subtle variations in the distribution of those prime numbers. Brilliant for its clarity, astounding for its potential consequences, the Hypothesis took on enormous importance in mathematics. Indeed, the successful solution to this puzzle would herald a revolution in prime number theory. Proving or disproving it became the greatest challenge of the age...

It has become clear that the Riemann Hypothesis, whose resolution seems to hang tantalizingly just beyond our grasp holds the key to a variety of scientific and mathematical investigations. The making and breaking of modern codes, which depend on the properties of the prime numbers, have roots in the Hypothesis. In a series of extraordinary developments during the 1970s, it emerged that even the physics of the atomic nucleus is connected in ways not yet fully understood to this strange conundrum. ...Hunting down the solution to the Riemann Hypothesis has become an obsession for many - the veritable 'great white whale' of mathematical research. Yet despite determined efforts by generations of mathematicians, the Riemann Hypothesis defies resolution.""

J. Derbyshire, from the dustjacket description of Prime Obsession (John Henry Press, 2003)

"Proving the Riemann hypothesis won't end the story. It will prompt a sequence of even harder, more penetrating questions. Why do the primes achieve such a delicate balance between randomness and order? And if their patterns do encode the behaviour of quantum chaotic systems, what other jewels will we uncover when we dig deeper?

Those who believe mathematics holds the key to the Universe might do well to ponder a question that goes back to the ancients: What secrets are locked within the primes?"

E. Klarreich, "Prime Time" (New Scientist, 11/11/00)

"Riemann's insight followed his discovery of a mathematical looking-glass through which he could gaze at the primes. Alice's world was turned upside down when she stepped through her looking-glass. In contrast, in the strange mathematical world beyond Riemann's glass, the chaos of the primes seemed to be transformed into an ordered pattern as strong as any mathematician could hope for. He conjectured that this order would be maintained however far one stared into the never-ending world beyond the glass. His prediction of an inner harmony on the far side of the mirror would explain why outwardly the primes look so chaotic. The metamorphosis provided by Riemann's mirror, where chaos turns to order, is one which most mathematicians find almost miraculous. The challenge that Riemann left the mathematical world was to prove that the order he thought he could discern was really there."

"For centuries, mathematicians had been listening to the primes and hearing only disorganised noise. These numbers were like random notes wildly dotted on a mathematical stave with no discernible tune. Now Riemann had found new ears with which to listen to these mysterious tones. The sine-like waves that Riemann had created from the zeros in his zeta landscape revealed some hidden harmonic structure."

"These zeros did not appear to be scattered at random. Riemann's calculations indicated that they were lining up as if along some mystical ley line running through the landscape."
 
"In an interview, Hilbert explained that he believed the Riemann Hypothesis to be the most important problem 'not only in mathematics but absolutely the most important.'"

"We have all this evidence that the Riemann zeros are vibrations, but we don't know what's doing the vibrating."

"Maybe we have become so hung up on looking at the primes from Gauss's and Riemann's perspective that what we are missing is simply a different way to understand these enigmatic numbers. Gauss gave an estimate for the number of primes, Riemann predicted that the guess is at worst the square root of N off its mark, Littlewood showed that you can't do better than this. Maybe there is an alternative viewpoint that no one has found because we have become so culturally attached to the house that Gauss built."

M. du Sautoy, The Music of the Primes

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 11, 2018, 08:23:15 AM
SACRED CUBIT ZETA FUNCTION IV

(https://image.ibb.co/hwouLd/arg1.jpg)

It has been suggested that if a counterexample exists then it should be in the neighborhood of unusually large peaks of the zeta function.

(https://image.ibb.co/jB9jLd/arg2.jpg)

The interesting behavior of spacings between zeros is due to S(t).

"Large values of S(t) are of special interest because it is only when S(t) is large that unusual behavior of the zeta function can take place. Locally extreme values of S(t) occur at zeros."

The view is that the values for which ζ(s) will exhibit its true asymptotic behaviour must be really very large.

"The RH and (5.3) imply that, as t → ∞, the graph of Z(t) will consist of tightly packed spikes, which will be more and more condensed as t increases, with larger and large oscillations. This I find hardly conceivable. Of course, it could happen that the RH is true and that (5.3) is not."

"Numerical calculations confirm that S grows very slowly: |S(T)| < 1 for T < 280, |S(T)| < 2 for T < 6800000, and the largest value of |S(T)| found so far is around 3.2. It is thus hard to predict the eventual behavior of the zeros, for extremely large numbers are required before this factor becomes significant. We have seen that S(t) grows extremely slowly with t so that major fluctuations in the zeros might not emerge with the large numbers so far computed."


A new paper on the connection between S(t) and very large zeros of the zeta function has evidenced new properties which show that at these large values of t spikes do not occur.

NEW COMPUTATIONS OF THE RIEMANN ZETA FUNCTION ON THE CRITICAL LINE

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1607.00709.pdf

As a byproduct of our search for large values, we also find large values of S(t). It is always the case in our computations that when ζ(1/2 + it) is very large there is a large gap between the zeros around the large value. And it seems that to compensate for this large gap the zeros nearby get “pushed” to the left and right. A typical trend in the large values that we have found is that S(t) is particularly large and positive before the large value and large and negative afterwards.

The calculations involve more than 50000 zeros in over 200 small intervals going up to the 1036th zero.


S(t) is related to the large gaps between the zeta zeros where high extreme values of peaks occur, where it seems to protect the zeta function from attaining the tightly packed spikes conjectured by mathematicians.


http://www.dhushara.com/DarkHeart/RH2/RH.htm (one of the very best works on the Riemann zeta function and the RH)

http://www.math.sjsu.edu/~goldston/Tsang%20Ch2.pdf (on the function S(t))

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0022314X8790059X

https://math.boku.ac.at/udt/vol10/no2/09OzSteu.pdf (on the distribution of the argument of the zeta function)

http://wayback.cecm.sfu.ca/~pborwein/TEMP_PROTECTED/book.pdf (a classic work on the Riemann zeta function, it includes all of the major papers published over the last 150 years on the subject)

http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/unpublished/zeta.10to20.1992.pdf (one of the best papers on the zeta function, it includes pertinent material on the S(t) function, pg. 11, 25, 29, 43, 68)


Also, a new paper on the de Bruijn-Newman constant:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1508.05870.pdf (the connection between the de Bruijn-Newman constant and Lehmer pairs, implying that  Λ = 0, which of course means the RH is true, pg. 5)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1858153#msg1858153 (basic theory of the de Bruijn-Newman constant)


One of the highest Lehmer pairs found so far:

(https://image.ibb.co/gACFRJ/riem17.jpg)

A Lehmer pair occurs where the two subdivisions of the sacred cubit distance have very close values.


In 1974, in one of the best papers published on the zeta function ever, N. Levinson proved that more than 1/3 of the zeros of Riemann's zeta function lie on the σ = 1/2 line:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0001870874900747

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC388151/

Levinson indicated that it would be possible to prove that more than 98% of the zeros lie on the σ = 1/2 line, using a method that allowed for a converse to Rolle’s theorem in this situation, implying that if ξ'(s) has at least a certain proportion of zeros on the line, then so does ξ and similarly for ξ" to ξ' and so on.

http://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/conreyRH.pdf


"The lack of a proof of the Riemann hypothesis doesn't just mean we don't know all the zeros are on the line x = 1/2 , it means that despite all the zeros we know of lying neatly and precisely smack bang on the line x = 1/2 , no one knows why any of them do, for if we had a definitive reason why the first zero 1/2 + 14.13472514 i has real value precisely 1/2 we would have a reason to know why they all do. Neither do we know why the imaginary parts have the values they do.

Answers to such questions depend on a much more detailed knowledge of the distribution of zeros of the zeta function than is given by the RH. Relatively little work has been devoted to the precise distribution of the zeros. The main reason for the lack of research in this area was undoubtedly the feeling that there was little to be gained from studying problems harder than the RH if the RH itself could not be proved."


The height of the Gizeh pyramid measures exactly 141.34 meters.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1836001#msg1836001

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1835548#msg1835548


The Gizeh pyramid was not built by the Egyptians:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1625605#msg1625605


The fact that the arhitects of the pyramid knew the exact value of the first zero of the zeta function and that they used the extended arctangent series means that they had a deep knowledge of mathematical analysis at their disposal:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1834389#msg1834389

The sacred cubit is designated in the form of a horseshoe projection, known as the "Boss" on the face of the Granite Leaf in the Ante-Chamber of the Pyramid. By application of this unit of measurement it was discovered to be subdivided into 25 equal parts known now as: Pyramid inches.

ONE SACRED CUBIT = 0.6356621 meters:

http://www.aldokkan.com/photos/great_pyramid/30_great_pyramid.jpg

14.134725 x 180 = 2544.25

0.0254425 = one sacred inch

0.0254425 x 25 = 0.6360625 = one sacred cubit

14.134725 - 4π = 1.568354 (value of the width of the first section from the queen chamber niche)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1855591#msg1855591


...for if we had a definitive reason why the first zero 1/2 + 14.13472514 i has real value precisely 1/2 we would have a reason to know why they all do.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1950765#msg1950765

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 16, 2018, 04:48:25 AM
SACRED CUBIT ZETA FUNCTION V

https://news.artnet.com/art-world/great-pyramid-giza-egypt-void-1144325

https://www.nature.com/news/cosmic-ray-particles-reveal-secret-chamber-in-egypt-s-great-pyramid-1.22939

Scientists Have Discovered a Secret Room in the Great Pyramid of Giza Measuring 100 ft in Length

(https://news.artnet.com/app/news-upload/2017/11/03TB-PYRAMID3-1509574188531-facebookJumbo-1024x536.jpg)

This finding supports the theory that there are two sets of chambers inside the Gizeh pyramid, which are symmetrical.

https://web.archive.org/web/20100420104333/http://www.ianjamescolmer.com/pyramid.htm

(https://web.archive.org/web/20070722085709im_/http://www.ianjamescolmer.com/dual2.jpg)

(https://web.archive.org/web/20100420104333im_/http://www.ianjamescolmer.com/hidden6.jpg)

(https://web.archive.org/web/20070722085329im_/http://www.ianjamescolmer.com/hidden7.jpg)


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1831408#msg1831408 (the predicted hidden chambers of the Gizeh pyramid)

The king's chamber has to have two connections to the other chambers in order to form a five element sequence.

The second opening, though, has been hidden.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c8/09_edgar.jpg)

(John and Edgar Morton photograph, 1910)

(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/84/dc/3c/84dc3c75d5c6721ed7760e698c105a0b.jpg)

(https://web.archive.org/web/20100420104333im_/http://www.ianjamescolmer.com/hidden9.jpg)

(present day photograph)


In this case, there are two Riemann zeta function on either side of the centerline, located at 1/2 units to the right and to the left of the center.

The one located to the left is an upside down version of the zeta function found to the right of the centerline: an 180 degree rotation of the zeta function located to the right.

It is not clear yet how the sothic triangle which embeds the merkabah in the center would also allow the other two corresponding zeta functions to propagate the opposite way.


For the Gizeh pyramid:

h = 141.347 meters

hapex = 7.2738 meters = 286.1 sacred inches

286.1 = 450 sacred cubits

Masonry base = 141.347 - 136.1 = 5.24725 meters


7.2738 = 53.4 x 0.534 x 0.25424 = 100t x t x 10si

53.4/0.25424 = 210.03776 (a very good estimate of the 21.022 second zero of the zeta function)

136.1/53.4 = 2.54869

136.1/53.43 = 2.5472

(0.2861)1/2 = 0.534883

h (subterranean chamber to apex) = 286.1 sacred cubits


hapex = 100t x t x 10si

The next two notable sacred cubits figures, beyond 286.1 si, are 534 sisi and 636.36 si.

636.36 si = 16.1773 meters (the height of the apex of the pyramid whose frustum measures exactly the value of the second zeta function)

16.1773 = 100t x t x 10si

t = 79.768 meters (the equivalent figure of the 53.4 meter value of the Gizeh pyramid)

79.768 x 2.5424 = 202.803 meters (the equivalent figure of the 136.1 m value of the Gizeh pyramid)


79.768/0.25424 = 313.75

31.375 - 25.0108 = 6.3643


7.2738/5.24725 = 1.38621

7.28/5.24725 = 1.3874


21.022 x 10 = 210.22 (hfrustum of the pyramid representing the second zeta zero)

210.22 - 202.803 = 7.417 (height of masonry base of the second pyramid)


16.1773/7.417 = 2.181

1.3874/2.181 = 0.63613

That is, if we divide the height of the apex to the the masonry base value of the first pyramid, and divide the result by one sacred cubit, we get the ratio for the second pyramid (second zeta zero).


For the second pyramid, the height of the king chamber floor would be around 66.6 meters. For the first pyramid, the distance between the tip of the roof of Campbell's chamber and the top of the frustum measures 63.63 meters. For the second pyramid this value would be somewhere around 91 meters.

For the 534 si value pyramid, the corresponding ratio does not lead to the sacred cubit figure, a sign that the correct value is 636.36 si for the apex of the second pyramid, which represents the second zeta zero.


The next notable figures are: 858 si (286.1 x 3), 890 si (534/6). Then, 1273.2 si and 1144.44 si (286.1 x 4). Next, we would have 1430.5 si, 1816 si (181.6 = 286.1 sc), 2002.7 si (286.1 x 7).


Using the same reasoning as above, together with the subdivision of the sacred distance according to the law of proportions of the five elements derived earlier, we would get excellent approximations for the next three zeros: 25.0108, 30.424 and 32.935.


There must be another hidden template at work here, where the missing apex of each pyramid constitutes another important clue as to how to obtain the correct value of the subsequent zeta zero.

Let us remember that the computer-assisted proofs provided by Dr. Yuri Matiyasevich showed, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the zeta zeros examined were all related to each other, and the interpolating determinant could actually predict with great precision the next zero, using the figures of the previous zeros.

In addition to the five element subdivision of the sacred distance, there must be an additional way, using the values of the missing apexes, to calculate the values of the zeta zeros.


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 17, 2018, 01:05:28 AM
THE ELECTROGRAVITATIONAL FIELD OF THE STATIONARY EARTH II

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2000525#msg2000525 (part I)

(http://www.sciencebuddies.org/Files/3719/12/earth-magnetic-field.jpg)

But these constitute only HALF of the field lines of a magnet.

SPINTRONICS, the secret world of magnets, the most thorough work on the double helix theory of the magnetic field (double helix of the telluric currents):

http://freenrg.info/Misc/The_Secret_World_Of_Magnets.pdf

(https://image.ibb.co/dEuUmJ/spintro1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/cRSFRJ/spintro2.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/cN4qty/spintro3.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/iRouLd/spintro4.jpg)

There two flows of subquarks/magnetic monopoles: South-Center-North AND North-Center-South.

The modern study of the magnetic field/electromagnetism ONLY includes the South to North flow.

Yet, there are TWO continuous streams of different particles.

What, then, is the nature of the SECOND flux of particles?

http://www.electricitybook.com/magnetricity/hojo-leed.jpg

(Leedskalnin's diagram of the two streams of magnetic monopoles in a magnet)

"The Coral Castle is a decorative park built by E. Leedskalnin from over 1,000 tons of megalithic coral rock; dense blocks which from 1923 until 1951 were quarried, carved and stacked to form towers, beds and tables, rocking chairs, sundials and astrological figures.

As a folly, it is singularly unique – but what makes it stranger still is the fact that the Coral Castle was built by one man alone, using no more than hand tools as he fashioned a palace over the course of 28 years of solitary labour. In 1986 it took six men and a crane to repair the nine-ton gate; and yet this single man had been able to stack 14-ton slabs unaided.

Within the castle walls, built of coral blocks weighing approximately 15 tons each, there are a 22-ton obelisk, a 22-ton moon block, a 23-ton Jupiter block, a Saturn block, a 9-ton gate, a rocking chair that weighed 3-tons, and numerous puzzles. A huge 30-ton block is crowned with a gable shaped rock. Leedskalnin claimed to have used his knowledge of the double stream of magnetic lines to provide the force necessary to lift the blocks."

(http://static.panoramio.com/photos/large/19628670.jpg)

"Magnetic current is the same as electric current is a wrong expression. Really it is not one current they are two currents, one current is composed of North Pole individual magnets in concentrated streams, and the other is composed of South Pole magnets in concentrated streams, and they are running one stream against the other stream in whirling, screw like fashion, and with high speed."


Modern science only studies one of these streams.


Whittaker proved that the potential consists of pairs of bidirectional longitudinal scalar waves, and that the same equation governs both gravity and magnetism.


The second flow/stream of particles IS THE GRAVITATIONAL WAVE, which has a dextrorotatory spin. Both flows/streams form the ELECTROGRAVITATIONAL FIELD.


The spherical orbiting Earth has a STATIC gravitational field and a ROTATING magnetic field.

But in reality BOTH have to be rotating.

"A Gravity-based Theory

There is, however, another theory that does not rely on the concept of an aether, but is very closely aligned with the aether theories discussed thus far. The late Emeritus Professor of Electrical Engineering Petr Beckmann proposed that the outdated term "aether" could be replaced with the more modern term "gravity." Clearly, a gravitational field would have characteristics very similar to a partially entrained aether. Both would cause the bending of light rays. Gravity would be strongest near the surface of the planet where the partially entrained aether was most dense. Light would still behave in the same manner, if the speed of light is constant with respect to the source of the dominant gravitational field. This would square with all of the known experimental data because in nearly every case, the observer has always been tied to the Earth-bound frame of reference—so we substitute the word "gravity" for the word "aether." Obviously gravity exists and we know that, although gravity is "emitted" by the Earth, it does not rotate with it. So this is a very plausible replacement for a partially entrained aether. It also stands to reason if we speculate that light is actually a disturbance in the gravitational field.

Dr. William Cantrell"

William H. Cantrell, PhD, is a
member of the technical staff
at the MIT Lincoln Laboratory.
He was formerly an adjunct assistant
professor in the electrical
engineering department at the
University of Texas.

http://printarchive.epochtimes.com/a1/en/hk/nnn/2014/04_April/15/B4.pdf

https://www.ll.mit.edu/publications/journal/journalarchives19-2.html

https://www.ll.mit.edu/publications/journal/pdf/vol19_no2/19_2_4_Stambaugh.pdf

Dr. Petr Beckmann, PhD in EE

https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Petr_Beckmann


The magnetic field does rotate along with the Earth.

But not its gravitational field: the orbiting Earth rotates through its gravitational field.


The rotating ether field above the surface of the Earth acts as a electrogravitational field. This field is bounded by the outer aether dome (there is no outer ice wall). The dome acts as a shield between the terrestrial gravitational force and the planetary/stellar gravitational force.

There are TWO FLOWS and A CENTER.

That is, the are two sets of different particles (magnetic monopoles) traveling both in the North-Center-South and in the South-Center-North directions, going through the center.

The location of the center of the flat earth:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1952743#msg1952743

The double torsion flow of subquarks (magnetic monopoles) issues forth from both poles and goes through the center, before reaching the other pole.

This is how the electrogravitational field "rotates" above the surface of the flat earth.

By comparison, the definition of a rotating magnetic field:

"A rotating magnetic field is a magnetic field that has moving polarities in which its opposite poles rotate about a central point or axis."


Modern science assumes that the gravitational field and the magnetic field of the Earth represent two different physical phenomena: one is stationary ( the gravitational field does not rotate along with the supposed rotation of the Earth), the other one (the magnetic field) is rotating with the Earth around its own axis.


In reality BOTH the gravitational and the magnetic streams travel in double torsion fashion, as proven by Whittaker mathematically, and shown to be true experimentally in the Spintronics, The Secret World of Magnets book.


One (the gravitational field) cannot be stationary, while the other (the magnetic field) rotates at a certain rate: the bidirectional waves which comprise this lattice would be decoupled in an instant.

THEY HAVE TO ROTATE TOGETHER. In the case of heliocentrism, one of them HAS TO BE STATIONARY, WHILE THE OTHER ONE ROTATES.


The Aurora Borealis cannot be explained by an external stream of plasma/ions that are injected into the Earth's magnetic field.

The auroral displays are caused by the celestial object that orbits above the North Pole region.

(https://i.ibb.co/fM2wxFB/aur.jpg)

http://hollowplanet.blogspot.ro/2007/09/earth-weaves-its-own-invisible-cloak.html

NASA Scientists Agree — Polar Ion Fountains Fill the Earth's Magnetosphere

http://www.ourhollowearth.com/Earth_weaves_its_own_invisible_cloak.pdf

"The perception started to change in the mid-1980s following the Aug. 3, 1981, launch of two Dynamics Explorer satellites designed to study the magnetosphere near the Earth. DE-1 carried Chappell's Retarding Ion Mass Spectrometer (RIMS), designed to measure the population of the plasmasphere, a torus or donut of low-energy in the inner magnetosphere.

To Chappell's surprise, the real find was around the north pole where RIMS measured gases flowing upward from the ionosphere into space."


Aurora is the sister of Luna and Sol. Also called Eos: sister of Helios (the sun) and Selene (the moon).

It only orbits above the North Pole, and the must be a counterpart orbiting the South Pole, which causes the Aurora Australis.

Greenland and parts of northern Canada and Russia experience light from the sun via Earth’s Aurora.

The hollow earth hypothesis suffers from the same problems as does the spherical earth theory: the curvature and the static gravitational field.

Aurora is documented in the various legends around the world: it is the "inner sun" of the hollow earth theory.

It also provides light in the northern and southern pole regions during some periods of the year.

Aurora, sister of the Sun and of the Moon:

http://www.theoi.com/Titan/Eos.html

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 05, 2018, 05:06:04 AM
THE ELECTROGRAVITATIONAL FIELD AND ATMOSPHERIC TIDES

The barometer pressure paradox proves that the same mass of air gravitates with changing force at different hours.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1707294#msg1707294

The pressure oscillations occur at each and every point where pressure records are kept at every station.

The semidiurnal atmospheric tide takes place at each and every point on the Earth's surface.

The semidiurnal pressure oscillations tides have two maxima and two minima per day.

The pressure pattern of the tides, having two waves go over the surface of the flat Earth, defies Newtonian gravitational theory.

It is a huge etheric gravitational tide which encompasses the entire surface of the Earth.


However, the precise observations made by Dr. D.F. Martyn have shown that the atmospheric tides in the ionosphere match the semidiurnal tides as well.

http://rspa.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/royprsa/190/1021/273.full.pdf


BOTH the gravitational and the magnetic fields HAVE TO BE rotating over the surface of the Earth in order for these effects of the atmospheric tides to take place.

Yet, modern science assumes that the gravitational field and the magnetic field of the Earth represent two different physical phenomena: one is stationary ( the gravitational field does not rotate along with the supposed rotation of the Earth), the other one (the magnetic field) is rotating with the Earth around its own axis.

But one cannot be stationary, while the other one is rotating: the same effects recorded for both the atmospheric tide and the ionosphere tide would be decoupled in an instant.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2000525#msg2000525 (part I)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 05, 2018, 06:59:23 AM
DOUBLE TORSION ELECTROGRAVITATIONAL WAVES: TESLA BIFILAR COILS

(http://image.ibb.co/dxJ15c/leed2.jpg)

Tesla was a pioneer in the use of the double torsion concept in theory of electromagnetism.

https://teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla/patents/us-patent-512340-coil-electro-magnets

"The new idea of this patent seems to be that inductors have self-capacitance. Unlike an ordinary coil made by turning wire on a tube form, this one uses two wires laid next to each other on a form but with the end of the first one connected to the beginning of the second one. Tesla intended (and stated) these coils will cancel the self-induction, which in common electrical science means the inductive impedance is canceled by capacitive inductance hence it is a self resonant device (it has its own resonant frequency)."

(http://www.todomisterio.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Nikola-Tesla.jpg)

(http://afflictor.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/tesla-nyc-lab.jpg)

"A standard solenoidal-wound coil of 1000 turns with a potential of 100 volts across it
will have a difference of 0.1 volt between turns.

• A BIFILAR-wound coil of the same number of turns will have a potential of 50 volts between turns.

Because the stored energy is a function of the square of the voltages,
the energy in the BIFILAR Coil will be 50 squared / .1 squared  =  2500 / .01   =   250,000  times greater than the standard coil."

http://aetherwizard.com/tesla/bifilar_electromagnet.htm


Tesla bifilar coil experiments done by JNaudin Labs

http://jnaudin.free.fr/gegene/indexen.htm

Comparison of Tesla Bifilar and Pancake Coils




Test #1



Test #2



Test #3



(http://image.ibb.co/j8YZQc/leed4.jpg)

(http://image.ibb.co/bVzDJx/leed3.jpg)

JPL/CalTech have copied Tesla's design:

https://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegallery/image_feature_2311.html

The caduceus coils also exhibit antigravitational features as well:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1620300#msg1620300
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 12, 2018, 01:57:03 AM
TOPOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS OF THE SAGNAC EFFECT

"Sagnac effect is a change in propagation time for light going in a closed path. The time delay Δt appears when a test equipment is rotated with an angular velocity Ώ. Sagnac effect is frequently used in rate gyros in navigational systems. Fiber optics is used with light-speed c inside the fiber in a circular light path. The difference in propagation time Δt for two opposite directions of light is described as

Δt = 4AΩ/c2

Where A is enclosed area. Δt is derived based on an integration of Ω over A.

According to Stokes' rule can an integration of angular velocity Ω over an area A be substituted by an integration of tangential component of translational velocity v along the closed line of length L limiting the given area. This interpretation gives

Δt = 4vL/c2

producing the same value as the earlier expression. This can also be demonstrated by geometrical relations. These two integrations have different physical implications. We must therefore decide which one is correct from a physical aspect. Mathematics can not tell us that. So the decision is whether the effect is caused by a rotating area or by a translating line. Since Sagnac effect is an effect in light that is enclosed inside an optical fiber we can conclude that Sagnac effect is distributed along a line and not over an area. No light and no rotation exists in the enclosed area. Sagnac detected therefore an effect of translation although he had to rotate the equipment to produce the effect inside the fiber.

We conclude that the later expression

Δt = 4vL/c2

is the correct interpretation."

http://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Astrophysics/Download/2159

"Sagnac effect is distributed along a line and not over a surface. The assumption that starts from an integration over a surface (2Aw; rotation) is mathematically correct (due to Stokes' rule) but equal to a line integral (vL; translation). We must decide if the reason is a translating line or a rotating surface from a physical point of view. The rotation theory is correct only mathematically. Since the effect is locked inside an optical fiber the translating line is the correct interpretation. Classification as a rotational effect is wrong."

Professor Ruyong Wang has proven the Sagnac effect applies to uniform/translational/linear motion:

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0609/0609222.pdf

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0609/0609202.pdf

http://web.stcloudstate.edu/ruwang/ION58PROCEEDINGS.pdf


Therefore, the formula for the Sagnac phase shift which features the area and the angular velocity IS INCORRECT. Only the formula which includes the linear velocity is CORRECT.


The analogy between the Aharonov-Bohm phase and the Sagnac phase:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1997318#msg1997318


The topological feature of the Aharonov-Bohm effect is its multiple-connectedness:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1999598#msg1999598


The Sagnac phase is multiply-connected as well:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/288491190_SAGNAC_EFFECT_A_consequence_of_conservation_of_action_due_to_gauge_field_global_conformal_invariance_in_a_multiply-joined_topology_of_coherent_fields


(http://image.ibb.co/nNOBkn/ahasag3.jpg)

The phase difference of the Aharonov-Bohm effect and of the Sagnac effect is described by the POTENTIAL (A) enclosed by the curve C.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 12, 2018, 08:38:01 AM
THE MICHELSON-GALE EXPERIMENT HOAX

The experiment carried out in 1925 by A. Michelson and H. Gale, aided by F. Pearson, was supposed to measure the Sagnac effect due to Earth's rotation (to resolve the issue whether or not the rotation of the Earth had an effect on the propagation of light in the vicinity of the Earth, using a very large interferometer).

However, Michelson and Gale USED THE WRONG FORMULA.

http://www.aamorris.net/properganderatpropaganda/2017/8/9/there-is-no-evidence-the-earth-spins-part-1a-michelson-gale-make-fudge (examines the claims of the Michelson-Gale experiment)


The formula used by Michelson and Gale was the CORIOLIS EFFECT FORMULA, and not the equation for the Sagnac phase shift.

Spinning Earth and its Coriolis effect on the circuital light beams

http://www.ias.ac.in/article/fulltext/pram/087/05/0071

Classical Interpretations of Relativistic Phenomena

https://file.scirp.org/pdf/JMP20120200009_86423451.pdf (pg. 198)


The formula for the fringe measurements caused by the Coriolis effect IS THE SAME as the formula derived by A. Michelson for the Sagnac effect as applied to the rotation of the Earth.

The Coriolis effect (not the Sagnac effect) is responsible for the non-null result of the Michelson–Gale experiment assisted by Pearson and the experiment of Bilger et al.


As was shown in the previous message, the Sagnac phase shift formula featuring the area and the angular velocity is the incorrect mathematical expression.

That is why the derivation published by A. Michelson is completely wrong: the data for the Michelson-Gale experiment was obtained by measuring the Coriolis effect and not the Sagnac effect.

This means that no physicist, so far, has published the correct Sagnac formula for the interferometer in the shape of a rectangle which is supposed to detect the rotation of the Earth (with the exception of the formula for the rotating linear segment which uses phase conjugate mirrors).  All of the Sagnac phase shift formulas published up to this time for the detection of the rotation of the Earth (interferometer on the surface of the Earth) highlight the area and the angular velocity: these formulas actually describe the Coriolis effect, and not the Sagnac effect (again, with the exception of the equation for the rotating linear segment).

The correct Sagnac formula has to include the tangential velocity, not the area or the angular velocity.

Most probably, Michelson and Gale realized that they were actually carrying out an experiment designed to find the effect of the Coriolis force and not the effects of the Sagnac phase shift, and chose not to disclose their findings to the scientific community.

Geocentric Coriolis force:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg953747#msg953747

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 13, 2018, 02:16:13 AM
THE MICHELSON-GALE EXPERIMENT HOAX II


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2024144#msg2024144 (part I)

The Sagnac formula derived by Michelson (1904) and Silberstein (1921) is plain wrong: it is actually the Coriolis effect formula.

(https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5565d642e4b0b6e4ce20b2f5/t/598d8d93a803bbe5a4b06959/1502686935548/?format=300w)

The equivalent form is:

(http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Michelson-Gale/MangG1.jpg)

But this is not the Sagnac formula for the phase shift.

The angular velocity is multiplied either by l (the long leg of the rectangle) or by h (the short leg of the rectangle); from the point of view of the Sagnac experiment this formulation that does not make sense at all.

The Sagnac phase shift formula has to include the angular velocity multiplied by the radius of the loop.

The only correct formula published for the case of an interferometer placed at the surface of the Earth in order to detect rotation is that for a rotating linear segment using phase conjugate mirrors.

SAGNAC EFFECT WITHOUT AN AREA OR A LOOP

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0609/0609202.pdf

The use of a phase-conjugate mirror has permitted new breakthroughs in the experimental science of the Sagnac effect.

(https://image.ibb.co/g629jS/lis5.jpg)

The equation which expresses the relationship between interference fringes and time differences is F=dt[c/λ] (where dt = 4vL/c2).

This experiment shows us two important points. First, it confirms the phase reversal of a PCM and demonstrates the Sagnac effect in an arc segment AB, not a closed path. Second, it gives us important implications: The result, φ = 4πRΩL/cλ, can be re-written as φ = 4πvL/cλ where v is the speed of the moving arc segment AB (where R is the radius of the circular motion, Ω is the rotational rate).

If we increase the radius of the circular motion as shown in Fig. 6, the arc segment AB will approach a linear segment AB, the circular motion will approach the linear motion, the phase-conjugate Sagnac experiment will approach the phase-conjugate first-order experiment as shown in Fig. 4, and the phase shift is always φ = 4πvL/cλ.


The Sagnac effect for a ROTATING LINEAR SEGMENT interferometer IS: 2vL/c2, where v=RΩ.

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0609/0609222.pdf


We have the linear velocity (angular velocity x radius), and the length of the segment: this is the correct Sagnac formula.


The Michelson-Gale formula, by contrast, features NO LINEAR VELOCITY AND NO RADIUS OF THE LOOP, having eliminated the linear velocity from the very start: this is not the Sagnac phase shift formula.


How did A. Michelson obtain the Coriolis effect formula?

(http://image.ibb.co/fjSJy7/ahasag2.jpg)

(http://image.ibb.co/fPWNAn/ahasag4.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/d6svVn/ahasag5.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/kF7137/ahasag6.jpg)

So, we can see that by applying the same reasoning as in the case of an interferometer which is being rotated in a lab, for an interferometer placed at the surface of the Earth to detect rotation, one will obtain the Coriolis effect formula and not the Sagnac phase shift formula.

What happens if the interferometer is placed like a billboard on the surface?

http://signandpop.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/billboard2.jpg

The same thing: one will obtain a final formula featuring l and h (the long leg and the short leg of the rectangular interferometer) multiplied by the angular velocity.

But this is not the Sagnac phase shift formula: it is the Coriolis effect equation.


Any derivation which will apply the same reasoning as in the case of the interferometer rotating in a lab to obtain a Sagnac phase shift, will feature a final formula involving the angular velocity and the area: a Coriolis effect equation.

The correct final formula has to show the linear velocity and the length of the curve which encloses the interferometer.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2023979#msg2023979 (the formula for the Sagnac phase shift which features the area and the angular velocity IS INCORRECT; only the formula which includes the linear velocity and the closed line of length L is CORRECT)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 14, 2018, 04:22:07 AM
THE MICHELSON-GALE EXPERIMENT HOAX III

(https://www.usna.edu/Library/sca/ve-collections/michelson/images/15_M_ether.jpg)

The Michelson-Gale experiment recorded ONLY the Coriolis effect, which is thousands of times smaller in magnitude than the phase shift predicted by the correct Sagnac formula.

Thus, we have absolute proof that the Earth is stationary and that it does not rotate around its own axis: the experiment did not record/register the Sagnac effect.

The correct Sagnac formula should include vr and L (long leg of the rectangle); the correct formula for the interferometer placed at the surface of the Earth must contain a single speed and a single radius, perhaps pointed at the geometrical center of the interferometer.

The Coriolis effect formula derived by Michelson features only the area and the angular velocity. Since vr = r x Ω, and r = 6,378.164 km, the Sagnac is larger in magnitude than the Coriolis effect by at least the r = 6,378.164 km factor.

It is obvious that the fringe shifts recorded by A. Michelson and H. Gale did not register the Sagnac effect at all; only the Coriolis effect (much smaller in magnitude) was observed.

This means that the experiment proved that the Earth is stationary.

The experiment also shows that there is no such thing as the UA accelerator: the interferometer would have recorded any upward translational motion.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1848154#msg1848154

The ether is impeding the velocity of the light beams in the rotating table experiment of G. Sagnac and in the light signals sent by the GPS satellites to Earth.

The interferometer built by A. Michelson and H. Gale did not record the Sagnac phase shift, but only the Coriolis effect (see part I of this series on the Michelson-Gale experiment). The final formula and data published by Michelson and Gale, however, features only fringe shifts measurements caused by the Coriolis effect.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2024144#msg2024144 (part I)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 16, 2018, 06:15:00 AM
THE MICHELSON-GALE EXPERIMENT HOAX IV

The value of the main term of the Coriolis effect for an interferometer (in the shape of a rectangle, trapezoid, annular sector) located away from the geometric center of the rotation (of the turntable/Earth/circle) will be THE SAME as the value of the Sagnac effect for the same interferometer whose center of rotation now coincides with that of the turntable/Earth/circle.

(http://image.ibb.co/dkiwQn/cir1.jpg)

Long leg = L

Short leg = h

The turntable/circle rotates with angular velocity Ω

The speed of the L segment = h/2 x Ω

vL = hΩ/2

The speed of the h segment = L/2 x Ω

vh = LΩ/2


vLL = ΩhL/2 = ΩA/2

vhh = ΩhL/2 = ΩA/2


Now, a rectangular interferometer (the same area and dimensions) located away from the center of rotation of the turntable/circle.

(http://image.ibb.co/iQWfJ7/cir2.jpg)

The Coriolis effect will be:

4ΩA/c2 (this term is multiplied by sinΦ, where Φ is the latitude)

http://www.ias.ac.in/article/fulltext/pram/087/05/0071


In reality, the Michelson-Gale experiment actually measured the Sagnac fringe shift obtained for an interferometer whose center of rotation coincides with that of the Earth.

That is, a rectangular interferometer with the dimensions of 2010 ft (612.65 m) by 1113 ft (339.24 m) is simply placed with its center of rotation coinciding with the center of rotation of the Earth having a radius of 6,376.164 km.

But that is NOT the Sagnac phase shift for the original problem, where the same interferometer was placed on the surface of the Earth, at a distance of 6,378.164 km from the center of rotation.


The same results will be obtained in the case of an interferometer having the shape of an isosceles trapezoid or an annular sector of a circle (both are first placed away from the center of rotation, and then these interferometers are being placed with their center of rotation coinciding with the center of rotation of a circle/turntable.


The Coriolis effect value for an interferometer located away from the center of rotation will be THE SAME as the Sagnac effect value for the same interferometer whose center of rotation coincides with the center of rotation of the Earth/circle/turntable.


The true value of the Sagnac effect for an interferometer in the shape of a rectangle whose center of rotation is located away from the center of rotation of the circle/turntable could be calculated as follows: let h = the short leg of the rectangle, h1 the distance from the center of the circle to the lower long leg of the rectangle, and of course h2 = h1 + h, as the distance from the center of the circle to the upper long leg of the rectangle.

Unfold these sides which measure both L, to form a single segment of length 2L, using a phase-conjugate mirror for the rotating linear segment.

Then the value of the Sagnac effect will measure: 4ΩrxL/c2, where rx is the distance from the center of the circle to the upper leg of the rectangle.

The Coriolis effect is 4ΩA/c2, where A = Lh.

The Sagnac effect value will be very close to 4ΩrxL/c2.

The ratio will be rx/h.



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 17, 2018, 04:33:01 AM
THE MICHELSON-GALE EXPERIMENT HOAX V

(https://i.stack.imgur.com/FEppO.png)

An interferometer in the shape of an annular sector is placed in the center of a circular turntable.

The upper circular arc (s1) is located at a distance r from the center of the circle.

The lower circular arc (s2) is also located at a distance r from the center of the circle.

s1 = R1 x θ
s2 = R2 x θ

2r = R1 - R2

If the annular sector interferometer is rotated, the formula obtained by a straightforward classic analysis, which features the area and the angular velocity, will also include two speeds:

dt = 2Ωθ(R12 - R22)/c2 = (2v1s1 - 2v2s2)/c2

If we UNFOLD the two circular arcs into one single segment of length L (L = s1 + s2), and use a phase-conjugate mirror, the Sagnac formula is:

dt = 2vLL/c2

vL = Ωr


If we place an interferometer in the shape of an isosceles trapezoid in the center of a circular turntable, and unfold the two parallel sides, l and L, A = l + L, and rotate the segment A as before, we get:

dt = 2vAA/c2

vA = Ωr

r = h/2 (h = height of the trapezoid connecting the sides l and L)


(http://image.ibb.co/iQWfJ7/cir2.jpg)

A rectangular interferometer, sides L and h.

The lower leg, L, is located at a distance h from the center of the turntable.

The upper leg L, of course, is located at a distance 2h from the center of the turntable.


Let us now unfold the perimeter of the sides where the light beams of the interferometer will be acted upon by the rotation of the turntable:

P = 2L

Now, we will have a rotating linear segment of length P, located at a distance of 2h from the center of the turntable.

The Sagnac formula will be:

dt = 2vPP/c2

vP = Ω x 2h

Thus, the Sagnac formula for the unfolded perimeter (now a rotating linear segment) will be THE SAME as the Sagnac formula for a rectangle with sides 4h and P (P = 2L), whose center coincides with that of the circle/turntable.


Now, the rectangular interferometer with sides L and h will be placed with the lower leg L tangent to the center of the circle/turntable.

The upper leg, L, will be located at a distance h from the center of the turntable.

The unfolding of the three sides, 2h and L, where the light beams will be acted upon by the rotation: M = h + h + L.

So, we will have a rotating linear segment of length M, situated at a distance of h from the center of the circle.

The Sagnac formula will be:

dt = 2vMM/c2

vMM = Ω x h

Thus, the Sagnac formula for the unfolded perimeter (now a rotating linear segment) will be THE SAME as the Sagnac formula for a rectangle with sides 2h and M (M = L + 2h), whose center coincides with that of the circle/turntable.


The rectangular interferometer with sides L and h will now be placed with the lower leg L at a distance 5h from the center of the circle/turntable.

The lower leg, L, is located at a distance 5h from the center of the turntable.

The upper leg L, of course, is located at a distance 6h from the center of the turntable.

Unfolding the sides of the perimeter whose light beams interact with the rotation: P = 2L.

Now, we will have a rotating linear segment of length P, located at a distance of 6h from the center of the turntable.

The Sagnac formula will be:

dt = 2vPP/c2

vP = Ω x 6h

Thus, the Sagnac formula for the unfolded perimeter (now a rotating linear segment) will be THE SAME as the Sagnac formula for a rectangle with sides 12h and P (P = 2L), whose center coincides with that of the circle/turntable.


Let us now unfold the perimeter of the rectangular interferometer used in the Michelson-Gale experiment.

The lower leg of the rectangle will be a distance of 6,377.825 km from the center of the rotation (in the heliocentrical version, the radius from the center of the Earth to Clearing, Illinois, is less than 6,378.164 km).

The upper leg of the rectangle will be located at a distance of 6,378.164 km (6,377.825 + 1113 ft (339.24 m = 0.33924 km)) from the center of the rotation.

Unfolding the sides: P = 2L.

Now, we will have a rotating linear segment of length P, located at a distance of 6,378.164 km from the center of the rotation.

The Sagnac formula will be:

dt = 2vPP/c2

vP = Ω x 6,378.164 km

Thus, the Sagnac formula for the the rotating linear segment (whose length is equal to 2L) will be THE SAME as the Sagnac formula for a rectangle with sides 12,756.328 km and P (P = 2L), whose center coincides with that of the rotation itself.


Thus, by contrast, A. Michelson and H. Gale actually calculated the Sagnac formula for a rectangle with sides 2010 ft (612.65 m) and 1113 ft (339.24 m) which is placed at the center of the rotation.

This is equivalent to calculating main term of the Coriolis effect formula, if we place the rectangular interferometer at the surface of the Earth, as was done in the Michelson-Gale experiment.

The ratio of the correct Sagnac formula to the Coriolis effect formula will be:

6,378.164/0.33924.


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2023979#msg2023979 (topological considerations of the Sagnac effect; only the formula which includes the linear velocity is correct)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 18, 2018, 12:54:47 AM
THE MICHELSON-GALE EXPERIMENT HOAX VI

Contrary to what physicists have been led to believe, up until 1995, the ONLY Sagnac experiments which were carried out while center of rotation was away from the geometric center of the turntable, were the tests performed by Georges Sagnac in 1913, and the Michelson-Gale experiment (1925). E.J. Post's comment that "the fringe shift does not depend on the location of the center of rotation" refers only to the Michelson-Gale experiment.

Sagnac moved the center of rotation just a few centimeters away from the geometric center of the turntable and did not realize that the area of the interferometer has nothing to do with the phase shift observed, and that the effect was distributed along a line and not over a surface.

Michelson and Gale used the formula for the Coriolis effect to verify the changes in the fringe shifts.

The original papers published by G. Sagnac:

https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/jpa-00241884/document

http://zelmanov.ptep-online.com/papers/zj-2008-07.pdf

http://zelmanov.ptep-online.com/papers/zj-2008-08.pdf

Bilger et al (1995) and Anderson et al (1994) used the Sagnac phase shift formula derived by A. Michelson, which was actually the Coriolis effect equation.

H.R. Bilger, G.E. Stedman, Z. Li, U. Schreiber and M. Schneider, IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 44(2), 468 (1995)
R. Anderson, H.R. Bilger and G.E. Stedman, Am. J. Phys. 62(11), 975 (1994)

(http://image.ibb.co/m35Ckn/mig1.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/k33Md7/mig2.jpg)

But this ring laser interferometer will measure ONLY the Coriolis effect of the ether drift, and not the Sagnac effect.

It is as if this interferometer with a side length of 4 meters would be placed with its center of rotation coinciding with the supposed center of rotation of the Earth. The fact that the interferometer is located THOUSANDS OF KILOMETERS away from the center of rotation does not enter the Coriolis effect formula at all.

The correct Sagnac formula features a linear velocity (angular velocity multiplied by the radius of the loop).

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 18, 2018, 09:33:07 AM
THE MICHELSON-GALE EXPERIMENT HOAX VII

(http://editionsassailly.com/books/space_fichiers/image096.jpg)

The interferometer used by A. Michelson and H. Gale will be placed with the center of the rectangle concentric with a circle.

(http://image.ibb.co/dkiwQn/cir1.jpg)

Then, the Sagnac phase shift will be:

dt = 4hLΩ/c2 = 8vhh/c2 = 8vLL/c2 = 4AΩ/c2

A = hL

vh = ΩL/2

vL = Ωh/2

This phase shift is the SAME as the main term of the Sagnac formula derived by A. Michelson for the interferometer located in Clearing, Illinois:

4AΩ/c2

The formula used by A. Michelson is the equation used for an interferometer whose center of symmetry is concentric with a circle.

If the interferometer is moved away from the center of rotation, the Sagnac formula becomes the Coriolis effect formula.

The real Sagnac formula for an interferometer which is located away from the center of rotation has to feature the linear velocity (angular velocity multiplied by the radius of the loop).

dt = 2vPP/c2

vP = Ω x 6,378.164 km

Thus, the Sagnac formula for the rotating linear segment (whose length is equal to 2L) will be THE SAME as the Sagnac formula for a rectangle with sides 12,756.328 km and P (P = 2L), whose center coincides with that of the rotation itself (see the previous several messages).



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 19, 2018, 01:40:48 AM
THE MICHELSON-GALE EXPERIMENT HOAX VIII

The Sagnac effect derivation cannot be applied to a curved surface featuring two different radii:

(http://image.ibb.co/fjSJy7/ahasag2.jpg)

The final phase shift formula will be the Coriolis effect equation, and not the Sagnac phase shift.

It can only be applied to a planar surface.

Let us now replace a sphere with a set of inscribed rectangles (the following image has circles instead):

(http://image.ibb.co/d99oRS/kel5.jpg)

Then, a straightforward analysis will reveal the correct Sagnac formula:

dt = 4rLΩ/c2 = 4vL/c2

r = 6,378.164 km

The formula for a rotating linear segment is:

dt = 2vP/c2, where P = 2L and r = 6,378.164 km


Now, for the rectangular interferometer, the orbital Sagnac effect can be computed as well:

dto = 2voP/c2, where vo = RΩo and R = 150,000,000 km

This can be multiplied by the sun's declination cosδ; however, on the day of the spring or autumn equinox, cosδ = 1.


Applying the analysis provided by A. Michelson to the orbital Sagnac effect, an erroneous final formula will be obtained (the sun's declination term is omitted):

dto = 4AvosinΦ/Rc2 = 4AΩosinΦ/c2

R = 150,000,000 km and A = Lh

But this is equivalent to placing an interferometer having an area of (A x 30/0.465) concentric with the center of rotation of the Earth (or of a turntable).

By contrast, the correct Sagnac effect formula is:

dto = 2voP/c2, where vo = RΩo and R = 150,000,000 km (P = 2L)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 20, 2018, 11:28:59 AM
THE MICHELSON-GALE EXPERIMENT HOAX IX

(http://image.ibb.co/gNughc/kel6.jpg)

The Michelson-Gale experiment used the Coriolis effect formula to calculate the observed fringe shift. However, it was fully equipped to detect the orbital Sagnac effect and also the galactic Sagnac effect, none of which were observed (in addition to the fact that the correct rotational Sagnac phase shift was not recorded/registered either).


The Sagnac phase shift formula used in the GPS satellite signals calculations is also a Coriolis effect equation.

The light signal sent by the GPS satellite to Earth is deflected by the ether drift: a translational motion through the ether.

In a rare admission, the principal proponent of the theory of relativity as it applies to GPS technology acknowledges that the Coriolis-like term of equation (9) is related to the Sagnac effect:

https://books.google.ro/books?id=RW4PCQAAQBAJ&pg=PA399&lpg=PA399&dq=gps+sagnac+light+anisotropy&source=bl&ots=T66rUaUXo1&sig=CmoNUl9KdC1lQqb9pyC13X4Zobg&hl=ro&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi5zYLM9LTZAhVOUlAKHb9UC18Q6AEIcjAI#v=onepage&q=gps%20sagnac%20light%20anisotropy&f=false

(pg. 397)

The ether drift theory incorporates the correction term attributed to the Sagnac effect naturally into the final formula:

http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/apr/article/viewFile/30130/17851

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.651.7591&rep=rep1&type=pdf

The Sagnac "correction" is calculated as follows in the currently accepted model:

"This leads to a simple description of the Sagnac correction: ∆tSagnac is 2ωE/c2 times the area swept out by the electromagnetic pulse as it travels from the GPS transmitter to the receiver, projected onto earth’s equatorial plane."

(http://www.alternativephysics.org/book/img/GPSm2-sagn-meth2.jpg)

The same author also adds a SECOND triangle to the total sum which makes up the area, in another work:

(http://image.ibb.co/dafXoH/kel7.jpg)

Even so, the final formula will feature an angular velocity multiplied by an area of the equatorial projections: this is a Coriolis effect formula (dt = 4ΩA/c2).

And the ether drift theory even includes this "correction" term in the accurate interpretation of the light transmission from a satellite to the surface of the Earth.

It is to be noted that MLET (Modified Lorentz Ether Theory) is false (an ether field which surrounds/encloses the spherical Earth, but does not rotate along with the Earth): the Whittaker potential theory requires both electrogravitational waves (bidirectional longitudinal strings) to rotate with the Earth:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2009680#msg2009680



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 22, 2018, 01:31:12 AM
THE MICHELSON-GALE EXPERIMENT HOAX X

(http://image.ibb.co/j7Q3hc/kel12.jpg)

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1023972214666

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0103091.pdf

Coriolis Force and Sagnac Effect

Because of acting of gravity-like Coriolis force the trajectories of co- and anti-rotating photons have different radii in the rotating reference frame, while in the case of the equal radius the effective gravitational potentials for the photons have to be different.

(http://image.ibb.co/cUTCax/cor1.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/jGVx8H/cor2.jpg)

An interferometer with DIFFERENT RADII (located away from the center of rotation) will manifest the Coriolis force in the form of a phase shift 4AΩ/c2.

This formula is the equivalent of a Sagnac phase shift, where the interferometer is placed concentric with the center of the rotation of the turntable.

The real Sagnac phase shift will feature a linear velocity and the radius of the loop.


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/288491190_SAGNAC_EFFECT_A_consequence_of_conservation_of_action_due_to_gauge_field_global_conformal_invariance_in_a_multiply-joined_topology_of_coherent_fields

SAGNAC EFFECT: A consequence of conservation of action due to gauge field global conformal invariance in a multiply-joined topology of coherent fields


https://books.google.ro/books?id=qsOBhKVM1qYC&pg=PA85&dq=Lakhtakia+Barrett,+T.W.+electromagnetism&hl=ro&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiV3IXAmbnZAhXKJVAKHeebCnUQ6AEIJjAA#v=onepage&q=Lakhtakia%20Barrett%2C%20T.W.%20electromagnetism&f=false

T.W. Barrett, "Electromagnetic Phenomena Not Explained by Maxwell's Equations" pg 6 - 85

The Michelson-Gale experiment detected ONLY the Coriolis effect, and NOT the rotational Sagnac, nor the orbital Sagnac, nor the galactic Sagnac.

Each and every ring laser interferometer located away from the center of rotation will record the Coriolis effect: none of these interferometers have detected the rotational/orbital/galactic Sagnac effects.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 22, 2018, 07:01:42 AM
DEPALMA SPINNING EFFECT ON LONG DISTANCE ARTILLERY PROJECTILES

(http://characterisationexplosiveweapons.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/annexe_29.jpg)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg753387#msg753387 (DePalma spinning ball experiments)

"The precise application of Newton’s laws … have to be restricted to non-rotating mechanical objects in field-free space. In a gravitational field, the possibility of extraction of greater energy by a new mechanical dimension [rotation] opens up the possibility of an anti-gravitational interaction"

Dr. Bruce DePalma, 1977


"Artillery projectiles are spinning at a very high speed when they exit the barrel of the gun. The spinning stabilises the projectile in flight and makes it more accurate."

http://nigelef.tripod.com/fc_ballistics.htm

For artillery projectiles spin rates in the order of 20,000 revolutions per minute are needed, rifle bullets are an order of magnitude greater.

The rotation of the projectile (its spinning rate) will radically alter both its mass and its inertia.

The rotation produces a TORSION FIELD which will attract the Whittaker potential waves (ether longitudinal waves) thus forming an ether vortex around the projectile which will impart antigravitational properties.

The magnitude of this effect is totally unaccounted for by modern science, in fact it is attributed to curvature calculations.

But the DePalma effect can only take place on a flat stationary Earth, since both the gravitational and the antigravitational strings/waves of the electrogravitational field of the Earth must rotate at the same rate above the surface of the Earth.

The Eotvos effect is caused by the rotation of the ether field; a superb study of the seminal paper published by Roland Eotvos on gravitational anomalies almost 100 years ago (his discoveries remain completely unexplained by modern science):

http://mek.oszk.hu/02000/02054/html/onehund.html

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg953747#msg953747 (geocentric Coriolis effect)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 25, 2018, 03:02:27 AM
BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT II

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg759935#msg759935

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1852363#msg1852363

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1913909#msg1913909


Dr. Takaaki Musha
Advanced Space Propulsion Investigation Committee (ASPIC)
Research Engineer on Naval Systems, Technical Research & Development Institute
Honda R&D Institute, Biefeld-Brown effect experiments

http://jnaudin.free.fr/lifters/musha/Musha.pdf

Explanation of dynamical Biefeld-Brown Effect from the standpoint of ZPF field

In 1956, T.T. Brown presented a discovery known as the Biefeld-Bown effect (abbreviated B-B effect) that a sufficiently charged capacitor with dielectrics exhibited unidirectional thrust in the direction of the positive plate.

From the 1st of February until the 1st of March in 1996, the research group of the HONDA R&D Institute conducted experiments to verify the B-B effect with an improved experimental device which rejected the influence of corona discharges and electric wind around the capacitor by setting the capacitor in the insulator oil contained within a metallic vessel . . . The experimental results measured by the Honda research group are shown . . .

. . . The theoretical analysis result suggests that the impulsive electric field applied to the dielectric material may produce a sufficient artificial gravity to attain velocities comparable to chemical rockets.


https://web.archive.org/web/20120710005059/http://www.ovaltech.ca/pdfss/Theoretical_Explanation_of_the_Biefield-Brown_Effect.pdf

Experiments carried out at the HONDA R&D Institute confirm that the Biefeld-Brown effect is real.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 25, 2018, 10:26:59 AM
HAMMAR EXPERIMENT HOAX

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fa/Hammar_experiment.svg/515px-Hammar_experiment.svg.png)

“D. C. Miller explains in his report that the difference between his results and those of other experimenters in the field may be due to entrapping of the ether in the heavily enclosed apparatus of the other investigators, while his own apparatus is quite open to the outside atmosphere. If this explanation be correct, it should be possible to detect a differential light velocity between a light beam in a heavily walled tube with stopped ends held in the direction of the earth's velocity and a light beam just outside and parallel to the tube.”

G.W. Hammar, 1935

Basically, the geometry of the light path is that of a Sagnac interferometer, using an odd number of reflections.

The aether wind would affect the speed of light differently for the shielded arm (encased in a heavy steel tube with lead plugs) and the unshielded arm.

With evident satisfaction, Dr. Adrian Sfarti (UC Berkeley) entitles his paper: "The Wonderful World of Hammar’s Experiment":

http://www.journalrepository.org/media/journals/PSIJ_33/2016/Nov/Sfarti1242016PSIJ29643_1.pdf

However, the entire experiment is a hoax; that is why no fringe shifts were detected, or could have been detected.

G.W. Hammar committed the same error as did A. Michelson and H. Gale: he did not realize that the Sagnac interferometer was located AWAY FROM THE SUPPOSED CENTER OF ROTATION OF THE EARTH. The apparatus was set up two miles south of Moscow, Idaho.

Therefore, no rotation was detected by the Sagnac interferometer: not the rotational Sagnac, nor the orbital Sagnac, nor the galactic Sagnac.

The only detection possible with Hammar's interferometer was the CORIOLIS EFFECT of the ether drift.

But the encased arm of the interferometer could not detect the ether drift at all, just as Dayton Miller had predicted (the CD arm was encased in a heavy walled steel tube with lead plugs).

Even though the interferometer did have two arms which within the context of a spherical Earth hypothesis were connected to two different radii (distance from the center of the Earth to the arms of the interferometer itself), one of the arms could not detect the Coriolis force of the ether drift, due to it being encased in steel and lead.

That is why no fringe shift was detected, or could have been detected.


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 26, 2018, 02:25:58 AM
NIPHER EXPERIMENTS II

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1852840#msg1852840 (part I: the relationship between gravitation and the electric field first observed experimentally by Dr. Francis Nipher)

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0509/0509068.pdf

Experimental Indications of Electro-Gravity

Dr. Timir Datta, University of South Carolina

Nipher experiments revealing the connection between electricity and terrestrial gravity performed in 2003 and 2004.


In view of the results published by Roland Eotvos, Dr. E. Fischbach (Purdue University) has proposed the following modification to the law of universal gravitation:

(http://image.ibb.co/e9fPSc/eot.jpg)

Of course, in the experiments done by R. Eotvos (1906-1909) only a slight gravitational perturbation was measured.

The acoustic levitation of the granite blocks carried out in Tibet showed that the effect of terrestrial gravity was completely canceled out:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1388219#msg1388219

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 26, 2018, 06:07:33 AM
SUPERCONDUCTOR PODKLETNOV EFFECT II

(http://www.holoscience.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2002/05/disc.jpg)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1833949#msg1833949 (part I)

A rapidly spinning disc of superconducting ceramic suspended in the magnetic field of three electric coils, was tested with a variety of materials and objects suspended above it, with measurable and consistent effects. In each case, the objects suspended above the rotating magnetic fields lightened by from 0.5 percent to 2 percent.

When Dr. Eugene Podkletnov increased the rotation speed to 20,000 rpm, the loss of weight became 5%. The highest speed that could be obtained was 30,000 rpm, where the loss of weight was 9% (figures offered by Dr. Podkletnov in the 2004 interview at the Tampere Technical University in Finland).

"In 1995, the Max Planck Institute of Physics did a follow up study, and was able to confirm the results."

https://web.archive.org/web/20190718031631/http://www.enterprisemission.com/images/anti-g6.jpg

https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/9505094.pdf


Impulse Gravity Generator Based on Charged Y Ba2Cu3O7-y Superconductor with Composite Crystal Structure

https://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0108005.pdf

The observed phenomenon appears to be absolutely new and unprecedented in the
literature. It cannot be understood in the framework of general relativity.


Weak gravitation shielding properties of composite bulk Y Ba2Cu3O7-x superconductor
below 70 K under e.m. field


https://arxiv.org/pdf/cond-mat/9701074.pdf

A toroidal disk with an outer diameter of 275 mm and a thickness of 10 mm was prepared using conventional ceramic technology in combination with melt-texture growth. Two solenoids were placed around the disk in order to initiate the current inside it and to rotate the disk about its central axis. Samples placed over the rotating disk initially demonstrated a weight loss of 0.3-0.5%. When the rotation speed was slowly reduced by changing the current in the solenoids, the shielding effect became considerably higher and reached 1.9-2.1% at maximum.


Study of Light Interaction with Gravity Impulses and Measurements of the Speed of Gravity Impulses

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281440634_Study_of_Light_Interaction_with_Gravity_Impulses_and_Measurements_of_the_Speed_of_Gravity_Impulses

An attempt has been made in this work to study the scattering of laser light by the gravity-like impulse produced in an impulse gravity generator (IGG) and also an experiment has been conducted in order to determine the propagation speed of the gravity impulse. The light attenuation was found to last between 34 and 48 ns and to increase with voltage, up to a maximum of 7% at 2000 kV. The propagation time of the pulse over a distance of 1211 m was measured recording the response of two identical piezoelectric sensors connected to two synchronized rubidium atomic clocks. The delay was 63±1 ns, corresponding to a propagation speed of 64c.


"Dr. Podkletnov also describes his “force beam generator” experiment in detail, and provides insights into improvements that he’s made over the last decade to increase the force produced by this experimental gravity-beam. The force beam is generated by passing a high-voltage discharge from a Marx-generator through a YBCO emitter suspended in a magnetic field, and Podkletnov has described it as being powerful enough to knock over objects in the lab, as well as capable of being tuned by even punch holes in solid materials.

Podkletnov maintains that a laboratory installation in Russia has already demonstrated the 4in (10cm) wide beam’s ability to repel objects a kilometre away and that it exhibits negligible power loss at distances of up to 200km."


G-acceleration is a VARIABLE whose value can be decreased in direct proportion to the amount of ether generated (by sound, by double torsion, by a high-electrical field).

As the temperature of the superconductor reaches the level of temperature of the ether, the subquark lattice state of the material will approach that of the baryon state of ether of the atom.

If the superconductor is being rotated at high speed, the Whittaker potential ether longitudinal strings will begin to form a torsion field which will act as a terrestrial gravity shield.

The gravity-beam created by Dr. Podkletnov is able to modify at a much higher speed than normal the ether quantum state of the target (allowing it to reach the baryon state of ether).


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 27, 2018, 12:19:08 AM
DEPALMA SPINNING EFFECT ON LONG DISTANCE ARTILLERY PROJECTILES II

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cb/Dutch_Panzerhaubitz_fires_in_Afghanistan.jpg/1200px-Dutch_Panzerhaubitz_fires_in_Afghanistan.jpg)

It is assumed by modern science that “differences in spin rate do not affect the aerodynamic coefficients”. (Ballistics 2011, 26th International Symposium, pg. 474)

“How far the bullet drops has nothing to do with spinning other than that it keeps it in the most favorable aerodynamic position”.

But spinning has everything to do with the calculation of the range, as proven by the experiments carried out by Dr. Bruce DePalma.

(http://image.ibb.co/fre6Qx/art1.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/et6syH/art2.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/hBYGQx/art3.jpg)

For a spinning projectile, the flat earth expression for the range should be:

R = {vo2(sin 2θo)}/f(k)

k is the variable electrogravitational value, which depends on the altitude, the atmospheric ether tide, the density of ether at a certain altitude, and the spin rate

The curvature factor is ~EQUAL to the antigravitational effect produced by the spin rate of the projectile which forms a torsion field which partially cancels out the g force.

Let vo = 1,000 m/s and θo = 45 degrees (neglecting air drag and other factors such as the Coriolis and the Eotvos effects).

R = [1,0002sin90degrees][{1 + 1,0002cos2(45deg)}/(9.81x6,378,164)}]/9.81 = 102.7514 km

The curvature factor is: 1.007991

Even though f(k) is a nonlinear function of k, let's approximate this factor by k in order to get an estimate:

Rflat earth = 101.937 km

102,751.4 = 1,0002sin90degrees/k

k = 9.73223

"The only explanation for this effect is that both balls are drawing energy into themselves from an unseen source, and the rotating ball is thus “soaking up” more of this energy than its counterpart – energy that would normally exist as gravity, moving down into the earth.

With the addition of torsion-field research we can see that the spinning ball was able to harness naturally spiraling torsion waves in its environment, which gave it an additional supply of energy."

https://depalma.pairsite.com/Absurdity/Absurdity05/SecretOfForceMachine.html

The original Force Machine was constructed in 1971, figure (1). The total weight of the apparatus was 276 lbs. The "active" mass at the rim of the flywheels was 10 lbs. The assembly was suspended from a spring scale and the gyroscopes driven counter-rotating at 7600 r.p.m. Under these conditions the support cylinder was driven at 4 r.p.s. to precess the gyros. A consistent set of experiments repeatably showed 4 - 6 lbs. of weight loss.

“In DePalma’s device, two magnetized gyroscopes were mounted side-by-side within a cylinder, (see next image,) spinning in opposite directions to each other — one clockwise and the other counterclockwise.

Both gyroscopes (here referred to as flywheels) were in the same position, with the bottom of their axles pointing straight downward and the top of their axles straight upward.

The cylinder that held these gyroscopes in place was then also made to rotate from its side, causing the axles of the gyroscopes to continually rotate end-over-end in the vertical plane like spokes in a spinning wheel.

Since the inertial forces generated by the gyroscopes cause them to naturally resist being moved out of position, even more aetheric energy could be harnessed by forcing them to do so. And as we said in the last chapter, defying gravity is as simple as gathering some of the downward-streaming aetheric energy and redirecting it off to the side, like the bending of a hose. This redirection can be accomplished by simple rotation.”

(https://divinecosmos.com/wp-content/uploads/2005/11/forcemachine01.gif)

“Dr. DePalma‘s “Force” machine would initially weigh 276 lbs. before being activated. The gyroscopes would be driven in counter-rotating directions at 7600 rpm each, and then the entire cylinder would be rotated or precessed at 4 revolutions per second. Any movement faster than this would create internal forces great enough to fracture the support axles for the gyroscopes, which would destroy the machine.

Once the Force Machine was running at this speed, it would repeatedly show 4-6 lbs. of weight loss!”


http://depalma.pair.com/gyrodrop.html (experiment carried out by the team of researchers who worked with Dr. Bruce DePalma)

Gyro Drop Experiment

In this experiment a fully enclosed, electrically driven gyroscope is released to fall freely under the influence of gravity. The elapsed time taken to fall a measured distance of 10.617 feet was measured, with the rotor stopped and also with the rotor spinning at approximately 15,000 RPM.

Data was gathered on a Chronometrics Digital Elapsed Dime Clock measuring 1/10,000 second, actuated by two phototransistor sensors placed in the paths of two light beams which were consecutively interrupted by the edge of the casing of the falling gyroscope.

A fully encased, spinning gyroscope drops faster than the identical gyroscope non-spinning, when released to fall along its axis.


The word “curvature” has to be replaced with the phrase “DePalma spinning effect” in the US Naval manual for curvature calculations applied to the range of the projectile:

https://i2.wp.com/mathscinotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/CurvatureTable1.png?resize=768%2C723 (Table of Curvatures for Different Horizontal Ranges)

Rotational bodies have different 'classical' principles such as:

- variable inertia

- variable gravitational acceleration either up or down (the spinning ball launch experiment)


Drag coefficients:

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/802065.pdf

http://astrowww.phys.uvic.ca/~tatum/classmechs/class7.pdf


Coriolis approximation:

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a010816.pdf


Fin-stabilized projectiles are used to extend the range and also to improve maneuverability.

https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/bullets2.htm

https://archive.org/stream/in.ernet.dli.2015.194220/2015.194220.Trajectory-Analysis-Of-A-Fin-Stabilized-Artillery-Projectile#page/n0/mode/1up

https://glosbe.com/en/en/fin%20stabilizer

Fin stabilizers with canards extend the range by nearly double:

https://scialert.net/fulltext/?doi=itj.2014.2658.2665



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 28, 2018, 05:33:15 AM
DEPALMA ACCUTRON EXPERIMENT

https://depalma.pairsite.com/Absurdity/Absurdity09/NatureOfElectricalInduction.html (appendix)

"Dr. Nikolai Kozyrev, a respected Russian astrophysicist, announced almost fifty years ago that he had discovered a new force in physics that he called the “density of time.” He concluded that the rate at which time passes can be altered by other physical processes."

Time not only has a pattern of flow, says Dr. Kozyrev, but also a rate of flow. He calls "the rate of flow" the difference between cause and effect. "As the rate of the time flow through a substance changes, weight is lost," Dr. Kozyrev told us.”

Time is a torsion potential (also called a scalar wave).

Time is the dextrorotatory torsion field (subquark string), or terrestrial gravity.

Anti-time is the laevorotatory torsion field, or antigravity.

The flow of time and anti-time can cause matter to either increase or decrease in weight.

Both torsion potentials/scalar waves form the Whittaker potential.


"DePalma proposed, as a result of his wide-ranging rotational experiments, that "rotating masses" in general set up an "inertial field" in their vicinity (the more widely-used term for this field now, because of how it's accessed, is a "torsion field" -- because "torsion" means literally "rotation")."

(http://www.enterprisemission.com/DePalma-Accutron.jpg)

'What this means is simple.

If measured along the rotational axis (as seen in the diagram - above) ... this "torsion field" from the resulting rotation seemed to increase the inertia of other moving objects (such as the tuning fork inside the Accutron); but, if the watch was rotated 90 degrees -- into the plane of the masses rotation -- the Accutron's tuning fork inertia abruptly decreased ...!

Again, these differences -- measured "within the spin field" -- were NOT slight ... or ambiguous.

A 1000-second measurement period (~17 minutes ...) produced almost a full second (0.9 sec) lag in the Accutron's previous time setting; the normal drift rate of the watch -- as measured by DePalma before and after each experimental "run" -- was about 0.25 second per a four hour period .... The effect of a nearby, rotationally generated "inertial field" on the Accutron's vibrating tuning fork -- a field created solely by spinning a ~30-lb aluminum/steel disc, at almost 8000 rpm -- was definitely NOT "buried in the noise!""


"Kozyrev’s work was so awesome and extraordinary in its implications, not only for the development of the foundations of theoretical physics, but also for its dangerous potential applications, that the Soviet leadership wisely classified it at the very highest levels. Indeed, it was Kozyrev, in fact, who laid the experimental basis and outlined the theory of Soviet research into that area of physics often called “scalar” physics, but it might equally, and probably with more justification, be called “torsion” physics.

Kozyrev’s analysis “brought him to a conclusion that the processes of thermonuclear
synthesis cannot serve as a main source of stellar energy.” In other words, the fusion-gravity geometry model of standard stellar processes — a geometric model inspired in large part by Einstein’s General Relativity and extrapolations from it performed by other scientists — was simply not able to account for the enormous energy pouring out of stars. Some other mechanism altogether was at work.

Dr. Kozyrev outlined the fundamentals of his whole physics and philosophical approach in a paper first published in 1967: “The Possibility of Experimental Study of the Properties of Time.” The title itself is suggestive, and breathtaking enough. But the contents of the paper — especially for one reared in the milieu of post-relativistic physics — as Dr. Kozyrev like all academic physicists was, is even more stunning. He announces his philosophy, and program, in no uncertain terms:

In reality, the exact sciences negate the existence in time of any other qualities other than the simplest quality of “duration” or time intervals…. This quality of time is similar to the spatial interval. The theory of relativity by Einstein made this analogy more profound, considering time intervals and space as components of a 4-dimensional interval of a Minkowski universe. Only the…geometry of the Minkowki universe differentiates the time interval from the space interval. Under such a conception, time is scalar and quite passive. It only supplements the spatial arena, against which the events of the universe are played out. Owing to the scalarity of time, in the equations of theoretical mechanics the future is not separated from the past; hence, the causes are not separated from the results. In the result, classical mechanics brings to the universe a strictly deterministic, but deprived causality. At the same time, causality comprises the most important quality of the real world.

1. Time is not merely a “scalar” or “one-dimensional entity” in the geometry of space-time; it is not, therefore, to be viewed in the sense that the geometry of General Relativity — the Minkowski space — or for that matter, most physical theory, views it, namely, as merely duration; and,

2. That because physics has tended throughout the centuries to view time in only this way — as mere duration — modern physics in particular has no really adequate way to distinguish cause from effect with formal, mathematical, explicitness.

What Einstein did in his General Theory of Relativity, as many know, is that he made time a fourth dimension in the mathematical description of an object, since any physical object not only existed in space, but endured in time.

But this dimensionless “duration-only” description of time was completely inadequate, according to Dr. Kozyrev, for by pointing out the “scalarity” of time, he is simply pointing to the obvious fact that as a “dimensionless” entity it is not comprised of further “parts,” so to speak. One cannot therefore adequately distinguish a “cause” from its “effect” within mathematical physics with any degree of formal, mathematical precision, since this idea of “mere duration” is incapable of further formal analysis. Time, on this physical view, was a passive player, and not an active contributor, to physical processes and forces. It was merely a backdrop or stage on which those processes and forces were played out. By viewing time as a non-scalar, Kozyrev has announced his philosophy, and his program: time is active and possessed of its own inherent parts and qualities, and experimental physics must investigate these with all the scientific rigor as it investigated other active forces and properties in previous centuries. With this insight, in other words, Kozyrev announced a wholesale assault on two of the foundations of modern physics and some of its hidden, and very counterintuitive, assumptions: Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics.

To put it differently, since Kozyrev views time as an active participant in systems, he views the systems of physical processes in a profoundly different way from standard physical mechanics, in that for him they are (1) open systems and (2) systems more or less far from equilibrium. More is involved, in other words, in the notions of cause and effect than the merely statistical probabilities of standard quantum mechanics.

Since time is not, on Kozyrev’s view, merely a dimensionless scalar, this means in turn that it can have, like a vector of force in ordinary mathematical physics, a direction, a movement from one point to another, or what he calls, “the directivity of time.” It is this non-scalar, almost vector-like quality that Kozyrev means when he states that time is in its own right a kind of physical force, hitherto not adequately understood by contemporary physics as an exact science, but once understood when in its infancy centuries ago as a natural science. On this more ancient “teleological” view, “causality is linked in the closest way with the properties of time, specifically with the difference in the future and the past.”

Time enters a system through the cause to the effect. The rotation alters the possibility of this inflow, and, as a result, the time pattern can create additional stresses in the system. These variations produce the time pattern. From this it follows that time has energy.

Note that one aspect of Kozyrev’s basic theoretical conception was in fact confirmed, namely, that the local space of a system itself appeared to have a spin orientation; it was not simply a “void with a curvature,” as the post-Einstein popular imagination would have it, but it was a space with a dynamic property: an orientation to rotation.

Kozyrev leaves nothing to chance and spells out the implications of these observations and experimental data quite clearly: “Hence, time possesses not only energy but also a rotation moment which it can transmit to a system.""

(from The Philosopher's Stone by J. Farrell)



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 28, 2018, 12:16:40 PM
EULER'S PRESSURE GRAVITY

In the official chronology of history, one can find these most remarkable passages in the works attributed to Euler, which clearly describe the real cause of terrestrial gravity:

“Now, in whatever way we imagine the cause of gravity, as it is the effect of the pressure of a fluid, the force with which each molecule is pushed will always be proportional to the extension or the volume of that molecule. Indeed it is a general rule of hydrostatics that fluids act according to the volumes: a body immersed in water is always pushed by a force equal to the weight of an equal volume of water, but in an opposite direction.”

“the matter which constitutes the subtle fluid, cause of the gravity, is of an utterly different nature from the matter, of which all sensible bodies are composed. There will hence be two kinds of matter, one which provides the stuff to all sensible bodies, and of which all particles have the same [high] density [...]; the other kind of matter will be that of which the subtle fluid, which causes gravity, and which we name ether, is composed of. It is probable that this matter has always the same degree of density, but that this degree is incomparably smaller than that of the first kind.”

L. Euler, “Recherches physiques sur la nature des moindres parties de la matiere,” in Leonhardi Euleri Opera Omnia, Series Tertia, Pars Prima (B. G. Teubner, Leipzig and Bern 1911), pp. 3–15

“Those who attribute gravity to an attractive force of the Earth base their opinion mainly on the fact that otherwise no origin could be displayed for this force. But since we proved that all bodies are surrounded with ether and are pressed by the elastic force of the latter, we do not need to search elsewhere the origin of gravity. Only if the pressure of the ether would be everywhere the same, which assignment is indistinguishable from that of its equilibrium, would the bodies be equally pressed from every side, and thus would not be induced in any motion. But if we assume that the ether around the Earth is not in equilibrium, and that instead its pressure becomes smaller as one comes closer to the Earth, then any given body must experience a stronger pressure downwards on its superior surface that it does upwards on its inferior surface; it follows that the downwards pressure will have the advantage and hence that the body will really be pushed downwards, which effect we call gravity, and the downwards-pushing force the weight of the body.”

L. Euler, “Von der Schwere und den Kraften so auf die himmlischen Korper wirken,” in Leonhardi Euleri Opera Omnia, Series Tertia, Pars Prima (B. G. Teubner, Leipzig and Bern 1911), pp. 149–156

(translation by Dr. M. Arminjon)

Dr. Arminjon (CNRS/Universite Joseph Fourier/Institut National Polytechnique de Grenoble) has published this version of Euler's ether pressure gravity:

g = gradpep

∆pe = 4πGρρe

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1852870#msg1852870 (Subquark g force: gradient ether gravitation, Newton's ether pressure theory)

In the same official chronology of history, Newton totally based his terrestrial gravitation theory on magnetism:

http://www.gsjournal.net/old/science/ricker9.pdf (“Hypothesis Non Fingo” The Nature of Newton’s Hypothesis and The Concept Of Attraction sections)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 01, 2018, 12:34:03 AM
HYDRODYNAMIC GRAVITY EQUATION

(http://image.ibb.co/hhbysc/koz1.jpg)

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.424.4364&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Gravitational Induction and the Gyroscopic Force
(A hydrodynamical theory of gravity that accounts for the gyroscopic force)


The true terrestrial gravitational equation must include additional terms which can account for the DePalma/Kozyrev experiments and also for the Coriolis force effect.

"A general theory of gravity based on hydrodynamical principles which introduces three additional components that are not catered for by Newton’s law of gravitation. These three components link gravity directly with electromagnetism as well as fully accounting for the induced gyroscopic force in terms of the Coriolis force.

Newton’s law of gravitation is only concerned with the radial component of gravity.

This equation enables us to extract an enormous amount of information out of what is officially considered to be nothing at all. To begin with, equation (1) assumes the existence of an inertial frame of reference in which the background stars appear to be fixed. This implies the existence of some kind of aethereal medium with which motion is measured to be relative to. The very concepts of position, velocity, and acceleration, imply the existence of particles moving in that aethereal medium. Equation (1) further tells us about the nature of the forces which act between particles in the aether, in relation to position, velocity, angular velocity, and angular acceleration. This connectivity between the aether and particles, manifested in equation (1) suggests that particles and the aether are two parts of the same overall entity."

(http://image.ibb.co/bJJHkx/acc1.jpg)

When equation (1) was derived, it was assumed that empty space is rigid. We will now assume that space is dynamical and replace angular velocity ω with the vorticity vector H which is related to ω through the equation:

(http://image.ibb.co/bXW3Qx/acc2.jpg)

Since GM/r2 is the totally incorrect gravitational equation, this term must be replaced by the ether pressure:

gradpep

A hydrodynamical theory of gravity in which the aether imparts its acceleration to a particle.

(http://image.ibb.co/bJFV5x/acc3.jpg)

This equation accounts FOR ALL OF THE PHENOMENA left unexplained by Newton's single term gravitational formula: the DePalma/Kozyrev experiments, the Sagnac/Coriolis effect, the gravitational/magnetic Aharonov-Bohm effect, the Podkletnov effect, the Biefeld-Brown effect, the Nipher effect.

"We can summarize the current deficiencies in both gravitational theory and electromagnetic theory.

In gravitation, we are missing both the Coriolis/gyroscopic component and the angular acceleration component. The Coriolis/gyroscopic component is sadly missing from all contemporary accounts relating to the theory of gyroscopes."

The gravitoelectromagnetism equations derived from the TGR only include the gravitational field strength/torsion field, and because it is assumed that terrestrial gravitation is a force of attraction, they can only apply to very special situations.

Using advanced topology, a generalized Lorentz force can be derived which also includes FOUR COMPONENTS, among which are the DePalma/Kozyrev force field terms:

http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_5970.pdf

The g acceleration is a VARIABLE: the three additional components of the correct gravitational equation include the contributions of the DePalma/Kozyrev force term, the Sagnac/Coriolis term and are expressed through the vorticity equation.


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 02, 2018, 08:02:06 AM
HYDRODYNAMIC GRAVITY EQUATION II

(http://www.zenstillness.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/self500.jpg)

The difference in aether pressure generates an aether flow velocity. The difference in the aether flow velocities creates a pressure difference according to Bernoulli’s equation (the pressure in a fluid decreases as its velocity increases).

Bernoulli’s equation is used to relate the aether steady flow velocity change and the aether pressure change. A key concept of calculating universal gravity force is that the pressure acting on an object is induced by aether steady flow velocity variation.

Aether pressure will fluctuate with aether steady flow velocity.

T.-W. Lin (National Taiwan University)
H. Lin (General Motors Global Propulsion System)


Bernoulli’s Principle describes the inverse relationship between speed and pressure.


All that remains to be described is the BOUNDARY LAYER between the spinning ball (capacitor/rotating superconductor magnet) and the ether torsion field.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 02, 2018, 10:06:10 AM
HYDRODYNAMIC GRAVITY EQUATION III: IMPLOSION OF THE ATOM

(https://quantumunderground.files.wordpress.com/2015/11/2zs8u4p.jpg?w=825&h=510&crop=1)

Terrestrial gravity represents the dextrorotatory string of the Whittaker potential waves. It exerts a force of pressure on matter. The effects attributed to “global warming” are a direct consequence of the growth of the rate of vibration of the gravitational strings: they increase both the desertification phenomena and the disintegration of the glaciers. The anti-gravitational string can be brought into play by double torsion, sound and the application of high-electrical fields. There is a direct relationship between the addition of the anti-gravitational ether energy and the decrease in the action/effects of the  gravitational dextrorotatory strings upon matter.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1830644#msg1830644 (implosion of the atom, part I)

The rotation/spinning at a high rate of an object will cause the atoms to slightly implode: to achieve the baryon state of ether. That is, the centrifugal action of the rotation will cause the normal configuration of the atom (groups of 18 subquarks) to change into groups of 9 subquarks (baryons, fourth state of ether; mesons are the third state of ether, quarks the second state, and subquarks represent the first position of ether).  The outer surface (or edge) of the object will have a higher distribution of the slightly imploded atoms, thus attracting the Whittaker potential ether waves to the rotating body. The ether waves will form a torsion field around the object, partially shielding it from the influence/effect of the pressure gravity (dextrorotatory string), thus resulting in a lower value of the g acceleration.

In the Biefeld-Brown effect, the charging of the capacitor under high voltage, will activate the laevorotatory subquarks of the capacitor causing a slight implosion of the object, and the forming of a torsion field around it, which will act as a gravity shield.

The shape of the torsion field will be that of two overlapping cones:

(https://basharspacetimeantenna.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/rendered-sta.jpg)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 03, 2018, 12:01:55 AM
HYDRODYNAMIC GRAVITY EQUATION IV: TESLA CONICAL COILS

(https://www-tc.pbs.org/tesla/ins/images/tc_cone02.jpg)
Tesla’s conical coil, demonstrated in his lab in 1895.

http://www.pbs.org/tesla/ins/tcpop03.html

Tesla cone coil, patent #593,138:

(https://image.jimcdn.com/app/cms/image/transf/none/path/s40c423127565d23a/image/i3ec288210b996dc6/version/1386125750/image.png)

The conical coil was one of Tesla’s secrets which he disclosed only to his best friend, Walter Russell. The overlapping conical coils design allows for the creation of ball lightning spheres, acts as a plasma generator, and can generate an antigravity torsion field.

The overlapping coils model acts as a plasma pinch:

https://www.plasma-universe.com/Pinch

There is also the potential pinch (force-free ball lightning pinch).

Ball lightning created at the Jnaudin Labs:

http://jlnlabs.online.fr/plasma/gmrtst/index.htm

“What Tesla discovered in 1900 with his high voltage experiments is that he could diminish the gravity force dominating in our world simply with decompressing the ether where there is no law of gravity. In other words he was decompressing the ether with his special built cone coils producing high velocity voltage with brush discharge around the object.”

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/d9/be/5c/d9be5c47c4e6601b73218f0a6f5ae1a5.jpg)

Walter Russell’s overlapping coil design:

http://www.svpvril.com/Cosmology/vortexsphere.gif

(http://image.ibb.co/bVZL8S/con1.jpg)

http://www.rexresearch.com/russellcoil/russellcoil.htm

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 05, 2018, 03:47:23 AM
HYDRODYNAMIC GRAVITY EQUATION V

(https://www.electricaltechnology.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/What-is-a-Solenoid-and-Solenoid-Magnetic-Field--660x330.jpg)

The atmosphere of the flat earth is stationary.

The field of ether rotates above the flat surface of the Earth causing the Coriolis force, and also it levitates the clouds and the gases (using the Biefeld-Brown effect), generating the barometer pressure paradox.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg759968#msg759968 (levitation of cumulonimbus clouds which weigh one billion tons)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1707294#msg1707294 (barometer pressure paradox)

Atmospheric pressure IS ether pressure: the radiation pressure of the ether waves (Whittaker potential bidirectional longitudinal strings which flow through subquark transverse waves).

The height of the spherical cap which is the shape of the Earth up to the first dome is some 10km-25km (10,000m-25,000m).

Modern science tells us that the weight of a column of air which has a cross section of 1 square inch and which stretches from the surface of the Earth to the top of the atmosphere (some 80 km in altitude) is 14.7 pounds.

Therefore, given the figure of the real height of the atmosphere (~10km-25km), it is clear that the 14.7 lbs/in2 value is caused by a totally different factor: the radiation pressure of the  ether.

Any object (in the normal state of matter) in the atmosphere (or on the surface of the Earth) will be pushed down by the radiation pressure of the ether.

p = ρhg

p = 6.65kg/0.0645m2

h = 10,000-25,000 m

The figure for the vacuum permeability commonly used by modern science is 1.2566 x 10-6. However, this figure has to be wrong, since the speed of the longitudinal ether strings (which travel through the transverse ether waves) can be much greater than the speed of light.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1918701#msg1918701 (the original dynamical J.C. Maxwell equations are invariant under Galilean transformations, permitting superluminal speeds)

(https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/888575bf73fe5912c42d57ea74d248d4e2324a2f)

For superluminal speeds, the electric permittivity has to be much lower, while the value of the magnetic permeability has to be higher (these figures arise due to change of units from Gaussian to SI).

(http://images.slideplayer.com/47/11722253/slides/slide_2.jpg)

A column of water 32.2' (9.81 m) (cross-section 1 square inch) generates a pressure at the bottom of one atmosphere.

That is, this value will be equal to that of the g acceleration. Modern science assumes that the proportions of the ingredients of the air (distribution of gases) have varied since the formation of the Earth, yet we are to believe that now the atmospheric pressure on a column of water will generate a height of the liquid in the glass tube of exactly 9.81 m (the value of the g acceleration).



http://www.orgonelab.org/newtonletter.htm (I. Newton letter to R. Boyle)

4. When two bodies moving towards one another come near together, I suppose the aether between them to grow rarer than before, and the spaces of its graduated rarity to extend further from the superficies of the bodies towards one another; and this, by reason that the aether cannot move and play up and down so freely in the strait passage between the bodies, as it could before they came so near together.

5. Now, from the fourth supposition it follows, that when two bodies approaching one another come so near together as to make the aether between them begin to rarefy, they will begin to have a reluctance from being brought nearer together, and an endeavour to recede from one another; which reluctance and endeavour will increase as they come nearer together, because thereby they cause the interjacent aether to rarefy more and more. But at length, when they come so near together that the excess of pressure of the external aether which surrounds the bodies, above that of the rarefied aether, which is between them, is so great as to overcome the reluctance which the bodies have from being brought together; then will that excess of pressure drive them with violence together, and make them adhere strongly to one another, as was said in the second supposition.

Terrestrial ether pressure gravity equations using the displaced volumes:

http://bourabai.kz/gorbatz/gravity-e.htm

Terrestrial ether pressure gravity equations using ether velocity and pressure:

http://aethermechanics.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Newtons-Laws-of-Motion-Based-Substantial-Aether-Theory-of-the-Universal-Gravity-Force.pdf

Subquark g force:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1852870#msg1852870

1 bar = 0.98692 atm

π2 = 9.8696

760 mm = 29.92 sacred inches = 47 sc

The Navier-Stokes equations for the aether fluid:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1501.06763.pdf

Physical vacuum is a special superfluid medium
Dr. Valeriy I. Sbitnev
St. Petersburg B. P. Konstantinov Nuclear Physics Institute, NRC Kurchatov Institute, UC Berkeley

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 07, 2018, 05:07:13 AM
HYDRODYNAMIC GRAVITY EQUATION VI

(http://image.ibb.co/mj6dk7/scalar_waves.jpg)

The flow of longitudinal boson strings (superpotential) through subquark transverse waves (potential).

The g acceleration is a variable: increasing the velocity/angular acceleration will decrease the pressure and the g acceleration.


g = (-P/ρh + rH2/4)radial + (vXH + (1/2)rdH/dt)tangential


P/ρ + v2/2 = const

P/ρ + v2/2 + hg = const

Two other additional terms have to be added to the g equation, for the Biefeld-Brown effect (the vorticity of the electromagnetic potential) and for the acoustic levitation (the vorticity of the superpotential).


A clear distinction has to be made between the density and the impedance of transverse waves (Hertzian waves) and the density and the impedance of longitudinal strings (non-Hertzian waves).

http://bourabai.kz/gorbatz/ether-e06.htm

The density of the transverse waves will decrease as the density of the longitudinal strings which will form a torsion field (ball lightning) will increase.


Z = ρ x c = (μ00)1/2

c = (1/μ0ε0)1/2

ρ = Z/c = μ0

As the velocity increases, the density of the longitudinal waves will increase, while the g acceleration and the pressure will decrease.

The vacuum of space is a Whittaker superpotential lattice of superluminal boson strings.

The g acceleration can be modified if the longitudinal boson strings can be activated.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1832699#msg1832699 (the nuclear tokamak activates 1014 laevorotatory subquarks/positrons)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 10, 2018, 06:41:57 AM
HYDRODYNAMIC GRAVITY EQUATION VII

(http://image.ibb.co/ccmwQ7/vortex3.jpg)

A magnetic skyrmion has been produced in a laboratory for the first time:

http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/advances/4/3/eaao3820.full.pdf

"Skyrmions are the name of a general class of particles that are made by twisting a field. When this field is a magnetic field, the skyrmions are called magnetic skyrmions."

https://www.livescience.com/61946-ball-lightning-quantum-particle.html

http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/4/3/eaao3820.full

Magnetic fields and ball lightning:

https://www.nature.com/articles/243512b0

https://www.nature.com/articles/383032a0


The Tunguska ball lighthing spheres had approximately 100 meters in diameter.

"Tesla’s hypothesis on the origin and maintenance of fireballs includes some points which are also to be found in the most recent theories, but it also bears the stamp of the time. For instance, Tesla considers that the initial energy of the nucleus is not sufficient to maintain the fireball, but that there must be an external source of energy."

The geomagnetic disturbances recorded from June 27, 1908 to June 30, 1908:

http://tunguska.tsc.ru/f/4780/MainPart/7-The-Third-Key.pdf

Minutes after the explosion, a magnetic storm began that lasted some five hours.

N. Tesla could create ball lightning spheres with a diameter of 3 cm in a laboratory. This means that Tesla used a very large scale interferometry to produce the two spheres at a significant distance from his laboratory, and also create a huge magnetic permeability factor to activate the longitudinal boson strings which formed a torsion field around each ball lightning sphere reaching a diameter of some 100 meters. The diameter of the two spheres increased in size from 3 cm to 100 meters using the Whittaker potential strings, the entire phenomenon produced the recorded geomagnetic disturbances.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1995026#msg1995026

The Heaviside curl flow (longitudinal strings):

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2001928#msg2001928


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 12, 2018, 02:33:30 AM
HYDRODYNAMIC GRAVITY EQUATION VIII

(http://www.weare1.us/Babbitt%20color.jpg)

ε02.4π = G

2.4π = 5.34 x 1.4134725 = 4.8/sc

ε0 = 8.854187817 x 10-12 s4a2/m3kg = vacuum permittivity (transverse/vectorial waves)

ε002 = g(π/2 - 1)

π/2 - 1 = 1/1sc - 1

µ0 = 1.25663706 x 10-6 mkg/s2a2 = vacuum permeability (transverse/vectorial waves)

µ02(1/1sc[1 - 1sc])g = G

In the Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism (article 5, chapter 1), J.C. Maxwell notices that mass may be expressed in terms of length and time: M = L3/T2.

This proves immediately that G is dimensionless:

http://milesmathis.com/ug.html

Thus, just like the official chronology of history informs us, one can proceed along the same lines and reasoning offered by Newton, and assign the proper units to the constants 2.4π and (π/2 - 1).

The sacred cubit is a fundamental physical quantity constant: it represents the wavelength across which the two Riemann zeta functions propagate inside a boson.

h = 6.62607004 x 10-34 J s = 5/(0.534 x 1.4134725) x 10-34 J s (Planck constant)

(6.62607004 x 10-35)1/8 = 5.3414 x 10-5

lP = 1.616229 x 10-35 m = 2.5426sc x 10-35m = 4sc2 x 10-35 (Planck length)

2.5424 = one sacred inch

0.6356 = one sacred cubit


G acceleration is an increased rate of absorption of aether. Aether flowing into the dextrorotatory vortices of matter is terrestrial gravity; matter, flowing rapidly through ether/aether, acceleration, is experienced as the g force.

An object in free fall gains kinetic energy as evidenced by the acceleration (a measure of the amount of aether flowing through the dextrorotatory receptive vortices of the subquarks).

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1852870#msg1852870 (subquark g force)


Both g and G are variables, as are the vacuum permittivity and the vacuum permeability of the transverse waves. Once the longitudinal strings are activated, this variability increases.

g = (-G/{µ02(1/1sc[1 - 1sc])} + rH2/4)radial + (vXH + (1/2)rdH/dt)tangential + (AxX)Biefeld-Brown + (SxX)acoustic levitation

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 13, 2018, 01:02:33 AM
HYDRODYNAMIC GRAVITY EQUATION IX

(https://i.pinimg.com/736x/cf/66/c2/cf66c243efa41a015a7bb5e46845dfb2.jpg)
Thames Water Barometer

The height of the liquid column does not rise because of atmospheric pressure. It is an extraordinary antigravitational effect and a proof of the existence of laevorotatory subquark strings.

At a higher altitude the laevorotatory longitudinal strings have a greater than normal rate of vibration, while the pressure of the dextrorotatory strings decreases.

(http://images.slideplayer.com/34/10210042/slides/slide_19.jpg)

At the higher altitude, the antigravitational strings have a greater effect on the air inside the plastic bottle; at the lower elevation, the dextrorotatory receptive vortices of the atoms of air inside the container will be activated to a greater extent, practically causing the plastic bottle to implode.

The antigravitational force is acting permanently on  matter; it causes the tidal waves of the ocean. It is able to counteract the g force in liquids which can flow through a vertical tube/conduit/capillary:  (for a vertical tube, h = gk/ρ, where k = 1 for water). The brownian motion in gases is caused by the effect of these telluric currents.

http://www.rsarchive.org/RelArtic/Marinelli/ (the heart is not a pump)

(http://www.phys.ufl.edu/demo/2_FluidMechanics/B_StaticsFluids/MercuryBarometer.jpg)

A simple mercury barometer constitutes the most direct evidence of the existence of antigravitational waves/strings.

Dr. E. Podkletnov placed a mercury manometer (similar to a barometer) over the superconducting disc and recorded a 4-mm reduction in air pressure, because the air itself had been reduced in weight. Then he took the manometer upstairs to the lab above his and found exactly the same result - as if the equipment were generating an invisible column of low gravity extending upward indefinitely into space.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2031798#msg2031798

“A column of air one square meter in cross section is said to weigh over 100,000 Newtons or 10.2 metric tonnes or 11.2 (short) tons at sea level. This leads any child to ask how the human body can stand up under so much weight. And if we do a websearch, we do indeed find an answer for children at a NASA information site:

Why doesn't all that pressure squash me? Remember that you have air inside your body too, that air balances out the pressure outside so you stay nice and firm and not squishy.

That answer is so misleading I think we can call it an outright lie. The human body is not filled with air, except in the case of flatulent answers like this. The body is about 62% water, so the water must equalize most of any air pressure that exists. The body is made up of cells, remember, and cells are not filled with air. Cells can be as much as 90% water. Yes, the body contains oxygen that it gets from the air, but this oxygen is dissolved in the blood. It does not persist as air or continue to have air pressure once it enters the blood stream. Your lungs are the only things “filled with air” and only when you breathe in. If the air in your lungs was equalizing several tons of pressure, then when you breathed out your body would implode.

Let's go to a different sort of website: David Esker's site, which is often quite informative. David says this about atmospheric pressure:

The area on the face of an average adult's hand is about 0.0116 m2 or 18.0 square inches so there is about 1200 N (270 pounds) of force bearing down on an average adult human hand. Since the pressure is the same for both inside and outside of us, the net forces balance out to zero. Rather than weighing us down, we are indifferent to this force.

We may be indifferent to this force, but David should not be so indifferent to the questions begged here. If we have 270 pounds bearing down on one hand, why doesn't that force register on a normal scale? Go look at your bathroom scale. The atmosphere should be pressing down on that scale right now. Why doesn't it register a number? That scale is probably about a square foot, so it should register about a ton, or 2,000 pounds. Why don't we have to re-zero all bathroom scales to 2,000 pounds? If we did that, wouldn't that mean that I really weigh 2,170 lbs?

The only remaining dodge at this point is for the mainstream scientist to mimic the NASA feint and claim the scale is full of air. “For the scale to compress, there must be space underneath it, and that space is filled with air. The pressure underneath the scale equals the pressure above it, so it doesn't register the weight of the air.” This ridiculous argument is actually the accepted one: I am not making it up. The problem, if you don't already see it, is that these scientists have claimed the human body is also filled with one atmosphere of pressure, from air or otherwise; and if we weigh that body, it is standing on a scale also “floating” on air. Therefore the human body should also weigh nothing on the scale, according to this logic. If a column of air weighing 11 tons can be completely levitated by air pressure, why not a 170 pound man? The experts might say it is a matter of density, but neither Newton's nor Einstein's equations have a density variable in them. The force of gravity is supposed to be a function of mass, not density. If it is a matter of density, how does the field know I am denser than the column of air? Mr. Gravity is looking up at me and the column from underneath: how does he know I have more density than the column of air?

Or, return to David Esker's example. If I put my hand flat on a table, he claims there is 270 pounds of force bearing down on it. My hand is acting like a scale, and it “feels” 270 pounds of weight. But, like the scale, my hand is already pressurized. Why does my hand feel the weight but not the scale? If I lift my hand a fraction of an inch off the table, there is now air underneath it. Is my hand now equalized, like the scale? Do I now feel no force from the atmosphere? If I feel no force from the atmosphere, why does my hand not swell up to twice its size, like an astronaut in a hard vacuum without a spacesuit?

What if I lay my hand on the scale: am I to believe that my hand feels the force but not the scale? One of these scientists answered me that the top of my hand equalized the weight of the air, so that it was not transferred to the scale. The problem here, if you cannot see it already, is that if the top of my hand is capable of pushing back with 270 pounds of force, the bottom of my hand should be, too. In which case the scale will be feeling that force.

These scientists want us to believe that if we removed the atmosphere, we could wear cows as hats without stooping and could jump up to the clouds just by the strength of our calf muscles. If my outstretched arm can resist 800 pounds of atmospheric weight, then, without the atmosphere, I should be able to lift 800 pounds with one hand. Do you believe that? I don't. Can you lift 300 pounds with one arm, straight out to the side, on the top of a tall mountain? You should be able to, according to their math. Can you even lift a third more weight than normal at the top of a tall mountain? No, and it has nothing to do with being shagged out from lack of oxygen.

Let me explain what I mean by “levitating force.” Current theory tries to explain the zero-weight of the atmosphere on scales by one of two dodges. I have already ridiculed one dodge. The other dodge is that the lower atmosphere levitates the upper atmosphere, via air pressure. Each level is levitated by the level below it. The lowest level of the atmosphere is in equilibrium, being caught between the upper levels and the surface of the Earth. The air pressure of this lowest level pushes equally against the Earth and the upper levels, so the net force is zero. Scales exist in this lowest level, so they do not register a weight or force.

Again, I did not make this up. Many or most people are satisfied with that kind of answer, which makes one frightened for the future. Even someone with the intelligence of David Esker is satisfied with that kind of answer. He has not seen fit to question it. In fact, NO ONE has questioned it, that I know of. As I have shown in my book, hundreds of extremely transparent questions are begged in broad daylight, and thousands of truly despicable answers are posted to simple questions—as above with NASA—and no one ever budges an inch. Not only does your average web surfer not blink an eye, all the Russells and Feynmans and Godels and Hilberts and Wiles have passed them by without a pause—too busy with fake math to notice that the atmosphere doesn't register on a scale and things like that.

But just stop and analyze that answer for a moment. Gasses are hard to picture, so let us replace that lowest level of the atmosphere by Atlas. Say we let Atlas hold up the atmosphere. He puts one hand on the Earth and holds the atmosphere up with the other hand. Like the gas, he would create an equal and opposite force in each direction. And, also like the gas, we could sum those forces. Since they are in vector opposition, the vertical forces would sum to zero. So far so good. But now let us put a scale under his hand on the Earth. According to the answer above, the scale would read nothing, since the forces have summed to zero. Do you still believe that? Do you really think that one hand of Atlas could hold up the sky without creating any pressure on that scale with the other hand? If you believe it, you must also believe in the sky hook.

No, we have a real problem here. We have a reverse Chicken Little problem, since the standard model cannot explain why the sky is not falling. The sky has mass, so it should have weight, but it registers nothing on the scale. How is that possible? How can a column of air that weighs 11 tons fail to fall or register on a scale? Anything else that weighed 11 tons would fall and would register on the scale. If you propose that air pressure levitates the column of air, you must explain why that same air pressure does not levitate an elephant. If you claim that it is because there isn't enough air under the elephant to do the job, you imply that more air might do the job. If we took the elephant up to an altitude of five miles, would he be levitated then? Would he be partially levitated?

And that brings us back to the air in the scale. It was claimed above that the air in or under the scale was enough to levitate the 11 ton column of air. If the air under the scale can levitate an 11 ton column of air, why can it not levitate a 4 ton elephant?”


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 17, 2018, 03:39:46 AM
SUPERCONDUCTOR PODKLETNOV EFFECT III

(https://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Uploads/Graphics/001-1102181320-antigravity-podkletnov.jpg)

Dr. Podkletnov offered more details regarding the gravity shielding experiment to Nick Cook (Aviation Editor of Jane's Defence Weekly, The Hunt for the Zero Point):

(http://image.ibb.co/cdB9qH/podk1.jpg)

Using 30 cm discs (so strong that the president of Toshiba had been able to stand on one without breaking it) and a rotational speed of ~50,000 rpm, Dr. Podkletnov achieved the full Biefeld-Brown effect (" the disc experiences so much weight loss that it actually takes off").

A similar rotational speed was used during the Kronos Projekt to implode the mercury atoms:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1773379#msg1773379

(http://bell.greyfalcon.us/pictures/BELL1111.jpg)

The rotational speed actually used, I believe, was ~53,440 rpm, and this is directly related to the hydrodynamic gravity equation.

Interview with Dr. Eugene Podkletnov (2004, Tampere University):



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 17, 2018, 09:09:28 AM
IMPLOSION OF THE MERCURY ATOM

(http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/GR000036.gif)

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr06.htm

Density of mercury: 13,610 kg/m3

Density of water: 1,000 kg/m3


G = (5 x 2.67)10-11/2 = 5.34 x 1.25 x 10-11

h (Planck constant) = 2.676/sc2 x 10-34 = (5.343 x 2)/(4sc) x 10-34

lp (Planck length) = 4sc2 x 10-35

h/lP = (5.343 x 10)/8sc4


10-12/2 x g x 1.361 = G = (5sc x 5.343)/2.5424 x 10-11 = (50 x 1.361)/16sc x 10-11

5.343 x 0.25424 = 1.361

(height/radius of the baryon) x g x density of mercury = pressure (value of G)

That is, if the normal pressure can be reduced to that of the value of G, then the density of mercury will decrease by a factor of 13.61 (density of water), and the value of g will also decrease (g x sc). As always, the units can be added later (as noted before, G is actually dimensionless).

P + ρv2/2 + ρhg = const

P = ρhg = G

G + ρv2/2 + G = const

If P decreases all the way to a value equivalent to that of G, then v must increase by a very large amount.

53,4882 = 2,861,000,000 (2.861 displacement factor of the Gizeh pyramid, 286.1 = 450 sc)

G x 53,4322 = 10/sc

If the rotational speed is increased to 53,488 rpm, then the atom of mercury will implode to the first state of ether (baryon ether): its density will decrease by a factor of 13.61.

(https://www.alliancesforhumanity.com/matter/matter_files/image017.jpg)

(https://www.alliancesforhumanity.com/matter/matter_files/image016.jpg)


ρtransverse waves + ρlongitudinal waves = const


Die Glocke was comprised of two counter-rotating cylinders, rotating a purplish liquid-metallic looking substance code-named "Xerum 525" by the Vril society, at high speeds.

Xerum = implosion of the mercury atom to the baryon state of ether

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1830644#msg1830644 (implosion of the atom)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 18, 2018, 08:12:47 AM
TOPOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS OF THE SAGNAC EFFECT II

Using very advanced concepts from topology, T.W. Barrett proves that the Sagnac effect can only be described by the original set of the equations published by J.C. Maxwell.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1919728#msg1919728

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/288491190_SAGNAC_EFFECT_A_consequence_of_conservation_of_action_due_to_gauge_field_global_conformal_invariance_in_a_multiply-joined_topology_of_coherent_fields

Moreover, in the Sagnac effect there are two vector potential components with respect to clockwise and counterclockwise beams. The measured quantity, as will be explained more fully below, is then the phase factor or the integral of the potential difference between those beams and related to the angular velocity difference between the two beams. Therefore, as the vector potential measures the momentum gain and the scalar potential measures the kinetic energy gain, the photon will acquire “mass.”

(http://image.ibb.co/fr2wPc/topo1.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/m2swPc/topo2.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/bu0i4c/topo3.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/cRHD4c/topo4.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/imt9cx/topo5.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/goDQHx/topo6.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/eEPnVH/topo7.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/nkU4AH/topo8.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/hiKRPc/topo9.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/dKAuAH/topo10.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/cyOgqH/topo11.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/nbrqjc/topo12.jpg)

https://books.google.ro/books?id=qsOBhKVM1qYC&pg=PA6&lpg=PA6&dq=electromagnetic+phenomena+not+explained+by+maxwell%27s+equations&source=bl&ots=Hurq5SQ-EG&sig=iMhWIxjuFrg9Co763une7Dnpmf0&hl=ro&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi1m-6DmfDZAhUiSJoKHR7RCikQ6AEIOzAC#v=onepage&q=electromagnetic%20phenomena%20not%20explained%20by%20maxwell's%20equations&f=false

T.W. Barrett, "Electromagnetic Phenomena Not Explained by Maxwell's Equations" pg 6 - 85

From a topological point of view, the Heaviside-Lorentz equations are a LINEAR THEORY, U(1).

When extended to SU(2) or higher symmetry forms, Maxwell's theory possesses non-Abelian commutation relations, and addresses global, i.e., nonlocal in space, as well as local phenomena with the potentials used as local-to-global operators.


The different velocities of clockwise- and counter-clockwise-rotating light beams in the Sagnac interferometer are due to the motion of the ether.


The observed interference effect is clearly the optical whirling effect due to the movement of the system in relation to the ether and directly manifests the existence of the ether.

G. Sagnac

This ether is a dynamic, and not an inert, ether.

The Michelson-Gale experiment measured the CORIOLIS FORCE of the rotation of the potential (ether).

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2024144#msg2024144

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2029623#msg2029623

"In 1835, French scientist Gaspard-Gustave de Coriolis wrote a paper in which he mathematically derived equations of motion for rotating coordinate systems. In this paper he drew attention to two categories of supplementary forces. Coriolis referred to these forces in the plural. The forces in the first category were the ordinary centrifugal forces, while the forces in the second category were described as being equal to twice the product of the angular velocity of the mobile plane, taken with respect to the relative momentum as projected unto that plane. By analogy with the mathematical formula for the ordinary centrifugal forces, Coriolis called this second category of supplementary forces ‘The compound centrifugal forces’.

The Coriolis force results from a compound motion involving two independent yet physically connected motions, one of which is linear, and the other of which must be of a rotatory nature. Just like centrifugal force, it acts to deflect an element perpendicularly to its path of motion. Its mathematical expression is exactly twice that of the centrifugal force, but unlike in the expression for centrifugal force, the angular velocity term and the linear velocity term in the Coriolis force are independent of each other. French scientist Gaspard-Gustave de Coriolis referred to it as a “compound centrifugal force” in a paper  which he wrote in 1835, and it will be here proposed that the Coriolis force is the compound resultant of two opposing centrifugal forces that are pressing on each side of a body perpendicularly to the direction of motion.

This compound centrifugal force appeared in Maxwell’s original equations as a force per unit volume in the form μvxH, where v is the velocity relative to the sea of molecular vortices. The quantity μ is related to the density of this sea, while the vorticity H the mutually aligned vortices is the magnetic field intensity. In the case of rotating electron-positron dipoles, which we will equate with Maxwell’s molecular vortices, the vorticity H is equal to 2ω, where ω is the angular velocity. Written in the form 2μvxω, the compound centrifugal force then becomes identifiable as the familiar Coriolis force."

F.D. Tombe

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2023979#msg2023979 (topological considerations of the Sagnac effect, part I)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 24, 2018, 02:45:59 AM
MICHELSON-MORLEY EXPERIMENT HOAX

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e7/Interferometer.svg/1200px-Interferometer.svg.png)

"My honored Dr. Michelson, it was you who led the physicists into new paths, and through your marvelous experimental work paved the way for the development of the theory of relativity."

A. Einstein, speech at the Pasadena Atheneum banquet, 1931

"Michelson invented his interferometer in 1881 to compare c2 (1), the two way speed of light along arm 1, to c2 (2), the two way speed of light along arm 2. The interferometer was improved for the 1887 MM experiment. According to MM’s negative or null interpretation , they did not observe any difference between c2 (1) and c2 (2)."

Dr. W.M. Hicks (1902) revealed the effect of the changes in temperature and the averaging used by A. Michelson upon the data gathered in the experiment. J. Raymond Redbourne has proven that A. Michelson did not take into account the compression/extension effect on waves as they move from one portion of the wave medium to a portion moving at a different velocity. Milan R. Pavlovic showed that the magnitude of the interference shift was actually twice as big as the one that Michelson and Morley calculated. S. Das demonstrated that Michelson and Morley did not treat the light velocity as a vector. M.A. Handschy re-examined the large systemic trends of the MM experiment. E. Morley teamed up with Dayton Miller (1902-1906) and obtained positive effects of the experiment. It may be noted that the Morley-Miller experiments involved 995 turns of the interferometer in the period 1902-1905, while the MM experiment only consisted of 36 turns of the apparatus in the period July 8-12, 1887. Technological design of the experiment, and its environmental control were similar in both cases. R.H. Cahill proved that the MM experiment performed in vacuum will nullify the final results.

However, none of these authors managed to show the most basic flaw in the Michelson-Morley 1887 experiment, the error which explains the null result obtained.

In 1999 E. J. Post showed the equivalence between the Michelson-Morley experiment and the Sagnac experiment.

E. J. Post, A joint description of the Michelson Morley and Sagnac experiments.
Proceedings of the International Conference Galileo Back in Italy II, Bologna 1999,
Andromeda, Bologna 2000, p. 62

E. J. Post is the only person to notice the substantial identity  between the 1925 experiment and that of 1887: "To avoid possible confusion, it may be  remarked that the beam path in the more well-known Michelson-Morley interferometer, which was mounted on a turntable, does not enclose a finite surface area; therefore no fringe shift can be expected as a result of a uniform rotation of the latter".

E. J. Post, Reviews of Modern Physics. Vol. 39, n. 2, April 1967

(http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/MM1.jpg)

A. Michelson and E. Morley SIMPLY MEASURED THE CORIOLIS EFFECT OF THE ETHER DRIFT. Since they did not use a phase-conjugate mirror or a fiber optic equipment, the Coriolis force effects ("attractive" and "repulsive") upon the light offset each other.

The positive (slight deviations) from the null result are due to a residual surface enclosed by the multiple path beam (the Coriolis effect registered by a Sagnac interferometer). Dayton Miller also measured the Coriolis effect of the ether drift in his experiment (Mount Wilson, 1921-1924 and 1925-1926, and Cleveland, 1922-1924).

Michelson repeated his error in the Michelson-Gale experiment, where he used the WRONG formula (Michelson and Gale actually recorded the CORIOLIS EFFECT and not the Sagnac effect). Hammar also committed the same error.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2024144#msg2024144

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2029623#msg2029623

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2031383#msg2031383

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2023979#msg2023979 (professor R. Wang MM experiment using phase-conjugate mirrors)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg865008#msg865008 (fake TSR/MM experiments)

Dr. Patrick Cornille (Essays on the Formal Aspects of Electromagnetic Theory, pg. 141):

(http://image.ibb.co/eHyoUn/mmo.jpg)

Dr. Patrick Cornille (Advanced Electromagnetism and Vacuum Physics, 2003, pg. 150-157) has provided a thorough examination of the fact that the Michelson-Morley interferometer is actually a Sagnac interferometer with zero area:

(http://image.ibb.co/bNba9n/mmo2.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/jaTV9n/mmo3.jpg)

https://books.google.ro/books?id=73VpDQAAQBAJ&pg=PA156&lpg=PA156&dq=michelson+morley+interferometer+does+not+enclose+an+area+null+result&source=bl&ots=pQpIo4VJpM&sig=aruUeS-xQUTXVxN40XPtxmxFMhE&hl=ro&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiU5IiEl4PaAhVHZ1AKHXa
https://forum.cosmoquest.org/showthread.php?116299-Michelson-Morley-explained-in-uniformly-rotating-frames2DvMQ6AEIQDAE#v=onepage&q=michelson%20morley%20interferometer%20does%20not%20enclose%20an%20area%20null%20result&f=false

(http://image.ibb.co/iyfSpn/mmo4.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/gQwdvS/mmo5.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/idT8vS/mmo6.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/ct1Hpn/mmo7.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/hHLcpn/mmo8.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/bB8rFS/mmo9.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/iotQaS/mmo10.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/diLGh7/mmo11.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/jZOmh7/mmo12.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/h1Dxpn/mmo13.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/dUGp27/mmo14.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/g5ftUn/mmo15.jpg)
(http://image.ibb.co/hh1dvS/mmo16.jpg)

(http://image.ibb.co/hjnPkS/mmo17.jpg)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 02, 2018, 03:38:42 AM
TOPOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS OF THE MICHELSON-MORLEY INTERFEROMETER: MICHELSON-MORLEY EXPERIMENT HOAX II

Dr. Terence W. Barrett (Stanford Univ., Princeton Univ., U.S. Naval Research Laboratory, Univ. of Edinburgh, author of over 200 papers on advanced electromagnetism):

Topology has been used to provide answers to questions concerning what is most fundamental in physical explanation. That question itself implies the question concerning what mathematical structures one uses with confidence to adequately “paint” or describe physical models built from empirical facts. For example, differential equations of motion cannot be fundamental, because they are dependent on boundary conditions which must be justified—usually by group theoretical considerations. Perhaps, then, group theory is fundamental.

Group theory certainly offers an austere shorthand for fundamental transformation rules. But it appears to the present writer that the final judge of whether a mathematical group structure can, or cannot, be applied to a physical situation is the topology of that physical situation. Topology dictates and justifies the group transformations. So for the present writer, the answer to the question of what is the most fundamental physical description is that it is a description of the topology of the situation. With the topology known, the group theory description is justified and equations of motion can then be justified and defined in specific differential equation form. If there is a requirement for an understanding more basic than the topology of the situation, then all that is left is verbal description of visual images. So we commence an examination of electromagnetism under the assumption that topology defines group transformations and the group transformation rules justify the algebra underlying the differential equations of motion.

Those situations in which the Aμ potentials are measurable possess a topology, the transformation rules of which are describable by the SU(2) group; and those situations in which the Aμ potentials are not measurable possess a topology, the transformation rules of which are describable by the U(1) group.

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/a9bc/aee223173c4fef38a36623c550a05c584801.pdf

Topology and the Physical Properties of Electromagnetic Fields


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/288491661_Electromagnetic_phenomena_not_explained_by_Maxwell%27s_equations

Essays on the Formal Aspects of Electromagnetic Theory, pp.6-86: Electromagnetic phenomena not explained by Maxwell's equations

Maxwell's linear theory is of U(1) symmetry form with Abelian commutation relations. It can be extended to include physically meaningful Aμ effects by its reformulation  in SU(2) and higher symmetry forms. The commutation relations of conventional classical Maxwell theory are Abelian. When extended to SU(2) or higher symmetry forms, Maxwell's theory possesses non-Abelian commutation relations, and addresses global, i.e., nonlocal in space, as well as local phenomena with the potentials used as local-to-global operators. 

But to return to Maxwell's original formulation: Maxwell did place the A field at center stage and did use quaternionic algebra to dress his theory. We know now that quaternionic algebra is described by the SU(2) group of transformations, and vector algebra by the U(1) group of transformations.

(http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/phys314/lectures/mm_result/mm_sideview.gif)

The real Michelson-Morley apparatus had 16 reflecting mirrors.

(http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/phys314/lectures/mm_result/mm_topview.gif)

The real optical paths in the Michelson-Morley experiment.

Roberto A. Monti has uncovered the main reason why A. Michelson never repeated the ether drift experiment (with E. Morley):

http://digilander.libero.it/VNereo/r-monti-il-grande-bluff-di-albert-einstein.htm#erronea

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=it&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fdigilander.libero.it%2FVNereo%2Fr-monti-il-grande-bluff-di-albert-einstein.htm%23erronea&edit-text= (section NOTA)


The Michelson-Morley interferometer = the Sagnac interferometer

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2041450#msg2041450 (Michelson-Morley experiment hoax, part I)

The positive (slight deviations) from the null result are due to a residual line/path/curve followed by the multiple path beam (the Coriolis effect registered by a Sagnac interferometer).

Therefore, the SAME TOPOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS which were derived for the Sagnac interferometer/effect, can immediately be used to infer the correct topological considerations of the Michelson-Morley experiment/interferometer.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2023979#msg2023979 (topological considerations of the Sagnac effect, part I)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2039636#msg2039636 (topological considerations of the Sagnac effect, part II)

Fields can be described by a U(1) group transformation: the modified Maxwell equations (actually, the Heaviside-Lorentz equations).

Potentials (ether theory) can ONLY be described by SU(2) group transformations (and higher).

The group algebra underlying the commonly used Maxwell equations is U(1): but this only relates to the ripples in the sea of ether.

The Sagnac effect, the Aharonov-Bohm effect, the Maxwell-Lodge effect can only be described by SU(2) group transformations (the quaternion formulation of the Maxwell equations).

Whittaker managed to show the hidden structure of the potential: the set of bidirectional longitudinal waves which rule electromagnetism and terrestrial gravity.

The interferometer of the Sagnac experiment is a MULTIPLY-CONNECTED region and is an example of a topological obstruction.

That is, the Sagnac experiment can only be described by the SU(2) group of transformations, by the original set of the Maxwell equations, by potentials (ether).

Therefore, the Michelson-Morley experiment can also only be described by the SU(2) group of transformations, that is, by potentials (longitudinal ether waves).


“The infinite energy density of the zero-point vacuum field fluctuations is almost indistinguishable from the infinite elasticity of the universal ethereal medium” (Rowlands 1990, p. 285)

Rowlands, P.: Oliver Lodge and the Liverpool Physical Society. Liverpool University Press,
Liverpool (1990)

"All space is permeated by an elastic medium or aether, which is capable of propagating vibrations."

I. Newton (1675)

When Maxwell discovered that the equations which united electricity with magnetism called for the propagation of electromagnetic waves in a vacuum at the speed of light, it was suggested that the vacuum was not empty but filled with an elastic medium - the aether - whose excitation produced the phenomenon of light.

"On 7 Nov 1870, Maxwell wrote to Tait a letter discussing Quaternion terminology for things like,

gradient (which Maxwell called slope)
divergence (which Maxwell called convergence)
curl (which Maxwell then called twirl)
Laplacian (which Maxwell called concentration)

saying: "... I want phrases of this kind to make statements in electromagnetism ...".

Also in November 1870, Maxwell wrote a Manuscript on the Application of Quaternions to Electromagnetism, which is reprinted in Volume II of Maxwell's Scientific Papers at pages 570-576. In it Maxwell uses the term curl instead of twirl, and he also says:

"... The invention of the Calculus of Quaternions by Hamilton is a step towards the knowledge of quantities related to space which can only be compared for its importance with the invention of triple coordinates by Descartes. The limited use which has up to the present time been made of Quaternions must be attributed partly to the repugnance of most mature minds to new methods involving the expenditure of thought ...".

At this time, Maxwell had a clear idea that waves should have Scalar and Vector parts, and used the following terms in his Quaternionic formulation of the equations of Electromagnetism:
               
Slope = what we call Grad (represented by Nabla \/ )
Convergence = what we call Div
Curl = what we call Curl
Concentration = what we call Laplacian
 
Since Maxwell then had both the concept of waves in an elastic medium and the concepts of Grad, Div, Curl, and Laplacian, he had everything one needs to write the equations for Longitudinal Waves in an elastic medium as described, for example on pages 142-144 of Methods of Theoretical Physics by Morse and Feshbach (McGraw-Hill 1953).

Since (as shown in Morse and Feshbach) the Longitudinal Waves are faster than the Transverse Waves, and the Transverse Waves travel at the Speed of Light, the Longitudinal Waves are Superluminal if the Aether is a general elastic medium."

http://www.astrosen.unam.mx/~aceves/Metodos/ebooks/morse_feshbach1.pdf

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1994059#msg1994059 (scalar potential is comprised of a lattice of bidirectional longitudinal waves/ether/Tesla strings)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 03, 2018, 12:36:01 AM
SCHAUBERGER-DEPALMA EFFECT: JET ENGINE LEVITATION

https://web.archive.org/web/20180320190251/http://www. youtube .com/watch?v=O6Lk7xlWCjo remove the spaces before and after youtube (stated jet fuel loads are absurd: 210 tons for an A380)

7:44 A380 levitating on take-off



4:21 85,000 gallons of fuel ~= four 25,000 gallons capacity pools

https://web.archive.org/web/20190410205733/https://www. youtube .com/watch?v=uaE28uY7RXg remove the spaces before and after youtube (very little fuel being pumped into the airplane)

(wings cannot hold the assumed full capacity load of fuel)

(Airbus A380 slow speed levitation)


Since very little fuel seems to be used by these airplanes, the assumption made by the authors of these intriguing videos is that jet aircrafts run on compressed air (as a source of energy necessary for the flights).

However, the obvious levitation of the A380 on take-off and during a slow speed air display cannot be explained by just taking into account the compressed air as a source of energy.


Few researchers know that the jet engine was designed by Viktor Schauberger.

In documents dated 1941, V. Schauberger describes how Professor Ernst Heinkel, the designer of the first successful jet-plane (first flight 27 Aug 1939), had illegally obtained sight of Viktor's preliminary applications at the Patent Office in Berlin through his patent attorneys, Lehmann-Harlens. Having studied them carefully, Heinkel then expressed his disinterest in them, but immediately inaugurated a covert research programme using this information in modified form to improve the performance of his 1,000 kph fighter, most probably the He 280. This was an indictable infringement of Viktor's still confidential application. Wishing to avoid discovery and in order to continue to make use of the unlawfully obtained data, Heinkel fraudulently attempted to have Viktor's patent restricted to the conversion of sea water into fresh water only, by having its application to aircraft and submarine propulsion disallowed.

https://web.archive.org/web/20170611101930/http://free-energy.xf.cz/SCHAUBERGER/Living_Energies.pdf

The story goes like this, as narrated by Schauberger and from his letter-correspondence:

At some point in time Schauberger met Heinkel. He mentioned his special "Turbine" for propulsion which shall have an extraordinary performance. Heinkel was interested and Schauberger explained the engine to him, drew sketches etc. He then said to Heinkel, that if he's interested in building a prototype, then he shall contact him for making an arrangement. But he didn't hear anything from him anymore, so he thought that Heinkel wasn't interested.

Much later Schauberger heard through the SS, that Heinkel actually built a prototype which flew over 1000km/h, but which had frequent completely unpredictable engine stalls, and that their technicians are out of ideas of how to fix this. When they explained to him, how Heinkel made the Piston-Engine/Turbine aggregate, he said, that he knew immediately what Heinkel was doing wrong, and that in this arrangement an engine stall would be logic.

http://www.tuks.nl/Mirror/frankgermano_net/viktorschauberger_5.htm

Although Heinkel never had the honesty to reveal the source of the ideas for his invention, keeping all the kudos for himself, this jet plane was nevertheless built as a direct result of Viktor's theories. Viktor Schauberger is therefore the real father of the present jet age . He even went as far as to state that in order to develop and build fast-flying, supersonic aircraft successfully, the bodily forms of deep-sea fish should be copied. Today's 'stealth bombers' very much emulate these forms.

Viktor Schauberger patents:

http://www.rexresearch.com/schaub/schaub.htm#117749

(http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/picturesc/sch250.jpg)

(https://i.stack.imgur.com/az3N4.jpg)

"If water or air is rotated into a twisting form of oscillation known as ‘colloidal’, a build up of energy results, which, with immense power, can cause levitation. This form of movement is able to carry with it its own means of power generation. This principle leads logically to its application in the design of the ideal airplane or submarine... requiring almost no motive power." 

V. Schauberger

http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/Viktor%20Schauberger.htm


The jet engine designed by Schauberger made direct use of the double torsion of air in order to create a larger antigravitational torsion field around the engine itself, which then lead to levitation.

(http://image.ibb.co/fuyvRc/podk2.jpg)

(The Hunt For The Zero Point, Nick Cook)

Virtual state = implosion of the atom to the baryon level of ether (Whittaker potential longitudinal scalar waves)

In addition to the Schauberger effect, the DePalma effect also can be observed for the jet engine which rotates at a high speed: each jet engine will form a torsion field around it reducing the g acceleration in the hydrodynamic gravitational equation.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2033009#msg2033009


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 03, 2018, 07:01:13 AM
EARTH-SUN DISTANCE: ~10 KILOMETERS II

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1939818#msg1939818 (part I)

The Earth-Sun distance was first estimated to be somewhere around 25 km (in stark contrast to the 3000 mi distance claimed by the UA proponents). Using a variety of proofs, estimates and calculations, that distance was reduced to 12-15 km. Now, more proofs showing that this distance can be even lower, some 10 km.

Use https://archive.org/ with (www.youtube. com/watch?v=O6Lk7xlWCjo), remove the space between youtube. and com, it was saved on March 20, 2018.

https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=O6Lk7xlWCjo

https://web.archive.org/web/20180320190251/https://www. youtube. com/watch?v=O6Lk7xlWCjo

(remove the spaces between www. and youtube. and youtube. and com/)

16:15 - 18:52 real cruising altitude of aircrafts is around 7,500 ft; on board measurement using an altimeter; comparison of altitudes using a hot air balloon



starts at 3:42 - comparison of distances - the Moon is transparent



Use https://archive.org/ with (www.youtube. com/watch?v=sYm7LbCPe-w), remove the space between youtube. and com, it was saved on February 23 and October 28, 2018.

https://web.archive.org/web/*/www.youtube. com/watch?v=sYm7LbCPe-w

https://web.archive.org/web/20180223215112/www.youtube. com/watch?v=sYm7LbCPe-w

(remove the space between youtube. and com/)

The height of Mt. Everest has to be lower than the official estimate since the basic triangulation method does not take into account the different refractive indexes for each layer of aether and ether.

https://medium.com/@GatotSoedarto/the-deflection-of-light-by-refraction-not-gravity-49b9bd919aba

(https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/1600/1*ql_mBFyTqTH8BG2p_jYDUw.jpeg)


Amateur rockets

Actually, the way this altitude is measured is the following: According to RRS member Bill Claybaugh (1996, alleged 50 mile altitude reached), "this altitude was estimated from a image of the entire Black Rock Desert taken near peak using known distances between geographic features".

How do other amateur rocket endeavours measure their claims?

Altitude verification for the rocket will be primarily based on signals from an onboard Trimble GPS receiver.

But in fact satellites orbit at a much lower altitude, and are powered by Tesla's cosmic ray device which is the source of energy for the Biefeld-Brown effect.

An altimeter actually includes an aneroid barometer which measures the atmospheric pressure (actually it measures the effect of the dextrorotatory ether waves). A radar altimeter uses radio signals. Both methods do not take into account the layers of aether which exist above 5 km in altitude which influence both the pressure reading and also the distance travelled by the radar waves.

Full moon over Mt. Everest

(http://amc-nh.org/committee/excursions/trips/20121117%20Trekking%20Nepal%20on%20our%20own/1500_Kaitrin%20and%20Grigory_20121126_15.jpg)

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3453/3298788895_9d6a1eabeb_b.jpg)

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/skVzIhT8heg/maxresdefault.jpg)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 03, 2018, 08:58:48 AM
TURIN SHROUD/SFUMATO TECHNIQUE: BALL LIGHTNING LASER PRECISION II

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1896775#msg1896775 (part I)

https://www.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/eng/achievements/highlights/2006/mysteries_mona_lisa.html

With the high-resolution of the NRC-IIT 3D colour laser scanning technology, the relief pattern of brush strokes on a typical painting appear like ripples on the sea.

"With the Mona Lisa we don't see any signs of brush stroke detail," says John Taylor.

"It's extremely thinly painted and extremely flat, and yet the details of the curls of hair, for example are extremely distinct. So, the technique is unlike anything we've ever seen before. Leonardo was in a league of his own."

The thickness of the layers applied to create the Mona Lisa and John the Baptist paintings measures one to two microns each (50 times thinner than a human hair).



An extraordinary investigation of the sfumato technique used by Da Vinci.

4:50 pigments 15-55 microns thick; pigments particles

14:00 printing techniques

15:30 printing inks barely reach close to 2 microns

26:15 electricity must have been used to paint the Mona Lisa

28:02 modern equipment cannot measure the size of the particles of the paint used by Da Vinci, it can only measure the thickness of the individual layers


Both the Mona Lisa and John the Baptist paintings, attributed to Leonardo Da Vinci, were created by using LASER GENERATED PULSES 1-2 MICRONS THICK.


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/scientists-say-turin-shroud-is-supernatural-6279512.html

A similar image to the colouring on the Turin shroud was created by scientists using ultra violet lasers.

"This degree of power cannot be reproduced by any normal UV source built to date."

https://shroudofturin.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/science_and_religion_meet_in_shroud_research-1.pdf (the best work on the Turin shroud)

In 2004 Prof. Giulio Fanti and a colleague, Roberto Maggiolo, discovered the faint image of a second face on the reverse side of the Turin Shroud using highly sophisticated image processing techniques. The discovery received wide attention after media reports and was published as “The double superficiality of the frontal image on the Turin Shroud” in the peer-reviewed scientific Journal of Optics A: Pure and Applied Optics, of the Institute of Physics in London.


(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/00/Ptah_standing.svg/1200px-Ptah_standing.svg.png)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/42/Relief_of_Ptah.jpg/397px-Relief_of_Ptah.jpg)

Tuning fork + djed + ankh = ball lightning device

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 04, 2018, 12:37:55 AM
"It also seemed to be a necessary consequence of the fact that light is capable of polarisation that this medium, the ether, must be of the nature of a solid body, because transverse waves are not possible in a fluid, but only in a solid."

A. Einstein, 1920

https://web.archive.org/web/20110705052009/http://www.sciencedaily.com:80/releases/1999/07/990730072958.htm

Northwestern University physicists have for the first time shown that superfluid helium-3 -- the lighter isotope of helium, which is a liquid that has lost all internal friction, allowing it to flow without resistance and ooze through tiny spaces that normal liquids cannot penetrate -- actually behaves like a solid in its ability to conduct sound waves. The finding, reported in the July 29 issue of the journal Nature, is the first demonstration in a liquid of the 'acoustic Faraday effect,' a response of sound waves to a magnetic field that is exactly analogous to the response of light waves to a magnetic field first observed in 1845 by British scientist Michael Faraday. The acoustic effect provides conclusive proof of the existence of transverse sound waves -- which are characteristic of solids but not of liquids -- in superfluid helium-3.

"It is significant as the first observation of a previously unknown mode of wave propagation in a liquid -- one that is of the type you would expect to see in a solid."


"The space-time theory and the kinematics of the special theory of relativity were modelled on the Maxwell-Lorentz theory of the electromagnetic field."

A. Einstein, 1920

Thus, TSR was modelled on the Heaviside-Lorentz equations, which are not the original set of Maxwell equations. The original J.C. Maxwell's equations were modelled on the concept of ether and molecular vortices.


"Einstein's second postulate gives us the Lorentz transformations."

Postulate = assumption

The colossal mistakes committed by Lorentz and Einstein in deriving the Lorentz transformation/factor:

http://relativityunraveled.net/chapter-4-the-michelson-morley-experiment/ (Dr. Hans Zweig, Stanford University)

"Einstein maintained that he developed the Lorentz transformation independently. He does not cite Lorentz in his 1905 paper. It is most curious, therefore, that he made the same mathematical mistake of taking the square root at the same point in the development of the transform as his predecessor."


"The principle of the constancy of the velocity of light is of course contained in Maxwell's equations”

A. Einstein, 1905

However, the original set of Maxwell's equations is invariant under Galilean transformations, thus velocity vectors are additive, which means that the speed of light can be exceeded.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1918701#msg1918701


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 05, 2018, 12:40:31 AM
MENDELEEV'S ETHER PERIODIC TABLE OF ELEMENTS

Principles of Chemistry, 8th edition, 1906:

(http://rusphysics.ru/picture/img/mendeleev_big.jpg)

Group 0, line 0: NEWTONIUM

Group 0, line 1: CORONIUM

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a5/Mendeleev_Table_1905.png)

Elements x and y: Newtonium and Coronium

http://www.rexresearch.com/ether/mendelev.htm

An Attempt Towards A Chemical Conception Of The Ether by Professor D. Mendeleev


Mendeleev identified element x (Newtonium) with the ether.

In 1902, in an attempt at a chemical conception of the ether, he put forward the hypothesis that there are in existence two elements of smaller atomic weight than hydrogen, and that the lighter of these is a chemically inert, exceedingly mobile, all-penetrating and all-pervading gas, which constitutes the “aether.”

"Mendeleev devoted considerable attention to elements occurring before hydrogen in the periodic table. He gave a number of reasons for taking such a possibility seriously: first of all, the discovery of a whole new series of elements, the noble gases, in the closing years of the nineteenth century led him to think that this series could be extended upward to earlier analogues of the first two noble gases, helium and neon. Second, the apparent success of the ether theory in optical physics suggested to him that ether should be identified as a new element, which he chose to call newtonium. Third, ether would have to lack the ability for chemical combination since it was believed to permeate all substances. In addition, the notion of a completely unreactive element had become highly plausible after the discovery of the unreactive noble gases. Mendeleev predicted the existence of two elements lighter than hydrogen, calling them elements x and y, based on numerical relations between atomic weight ratios in a periodic table, which he devised in 1904.

http://evgars.com/aeph.htm

The original name chosen by Mendeleev for Newtonium, was Teslium in honor of N. Tesla.

The main element of Mendeleev's periodic table WAS ETHER.

Immediately, after 1907, Mendeleev's original periodic table of elements was concealed.

(http://evgars.com/aeph/image012.jpg)

The process of forging the periodic table of Dmitri Mendeleev through the "loss" of Ether (Ae) and coronium (Ko)

http://evgars.com/mend1.htm (Mendeleev's Group 0)

http://evgars.com/mi3.htm (how Mendeleev's original periodic table of elements was falsified)

"But at the present time, when there can be no doubt that the hydrogen group is preceded by the zero group composed of elements of less atomic weights, it seems to me impossible to deny the existence of elements lighter than hydrogen.

The element y, however, is necessary for us to be able to mentally realize the lightest and therefore swiftest element, x, which I consider may be looked upon as the ether."

D. Mendeleev

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1998110#msg1998110

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 09, 2018, 02:16:15 AM
THE IMPOSSIBLY EARLY GALAXY PROBLEM

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/0004-637X/824/1/21/pdf

Published in the Astrophysical Journal (authors from CalTech, Harvard Univ. and Kavli Inst. of Phys. and Math.)

The surprisingly early appearance of massive galaxies challenges the standard model, and the halo mass function estimated from galaxy surveys at z =~ 4 appears to be inconsistent with the predictions of ΛCDM, giving rise to what has been termed “The Impossibly Early Galaxy Problem”.

These findings show quite emphatically that the halo distribution estimated from galaxies
at z =~ 4 in the CANDELS and SPLASH surveys is inconsistent with the evolution of the halo mass function and the galaxy luminosity and mass functions predicted by standard ΛCDM.

It is to be noted that the redshift is untouchable by modern astrophysics, as are any other alternative expansion scenarios.

"Current models predict that the z ~ 4-8 universe should be a time in which the most massive galaxies are transitioning from their initial halo assembly to the later baryonic evolution seen in star-forming galaxies and quasars.  Instead, massive galaxies appear to exist impossibly early, before their halos should even have been able to assemble."

Dr. C. Steinhardt

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1885776#msg1885776 (origin of uranium paradox, two consecutive messages)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1937556#msg1937556 (quasars redshift, eight consecutive messages)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1707290#msg1707290 (faint young sun paradox)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1640735#msg1640735 (isotopes vs. comets)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1995663#msg1995663 (dark flow III)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1964696#msg1964696 (dark flow II, in an important development, published in the peer reviewed and prestigious journal Physical Review D, cosmologist C. Tsagas has proven that the universe either has dark flow or dark energy, but not both)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 18, 2018, 10:28:29 PM
MICHELSON FORMULA PROVES THAT THE EARTH IS STATIONARY

(http://image.ibb.co/g7Ah1n/int.jpg)

Aerial shot of the Clearing Industrial District, Illinois, 1923, Michelson-Gale experiment

https://www.flickr.com/photos/34126404@N06/8642997359/in/photostream/

"Well gentlemen, we will undertake this, although my conviction is strong that we shall prove only that the earth rotates on its axis, a conclusion which I think we may be said to be sure of already."

A. Michelson

This is the formula published by Michelson in 1904 and 1925:

(http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Michelson-Gale_webapp/image004.png)

Michelson thought that this expression for the fringe shift measured the Sagnac effect due to Earth's rotation (due to a Sagnac interferometer).

However, this is the CORIOLIS EFFECT FORMULA for circuital light beams.

Here it is:

Δt = 4AΩsinΦ/c^2 (where Φ is the latitude)

https://www.ias.ac.in/article/fulltext/pram/087/05/0071

https://file.scirp.org/pdf/JMP20120200009_86423451.pdf (page 198)

The vector potential of Coriolis forces in a rotating frame of reference and the effect of these forces on counterpropagating beams of light is a well-established subject in physics.

This formula for the Coriolis effect on circuital light beams can be derived by an undergraduate student of physics.

By contrast, the correct Sagnac effect formula is:

Δt = 4vL/c^2

Moreover, anytime one has an interferometer with different radii (that is, an interferometer which is located away from the center of rotation), one is going to measure first the Coriolis effect on the light beams.

This is the crucial point which was missed by all of the researchers in the field of the Sagnac effect.

The formula featuring the area/angular velocity is the formula for the Coriolis effect; the formula which includes the linear velocity/path is the Sagnac effect equation.

Michelson derived the Coriolis effect formula.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1023972214666

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0103091.pdf

Coriolis Force and Sagnac Effect

Because of acting of gravity-like Coriolis force the trajectories of co- and anti-rotating photons have different radii in the rotating reference frame, while in the case of the equal radius the effective gravitational potentials for the photons have to be different.

(http://storage.lib.uchicago.edu/ucpa/series1/derivatives_series1/apf1-04510r.jpg)

We have the linear velocity (angular velocity x radius), and the length of the segment: this is the correct Sagnac formula.

The Michelson-Gale formula, by contrast, features NO LINEAR VELOCITY AND NO RADIUS OF THE LOOP, having eliminated the linear velocity from the very start: this is not the Sagnac phase shift formula.

The Coriolis effect formula derived by Michelson features only the area and the angular velocity. Since vr = r x Ω, and r = 6,378.164 km, the Sagnac is larger in magnitude than the Coriolis effect by at least the r = 6,378.164 km factor.

It is obvious that the fringe shifts recorded by A. Michelson and H. Gale did not register the Sagnac effect at all; only the Coriolis effect (much smaller in magnitude) was observed.

The value of the main term of the Coriolis effect for an interferometer (in the shape of a rectangle, trapezoid, annular sector) located away from the geometric center of the rotation (of the turntable/Earth/circle) will be THE SAME as the value of the Sagnac effect for the same interferometer whose center of rotation now coincides with that of the turntable/Earth/circle.

This is a Sagnac interferometer, whose loop coincides with the center of rotation:

(http://image.ibb.co/dkiwQn/cir1.jpg)

This is a Sagnac interferometer, whose loop IS AWAY FROM the center of rotation, featuring two different radii (from the center to both legs of the interferometer):

(http://image.ibb.co/iQWfJ7/cir2.jpg)

Since now one has two different radii to deal with, the Coriolis effect will first be recorded/registered, using this formula:

Δt = 4AΩ/c^2

But this is NOT the true Sagnac effect.

The true Sagnac effect will be:

Δt = 4vL/c^2

v = (RADIUS TO THE LONG LEG OF THE INTERFEROMETER) X angular velocity

L = long leg of the interferometer

This is what Michelson cleverly REMOVED from his equation: the RADIUS OF THE EARTH ITSELF, 6,378.164 KM.

That is, the Sagnac effect will be larger than the Coriolis effect upon the interferometer by a factor of at least 6,378.164 km.

This effect WAS NEVER RECORDED BY MM, MG, H experiments.

This means that the Earth is stationary.

(http://storage.lib.uchicago.edu/ucpa/series1/derivatives_series1/apf1-04511r.jpg)

If this type of interferometer is used, being located away from the center of rotation, one is going to measure the following effects:

1. THE CORIOLIS EFFECT (which was recorded by Michelson-Morley, Michelson-Gale and Hammar)

The Coriolis effect will be:

4ΩA/c^2 (this term is multiplied by sinΦ, where Φ is the latitude)

2. THE TRUE SAGNAC EFFECT, which was NOT recorded by MG, MM, H exp.

Then the value of the Sagnac effect will measure: 4ΩrL/c^2, where r is the distance from the center of the circle to the upper leg of the rectangle.

The Coriolis effect is 4ΩA/c^2, where A = Lh.

The Sagnac effect value will be 4ΩrL/c^2.

The ratio will be r/h.

Thus, by contrast, A. Michelson and H. Gale actually calculated the Sagnac formula for a rectangle with sides 2010 ft (612.65 m) and 1113 ft (339.24 m) which is placed at the center of the rotation.

This is equivalent to calculating main term of the Coriolis effect formula, if we place the rectangular interferometer at the surface of the Earth, as was done in the Michelson-Gale experiment.

The ratio of the correct Sagnac formula to the Coriolis effect formula will be:

6,378.164/0.33924.

3. THE ORBITAL SAGNAC EFFECT

Not recorded by the MM, MG and H experiments.

The orbital Sagnac effect is 60 TIMES larger than the rotational Sagnac effect.

4. THE GALACTIC SAGNAC EFFECT

The galactic Sagnac effect is 8 times larger than the orbital Sagnac effect, thus 480 times larger than the rotatational Sagnac.

The fact that the MM, MX and H experiments recorded ONLY the Coriolis effect, means that the Earth is stationary.

IF THE EARTH HAD BEEN ROTATING AROUND THE SUN, OR AROUND ITS OWN AXIS, the Michelson-Gale interferometer (a Sagnac interferometer) SHOULD HAVE RECORDED THE ORBITAL AND ROTATIONAL SAGNAC AT ONCE. In fact it only recorded the Coriolis effect of the ether drift rotation.

This ether is dynamic and not static, as proven by the Michelson-Gale experiment which registered the CORIOLIS effect of the ether drift.

However, the Michelson-Gale experiment did not record the ROTATIONAL SAGNAC nor the ORBITAL SAGNAC.

GPS satellites do not record/register the orbital Sagnac effect.

GPS satellites do not record/register the solar gravitational potential effect.

The only effect ever mentioned is the Coriolis effect of the ether drift.

Totally missing is the rotational Sagnac (proportional to the radius of the Earth), and the orbital Sagnac (proportional to the Earth-Sun distance).

Since the rotational Sagnac and the orbital Sagnac were not seen in the fringe shifts, it means that the Earth is stationary and does not orbit around its own axis at all.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2024144#msg2024144 (Michelson-Gale experiment hoax, ten consecutive messages)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2023979#msg2023979 (topological considerations of the Sagnac effect, part I)

Therefore, the formula for the Sagnac phase shift which features the area and the angular velocity IS INCORRECT. Only the formula which includes the linear velocity is CORRECT.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2039636#msg2039636 (topological considerations of the Sagnac effect, part II)

The Sagnac effect is much, much greater than the Coriolis effect.

It is obvious that the fringe shifts recorded by A. Michelson and H. Gale did not register the Sagnac effect at all; only the Coriolis effect (much smaller in magnitude) was observed.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 30, 2018, 01:13:23 AM
FIZEAU EXPERIMENT HOAX

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8d/Fizeau_water_experiment.JPG)

A light ray emanating from the source is reflected by a beam splitter and is collimated into a parallel beam by the lens. After passing the slits, the two rays of light travel through the tubes through which water is streaming back and forth.

"But the outcome was quite different than what Fizeau expected. The speed of light was not a sum of the velocity of the light added to the velocity of the Earth. Rather, the only effect on the speed of light Fizeau found was that which was induced by the water’s refractive index. This was quite a dilemma. On the one hand, it showed that light was affected by a medium (i.e., water), but on the other hand, the light was not being affected by the medium of ether, that is, its speed was not increased or decreased as it went through the ether."

In 1886, Michelson and Morley repeated Fizeau's experiment with improved accuracy: the results were the same.


Fizeau simply measured the Coriolis effect on the light beams as they propagated through both air and water.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023%2FA%3A1023972214666

http://cds.cern.ch/record/492804/files/0103091.pdf

Coriolis Force and Sagnac Effect

"One can also understand the effect of the transparent media on the light beams. The co-rotating medium just changes the ”gravitational mass” A in (3) and does not affect (5), while the inertial medium changes the Coriolis force and the time lags as well."

A medium (water/glass) will increase the effect of the dextrorotatory ether strings and decrease the influence of the laevorotatory ether strings upon it.

That is, the Coriolis force effect upon the fringe shifts will be greatly diminished: the experiment will not register the ether drift effect upon the light beams.

Now, the Hoek experiment can be explained as well:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1956136#msg1956136

The arm of the interferometer immersed in water did not record the Coriolis force exerted by the ether drift, while the in the arm which was not immersed in water the effects of ’repulsive’ and ’attractive’ Coriolis forces offset each other.

The Hoek experiment was repeated using an interferometer with a glass block in one arm and air in the other:

https://books.google.ro/books?id=0Zh_AwAAQBAJ&pg=PA220&lpg=PA220&dq=light+interferometer+in+water+blocks+ether&source=bl&ots=wOzJYTLm7x&sig=nDiw-s40fKcEOn9-k8-WKOvLJNU&hl=ro&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwidr87w-d_aAhUBoywKHQacBlUQ6AEIWzAJ#v=onepage&q=light%20interferometer%20in%20water%20blocks%20ether&f=false

The result was, of course, null.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 02, 2018, 06:53:53 AM
FRESNEL FORMULA HOAX

Arago was one of France’s most celebrated scientists. He had his hands in many fields of interest, but his unique work with light set the pace for many years to come.

First, Arago observed one star through a telescope for the whole course of a year. In that year, the star would move toward the Earth and then move away (which is true in either the heliocentric or geocentric frames). Arago reasoned that the focal length of his telescope would have to change in viewing the star, since the speed of light coming from a receding star would be different from that of an approaching star (in the heliocentric system it would be the Earth moving toward or away from the star). To his astonishment, he observed no difference and thus he was not required to change the focal length. This was the first indication that the stars were far enough away that, regardless of whether the Earth was moving, the star, seen through a telescope, actually is where it appears to be.

Second, Arago experimented with light beams traveling through glass. He showed that light traveled slower in denser mediums, such as glass or water, and this, in turn, helped support the wave theory of light (as opposed to the particle theory). Since he understood light as consisting of waves, it was assumed that these waves had a uniform speed through the ether, but if the Earth was moving against the ether (as would be the case if it were revolving around the sun) then the ether should impede the speed of light, just as did glass or water. Arago showed, however, that whether the light beam going through the glass was pointed in the direction of the Earth’s supposed movement, or
opposite that movement, there was no effect on its speed going through the glass. Moreover, he showed that a light beam pointed toward or away from the Earth’s supposed orbit had the same refraction in glass as the refraction of starlight in glass. Hence, in whatever way he tested the incidence of light, it always showed Earth at rest in the ether.

Fresnel worked with Arago on various occasions, and it was left to Fresnel, the more famous of the two, to explain Arago’s results.

Fresnel came up with an ingenious answer and explained it to Arago in a letter dated 1818. He postulated that there was no effect on the incidence of starlight because the ether through which it traveled was being “dragged,” at least partially, by the glass of telescope. Because ether was understood to permeate all substances, Fresnel hypothesized that there was a certain amount of ether trapped within the glass, and this amount of ether would be denser than, and independent from, the ether in the surrounding air. The key to understanding this theory is that Fresnel held that the ether outside the glass was immobile.

(from Galileo Was Wrong)

Fresnel's drag factor:

(https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/219f12f27fa1bb5a4fa405485e312c5e40ac8c7b)

(n is the refractive index of the medium)

However, this formula is exactly the one derived by Carl Ockert in the context of the extinction theory of light:

https://aapt.scitation.org/doi/10.1119/1.1974445

(https://image.ibb.co/nzcvTn/ock1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/bCK9on/ock2.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/bvywZS/ock3.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/eK8wZS/ock4.jpg)

(Dr. A.G. Kelly, Challenging Modern Physics)

The use of the relativistic composition of velocities is catastrophically flawed:

https://web.archive.org/web/20160314211410/https://relativityoflight.com/Chapter29.pdf

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 03, 2018, 02:29:56 AM
FRESNEL FORMULA HOAX II

(https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/647c9c9cc4c5a9d1a21e1dc9d9973180453c69a2)

Fresnel’s work on the wave theory was based on the hypothesis of a stationary or immobile ether.

What physical explanation does Fresnel offer for the value of the dragging coefficient?

It is only a part of this medium [the ether] which is carried along by our earth, namely that portion which constitutes the excess of its density over that of the surrounding ether. By analogy it would seem that, when only a part of the medium is displaced, the velocity of propagation of the waves can only be increased by the velocity of the center of gravity of the system (Fresnel 1818; translation from Schaffner 1972).

In a note later added to the letter, he admits that other hypotheses regarding the elasticity are equally possible, but adds:

But whatever the hypothesis one makes concerning the causes of the slowing of light when it passes through transparent bodies, one may always ... mentally substitute for the real medium of the prism, an elastic fluid with the same tension as the surrounding ether, and having a density such that the velocity of light is precisely the same in this fluid and in the prism, when they are supposed at rest; this equality must still continue to hold in these two media when carried along by the earth’s motion; these, then, are the bases upon which my calculation rests (Fresnel 1818b; translation from Schaffner 1972).

This is the first, but hardly the last time that we shall come upon a disturbing problem: the lack of uniqueness in explanations of Fresnel’s coefficient. It has been suggested, notably by Veltmann (1873), that Fresnel first found the value of the coefficient that explained the anomalous experimental results, and then cooked up a theoretical explanation for this value.

Mascart (1872): In any case, to be rigorous, it must be stated that Fizeau’s experiment
only verified that the dragging of the [light] waves by moving media is in agreement
with [Fresnel’s] formula (1) and that one can replace Fresnel’s hypothesis by any other hypothesis that will finally lead to the same formula, or a slightly different one.

Mascart (1893): The considerations that guided Fresnel are insufficient; the formula
to which he was led by a happy intuition only has an empirical character, which should be interpreted by theory.

(J. Stachel, Center for Einstein Studies, Boston University)


The fact that Michelson and Gale only measured/recorded the CORIOLIS FORCE EFFECT and not the SAGNAC EFFECT, means not only that the Earth is stationary, but also that this Coriolis force effect (which must involve rotation) is due to the rotation of the ether drift above the surface of the Earth.

Thus Fresnel's original assumption is totally wrong.

The explanation provided by Carl Ockert (see previous message) which also derives the Fresnel drag formula is thus shown to be correct: the ether is dynamic and not static.

"Lorentz’s achievement was to purify the message of Maxwell’s equations—to separate the signal from the noise. The signal: four equations that govern how electrical and magnetic fields respond to electric charge and its motion, plus one equation that specifies the force those fields exert on charge. The noise: everything else!"

Lorentz severely curtailed/censored the original form of Maxwell's equations: the twenty original equations were reduced to just four equations

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1918701#msg1918701

http://www.omicsonline.com/open-access/back-to-galilean-transformation-and-newtonian-physics-refuting-thetheory-of-relativity-2090-0902-1000198.pdf

The common Maxwell’s equations are valid only for systems at rest (i.e.: static systems, V = 0 ). The application of these equations to dynamic systems, where V ≠ 0 , (often termed “the universal validity of Maxwell’s equations”) is the basis for the erroneous theory of relativity.

Therefore, Lorentz' derivation of the Fresnel drag factor is erroneous since it is based on the modified Heaviside equations, and not on the original Maxwell equations written in quaternion form which explicitly included the aether factor.

On the Relative Motion of the Earth and the Luminiferous
Ether: The actual displacement was certainly less than the
twentieth part of this...It appears, from all that precedes,
reasonably certain that if there be any relative motion between
the Earth and the luminiferous ether, it must be small; quite
small enough entirely to refute Fresnel’s explanation of
aberration, and that the velocity of the Earth with respect to the
ether is probably less than one-sixth the Earth’s orbital
velocity, and certainly less than one-fourth.

A. Michelson/E. Morley, 1887

“If Michelson-Morley is wrong, then relativity is wrong.”

Stated to Sir Herbert Samuel on the grounds of Government House, Jerusalem
(Einstein: The Life and Times, p. 207)

The 1887 experiment found fringe shifts that corresponded to about a 4 km/sec speed of ether
against the Earth, but since Michelson and Morley assumed the Earth was already moving at 30 km/sec around the sun, they reasoned that the experiment should have shown enough fringe shifting equating to a speed of at least 30 km/sec.

The 4 km/sec shows that at least something was present for which
they had to give an explanation, for vacuums in space do not give
resistances, especially on the order of 4 km/sec. In addition, since this
something is moving at a rate much less than 30 km/sec, they must
explain how this entity could cause such noticeable effects upon all
subsequent interferometer experiments if the Earth was not moving
through it. It would have been much easier for them if the experiment
had registered zero km/sec instead of 4, since the former figure would
have easily allowed them to claim that ether did not exist. In fact,
Einstein’s whole theory of Relativity is based on the supposition that
there is nothing in outer space, and thus the theory requires that there be
an interferometer result with absolutely no fringe shifting and a
corresponding speed of zero km/sec. If the Earth doesn’t move and yet
there is any fringe reading above zero, no matter how small, this should
immediately nullify Relativity theory.

Perhaps just as important concerning the Michelson-Morley
experiment was, even with this small evidence of ether movement, the
two scientists concluded that Fresnel’s “explanation of aberration” was
“refuted” by their 1887 interferometer experiment. We will recall that
Fresnel explained Arago’s stellar aberration results by postulating that it
was caused by glass mediums “dragging” ether against an immobile ether
that surrounded the glass. Interestingly enough, Michelson and Morley
had previously stated in 1886 that, after the repeat of Fizeau’s
experiment in 1884, they had, at that time, confirmed Fresnel’s formula
stating: “the result of this work is therefore that the result announced by
Fizeau is essentially correct: and that the luminiferous ether is entirely
unaffected by the motion of the matter which it permeates.” So we
have Michelson and Morley giving us two different stories, but the one
to which they adhere is the 1887 judgment showing that science had no
answer to Arago’s experiment and that the Earth’s 30 km/sec clip
through space was coming to a screeching halt unless somebody could
come up with an explanation.

(from Galileo Was Wrong)

“This conclusion directly contradicts the explanation… which
presupposes that the Earth moves…”

Albert Michelson

“There was just one alternative; the earth’s true velocity
through space might happen to have been nil…”

Arthur Eddington

The problem which now faced science was considerable. For
there seemed to be only three alternatives. The first was that
the Earth was standing still, which meant scuttling the whole
Copernican theory and was unthinkable.

Ronald W. Clark

“Even this simple idea, so clear to everyone, was not left untouched by the advance
of science. But let us leave this question for the time being and accept
Copernicus’ point of view.”

Albert Einstein

'Enter Albert Einstein. To save the world from having to reconnect itself with the Middle Ages, Einstein set his mind to finding an explanation to the Michelson-Morley experiment. Most people don’t realize, and even less would admit it, but Relativity was created for one main reason: so that mankind would not be forced to admit that Earth was standing still in space.'

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 10, 2018, 01:27:26 AM
KORONIUM

(https://image.ibb.co/mcefQd/kor.jpg)

(taken in Bratsk, Siberia; copyright Julius Sykora 1981, Miloslav Druckmüller 2007)

This image was taken through green narrow-band filter in the light of the most intense coronal spectral line. This prominent spectral line was discovered by Harkness and Young during the total solar eclipse of August 7, 1869. In the spectrum of the corona’s only light, Professor Young noticed a green line at 530.3 nm that matched no known elements. He supposed that the sun may contain a new element. This green line was confirmed in 1882 by Dr. Schuster and again in 1896, by Shakleton. The new element was even given a name by Mendeleev: Koronium.

In 1898 Nasini, Andreoli and Salvadori claimed to have observed a spectrum indicating the presence of traces of Koronium in certain volcanic gases.

"Because an element possessing an independent spectrum has been observed in the solar corona at an altitude above the region of luminous hydrogen, this element, which has therefore been named 'koronium', ... should be characterised by a density, and therefore also an atomic weight, lower than that of hydrogen".

The lines of koronium were observed, even at distances many times the radius of the sun above its atmosphere and protuberances, where the hydrogen lines are no longer visible, it is evident that koronium should have less density and atomic weight than hydrogen.

"In 1942, the Swedish astronomer B. Edlen tried to offer an explanation: the spectral lines came from atoms of iron (also nickel and calcium) after they had lost an appreciable number of electrons (13 or 14 for iron). Such high levels of ionization require the atoms to be buffeted around by extremely high temperatures, around 1,000,000 C."

In order to explain the huge temperatures in the solar corona, mainstream science turned to magnetic reconnection (merging).

Dr. Hannes Alfven, Nobel prize laureate, stated that the concept of magnetic "merging" or "reconnection" was a pseudo-science which was infecting cosmology and even plasma science:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/23869134_On_frozen-in_field_lines_and_field-line_reconnection

Dr. Donald Scott on the erroneous concept of magnetic reconnection:

https://web.archive.org/web/20110301221517/http://members.cox.net/dascott3/IEEE-TransPlasmaSci-Scott-Aug2007.pdf

The most devastating analysis of the notion of magnetic reconnection was published by Walter J. Heikkila in the Astrophysics and Space Science journal:

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1973Ap%26SS..23..261H

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00645155

X-rays from the Sun are not generated thermally, electromagnetic particles are being accelerated through the Sun's own ether field to create x-rays. The cause of the solar x-rays is electrical, not thermal.

The existence of the ether (potential) was proven by E.T. Whittaker in 1903 and 1904:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1994059#msg1994059

The accepted solar model (nuclear furnace) turns out to be very erroneous:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1827377#msg1827377 (CNO cycle defies the nuclear furnace model)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1939765#msg1939765

The discovery of Koronium by Young and Harkness stands correct.

Mendeleev's ether periodic table of elements, which features Newtonium (subquark) and Koronium, is correct:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2045088#msg2045088

In this periodic table, Koronium is of smaller atomic weight than hydrogen, a fact which cannot be justified by modern science.

The existence of Koronium can only be explained in the context of subquark ether physics:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1998110#msg1998110
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 10, 2018, 09:31:03 PM
KORONIUM II

(http://paulbourke.net/fun/solar_eclipse_2002/corona/green_line_corona.jpg)

The first state of ether made visible.


Mainstream science cannot explain the existence of Koronium at all. A proton is composed of three quarks. Electrons have fractional charges, called preons.

https://web.archive.org/web/20130621182913/http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/1999/05/19-01.html

This means that Koronium consists of two quarks and a few preons and that Hydrogen is not the lightest element at all. It also means that Mendeleev's ether periodic table is correct.

Koronium can only be explained by the subquark ether model:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1401101#msg1401101


Double Layers in Astrophysics (NASA Conference Publication 2469)

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19870013880.pdf

Magnetic Merging -- A Pseudo-Science

Since then I have stressed in a large number of papers the danger of using the frozen-in concept. For example, in a paper "Electric Current Structure of the Magnetosphere" (Alfven, 1975), I made a table showing the difference between the real plasma and "a fictitious medium" called "the pseudo-plasma," the latter having frozenin magnetic field lines moving with the plasma. The most important criticism of the "merging" mechanism of energy transfer is due to Heikkila (1973) who with increasing strength has demonstrated that it is wrong. In spite of all this, we have witnessed at the same time an enormously voluminous formalism building up based on this obviously erroneous concept. Indeed, we have been burdened with a gigantic pseudo-science which penetrates large parts of cosmic plasma physics. The monograph CP treats the field-line reconnection (merging) concept in I. 3, II. 3, and I1.5. We may conclude that anyone who uses the merging concepts states by implication that no double layers exist.

A new epoch in magnetospheric physics was inaugurated by L. Lyons and D. Williams' monograph (1985). They treat magnetospheric phenomena systematically by the particle approach and demonstrate that the fluid dynamic approach gives erroneous results. The error of the latter approach is of a basic character. Of course there can be no magnetic merging energy transfer.

I was naive enough to believe that such a pseudo-science would die by itself in the scientific community, and I concentrated my work on more pleasant problems. To my great surprise the opposite has occurred; the "merging" pseudo-science seems to be increasingly powerful. Magnetospheric physics and solar wind physics today are no doubt in a chaotic state, and a major reason for this is that some of the published papers are science and part pseudoscience, perhaps even with a majority for the latter group.

In those parts of solar physics which do not deal with the interior of the Sun and the dense photospheric region (fields where the frozen-in concept may be valid), the state is even worse. It is difficult to find theoretical papers on the low density regions which are correct. The present state of plasma astrophysics seems to be almost completely isolated from the new concepts of plasma which the in situ measurements on space plasma have made necessary (see Section VIII).

I sincerely hope that the increased interest in the study of double layers -- which is fatal to this pseudoscience -- will change the situation. Whenever we find a double layer (or any other Ell ≠ 0) we hammer a nail into the coffin of the "merging" pseudo-science.

Dr. Hannes Alfven, Nobel prize laureate

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 12, 2018, 09:26:40 PM
DYNAMICAL MAXWELL EQUATIONS

"The principle of the constancy of the velocity of light is of course contained in Maxwell's equations"

A. Einstein, 1905

https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/back-to-galilean-transformation-and-newtonian-physics-refuting-thetheory-of-relativity-2090-0902-1000198.php?aid=80761

Chapter 1 deals with the common formulation of Maxwell's equations, pointing out that they are valid for static cases only.

The question now is what happens when the radiator does move with respect to the reference coordinate system, say at the speed u in the positive x direction. We would expect (at least I would) that the electromagnetic wave in the positive x direction will propagate at the speed of c+u while the wave propagating at the opposite direction will do so at the speed of c-u. This obviously means that the speed of propagating electromagnetic waves is not constant.

Here comes in the assumption (or belief, if you want to call it so) that the common formulation of Maxwell's equations is universal, i.e.: they apply to non static problems as well. Now, if you substitute the two waves of the last paragraph (moving at different speeds than the nominal speed of light) the differential equation would not equate. We know why. The reason is the assumption of the universality of the common formulation of Maxwell's equations that forces all electromagnetic waves to propagate at the nominal speed c. I believe that this is the origin of the relativists' claim that the speed of light c is constant in all moving inertial frames (not the Michelson-Morley experiment) , and this discrepancy led to the Lorentz and Minkowski transformations and to Einstein's theory of relativity.

In chapter 2 I add the two missing terms to Maxwell's equations (due to the motion of the radiator with respect to the reference coordinate system).

And lo and behold - the solution is just what we would expect by common sense: an electromagnetic wave in the positive x direction propagating at the speed of c+u and a wave propagating at the opposite direction at the speed of c-u.

This means that velocity vectors are additive, and hence we go back to the Galilean transformation and Newtonian mechanics, which means that time, space and mass are invariant. Since the Lorentz and Minkowski transformations are invalid for the modified Maxwell's equations - the odd notions of the variation of time, space and mass should be rejected and thus Einstein's theory of relativity collapses.

M. Eisenman


The common representation of Maxwell’s equations is valid only for static systems. This is obvious from the derivation of these equations in appendix A. However, in order to emphasize this fact here is a quote of the third paragraph of chapter 4 (page 18) in [1]:

“We must form the time derivative of the first Eq. (1). We will here imagine the surface Δσ to remain fixed, which obviously applies to media at rest, to which we shall confine ourselves initially.”

This restriction, or initial confinement, to media at rest greatly facilitates the derivation of Maxwell’s equations in reference 1, because it enables the replacement of the total time derivatives in Faraday’s, Ampere’s and charge conservation laws [equations (A.1.1), (A.2.1) and (A.3.1)] with partial time derivatives and freely interchange the order of integration and differentiation. However, this restriction limits Maxwell’s equations to static systems only. The physicists at the turn of the twentieth century were unaware of this limitation. They assumed that Maxwell’s equations were universally valid (i.e.: applicable to any inertial coordinate system) and tried to apply them to dynamic systems which led to inconsistencies. But instead of realizing and correcting the error (by modifying Maxwell’s equations) they introduced the Lorentz transformation which was the foundation of the flawed theory of relativity. The quote of the [1] confirms the above statements:

“The path taken by Einstein in 1905 in the discovery of the special theory of relativity was steep and difficult. It led through the analysis of the concepts of time and space and some ingenious imaginary experiments. The path that we shall take is wide and effortless. It proceeds from the universal validity of the Maxwell equations and the tremendous accumulation of experimental material on which they are based. It ends almost inadvertently at the Lorentz transformation and all its relativistic consequences.” [Remark: the different font in the above two quotes appears in the original text of reference [1].

The basis for the erroneous theory of relativity is the discrepancy between the two above mentioned quotes: The first quote states that Maxwell’s equations are limited to static systems, while the second quote assumes that these equations are universally valid, i.e.: they apply also to dynamic systems.

(https://image.ibb.co/koWr3y/md1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/cSTM3y/md2.jpg)

We proceed to solve the common Maxwell’s equations (1.10) to (1.12).

(https://image.ibb.co/k98M3y/md3.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/n87EOy/md4.jpg)

This is the classic solution of Maxwell’s equation for a planar electromagnetic wave. As expected, the speed of propagation of the electromagnetic waves is the nominal speed of light c since there is no motion relative to the RCS (due to the restriction in the derivation of the common form of Maxwell’s equations).

What happens when a radiation source moves with respect to the RCS? It follows from the assumption of the universal validity of Maxwell’s equations (1.20) and (1.21) (namely: that they are valid in any inertial coordinate system) that the speed of propagation of any electromagnetic wave in all inertial coordinate systems is constant

and equals to the nominal speed of light c [solution (1.23) to equation (1.21)]. Thus, the speed of propagation of electromagnetic waves being constant in all inertial coordinate systems is not necessarily a measured observation. It is an assumption, a consequence of the assumed universal validity of the common Maxwell’s equations even for dynamic systems.

Suppose that a radiation source moves at a speed u in the positive direction of the x axis of the RCS. As engineers (hopefully with some common sense), and in agreement with the Galilean transformation where velocity vectors are additive, we would expect the electric field vector, of the propagating planar electromagnetic wave parallel to the x axis, to have the following form with respect to the RCS:

(https://image.ibb.co/hFwcAd/md5.jpg)

As noted in the previous chapter Maxwell’s equations (1.10) to (1.12), along with their derivatives (1.20) and (1.21), were formulated for static systems, namely: no motion relative to the RCS. Their wrong application to dynamic systems led to the Lorentz transformation and Einstein’s theory of relativity.

We proceed with the application of the corrected Maxwell equations to a planar wave in vacuum where all coordinate systems are inertial. It follows from the assumption that all coordinate systems, including the RCS, are inertial that the velocity vector V in equations (1.1) and (1.2) is constant. Equations (1.1) and (1.2) become:

(https://image.ibb.co/jrhOiy/md6.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/m2Cjqd/md7.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/fWU8GJ/md8.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/nuRzOy/md9.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/c7spOy/md10.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/f0AyGJ/md11.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/gcfFwJ/md12.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/gpLyGJ/md14.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/dikXbJ/md15.jpg)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 19, 2018, 02:56:40 AM
SACRED CUBIT ZETA FUNCTION VI

(https://web.archive.org/web/20100420104333im_/http://www.ianjamescolmer.com/hidden6.jpg)

The queen's chamber floor is located at 21.656 meters above the ground:

http://www.gizapyramids.org/pdf_library/petrie_gizeh.pdf (pg. 22)

21.656 - 0.63566 = 21.02

2nd zeta zero = 21.022

Queen chamber niche steps measurements:

Height

1,743 m
0.87166 m
0.69733 m
0.69733 m
0.69733 m

Total: 4.7 m

Apex: 1.511 m

4.7 - 0.69733= 4.0027

21.02 + 4.0027 = 25.0227

3rd zeta zero = 25.0108

The 4th and 5th zeta zeros figures are located above the apex of the pointed roof (the limestone blocks above the apex measure some 4 meters in height).

(https://image.ibb.co/mkRu1T/nitti_0.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/miMu1T/chambers4_1.jpg)

The 6th and 7th zeta zeros values are located by identifying the system of "secret" tunnels which link the five major zones of the pyramid:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1570956#msg1570956

The most amazing fact is that the 8th zeta zero, 43.327, coincides exactly with the value of the height of the king's chamber floor above the ground: 43.33 m.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1836001#msg1836001

43.33 + 5.59 = 48.92

48.92 - 0.63566 = 48.284

Value of 9th zeta zero = 48.00515

The granite blocks above the ceiling of the king's chamber measure 7 meters in height.

(https://image.ibb.co/jB7jJ8/kchroof.jpg)

48.92 + 7 = 55.92

The 10th and 11th zeta zeros are located in the dimensions of the beams of granite which make up area above the ceiling.

55.92 + 0.63566 = 56.55

12th zeta zero = 56.446

First relieving chamber: 0.76 m + 2 m (granite block above it) = 2.76 m

56.55 + 2.76 = 59.31

13th zeta zero = 59.347

Second relieving chamber: 0.6 m + 2 m = 2.6 m

59.31 + 2.6 = 61.91

61.91 - 1.27132 = 60.6369

14th zeta zero = 60.8317

Third relieving chamber: 0.7 m + 2 m = 2.7 m

61.91 + 2.7 = 64.61

64.61 + 0.63566 = 65.24

15th zeta zero = 65.1125

Fourth relieving chamber: 0.5 m + 2 m = 2.5 m

64.61 + 2.5 m = 67.11

16th zeta zero = 67.079

Fifth relieving chamber: 1.6 m + 4 m = 5.6 m

67.11 + 5.6 = 72.7

72.7 - 0.6356 = 72.06

17th zeta zero = 72.067

The 18th and 19th zeta zero values are located above the granite blocks which make up the apex of the fifth relieving chamber.

72.7 + 63.5 = 136.2

141.34725 - 136.266 = 5.08125 = 2 x 2.541

Missing apex = 286.1 si = 7.2738 m

1si = 2.5424 cm


The values of the other zeta zeros (from 79.337 on) could be identified using one of two methods: either increase the height of the Gizeh pyramid by 63.566 (and all of the other dimensions of the original pyramid proportionally) or use smaller pyramids (pyramid fractals) inserted in a certain way from 14.134725 to 72.7.

72.7 + 5.08 = 77.78

14.134725 + 63.566 = 77.7


The architects of the Gizeh pyramid thus knew the values of the first 19 zeta zeros.

The Gizeh pyramid is the architectural equivalent of the Riemann zeta function.

https://michaelberryphysics.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/berry483.pdf

The derivation of the Riemann-Siegel formula was the most difficult calculation of the 19th century, and certainly one of the most difficult of all time (see H.M. Edwards, Riemann's Zeta Function, chapter 7).

(https://image.ibb.co/cZ4Zko/saddle.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/dchRy8/saddle2.jpg)

To obtain the values of the first zeta zeros, the architects of the Gizeh pyramid needed either the Riemann-Siegel formula or the Euler-Maclaurin formula (which necessitates the use of a computational infrastructure and utilizes many more terms than the Riemann-Siegel formula).

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 22, 2018, 08:15:43 AM
QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT

(https://3c1703fe8d.site.internapcdn.net/newman/gfx/news/hires/2012/3-quantumphysi.jpg)

The concept of macroevolution based on natural selection was copied by C. Darwin from Patrick Matthew:

http://patrickmatthew.com/

"In 1831, Patrick Matthew's book 'On Naval Timber and Arboriculture' was published. It contained the first full conception of the theory of macroevolution by natural selection. Matthew uniquely named it 'the natural process of selection'. Then, 27 years later, Darwin replicated Matthew’s original idea and many of his explanatory examples. Darwin claimed to have done so independently of anyone else, failed to cite Matthew and uniquely four-word-shuffled Matthew’s unique term into 'process of natural selection' – which is the only possible grammatically correct equivalent use of the same four words in Matthew's original term for his discovery."

Total demolition of the theory of evolution:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1343816#msg1343816

The most ardent opponent of C. Darwin was the Russian scientist Pyotr Alexeevich Kropotkin who stated that our world was based on mutually-beneficial cooperation and reciprocity in both the animal kingdom and among human societies both past and present:

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/petr-kropotkin-mutual-aid-a-factor-of-evolution

R. Sheldrake proposed that morphic fields are responsible for telepathy-type interconnections between organisms.

Morphic fields = aether = Whittaker potential scalar waves

Non-local effects in consciousness and learning (a new behavior or idea is spread rapidly by unexplained means from one group to all related groups once a critical number of members of one group exhibit the new behavior or acknowledge the new idea) = quantum aether entanglement


Faster than light speed in entanglement dynamics:

https://newatlas.com/quantum-entanglement-speed-10000-faster-light/26587/

http://www2.caes.hku.hk/hkuscientist/2014/06/01/travelling-faster-than-light-can-quantum-entanglement-make-the-impossible-possible/

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1303.0614v1.pdf

Quantum entanglement experiments:

https://www.livescience.com/62418-quantum-einstein-paradox-test-entanglement.html

https://gizmodo.com/spooky-experiments-bring-quantum-weirdness-to-nearly-ma-1825571168

https://www.livescience.com/52811-spooky-action-is-real.html


The Whittaker scalar waves (bidirectional longitudinal waves) which comprise the potential not only explain quantum entanglement but also the beam neutrinos experiments.

Muon neutrinos neutrinos are shot into the ground at a downward angle.

(http://neutrino.kek.jp/news/2004.06.10/image/pct1e.jpg)

(https://media4.s-nbcnews.com/j/newscms/2014_21/458736/140521-lbne_154d3126e5a55a7a6a04bd92378cd5c6.nbcnews-ux-2880-1000.jpg)

These neutrinos were detected at a distance of 300 km, hundreds of meters above the ground.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=27426.0 (beam neutrinos thread)

Moreover, neutrinos are being observed approaching the detectors from below, through the Earth.

Dr. Henry T. Moray:

During the Christmas Holidays of 1911, I began to fully realize that the energy I was working with was not of a static nature, but of an oscillating nature. Further I realized that the energy was not coming out of the earth, but instead was coming to the earth from some outside source. These electrical oscillations in the form of waves were not simple oscillations, but were surgings --- like the waves of the sea --- coming to the earth continually, more in the daytime than at night, but always coming in vibrations from the reservoir of colossal energy out there in space.

While investigating the output of his device, he discovered a feature of the natural static energy, which had somehow been overlooked by other aerial battery designers. The electrostatic power had a flimmering, pulsating quality to it. He learned of this "static pulsation" while listening through headphones, which were connected to telephone wires. The static came in a single, potent surge. This first "wave" subsided, with numerous "back surges" following. Soon thereafter, the process repeated itself. The static surges came "like ocean waves". Indeed, with the volume of "white noise" which they produced, they sounded like ocean waves!

These peculiar waves did not arrive with "clock precision". Just like ocean waves, they arrived in schedules of their own. Dr. Moray was convinced that these were world-permeating waves. He came to believe that they represented the natural "cadence of the universe". This intriguing characteristic suggested that small amounts of pulsating electrostatic charge might be used to induce large oscillations in a large "tank" of charge.

Whittaker proved the existence of the potential scalar waves:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1994059#msg1994059

(https://image.ibb.co/kQexM7/l_101_all.png)

These potential helical waves were used in the tibetan acoustic levitation:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1388219#msg1388219

The neutrino was first postulated in 1930 when it was found that, from the standpoint of relativity theory, beta decay (the decay of a neutron into a proton and an electron) seemed to violate the conservation of energy. Wolfgang Pauli saved the day by inventing the neutrino, a particle that would be emitted along with every electron and carry away energy and momentum (the emitted particle is nowadays said to be an antineutrino).

W.A. Scott Murray described this as ‘an implausible ad hoc suggestion designed to make the experimental facts agree with the theory and not far removed from a confidence trick’.

Aspden calls the neutrino ‘a figment of the imagination invented in order to make the books balance’ and says that it simply denotes ‘the capacity of the aether to absorb energy and momentum’.

The neutrino is simply the detected presence of the telluric currents; they travel not in straight lines, but in helical paths of various wavelengths, the amplitudes can reach 10km all the way to the first aether dome and at least 10km deep into the Earth (depends on the strength of the initial energy of the signal how many telluric currents are actually activated). It is claimed that the Super K detector has a 1000m overburden of rock, and is located under the peak of Mt. Ikeno-yama, which has a height of 1360m above sea level, which leaves some 360 meters to be accounted for (T2K, which shoots neutrinos at a downward angle of about 1 degree from sea level, some 300 km distance). Let us not forget that the Super K detector uses some 11,000 photomultipliers which would activate the ether/potential around the detectors to a high degree, thus constituting a "target" for the telluric currents which pass nearby (at various amplitudes/wavelengths). The initial input of the telluric currents shot at some downward angle is picked up by the currents which travel in helical paths, some of them certainly reaching some 360 meters above ground to reach the activated ether/potential around the 11,000 photomultipliers.

Boson = neutrino = photon:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1998110#msg1998110

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 23, 2018, 02:40:37 AM
NEUTRINOS ARE TACHYONS II

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1907843#msg1907843 (part I)

http://cds.cern.ch/record/476759/files/0011087.pdf

A new Dirac-type equation for tachyonic neutrinos

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.346.6051&rep=rep1&type=pdf

An Explanation on Negative Mass-Square of Neutrinos


https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1511/1511.06745.pdf

A Model of   Neutrinos

https://scholarworks.iu.edu/dspace/handle/2022/20737

Neutrino as a Tachyon

https://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.53.6065

Upper limit of the muon-neutrino mass (the muon neutrino also exhibits a
negative mass-square)


Dr. Robert Ehrlich, PhD Columbia University, worked on the Nobel prize winning experiment "two neutrino" experiment:

https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1988/illpres/hunt.html

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1701.00488.pdf

The Mont Blanc neutrinos from SN 1987A: Could they have been monochromatic (8 MeV) tachyons with m2 = −0.38 keV2?

Published in the Astroparticle Physics Journal


The Kaluza-Klein particle is the tachyon:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/0607246.pdf

The Higgs boson is a tachyon.

The Whittaker potential scalar waves are longitudinal boson/tachyon/Kaluza-Klein strings.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 28, 2018, 01:04:40 AM
The Hypothesis of deriving the frame of the world by mechanical principles from matter eavenly spread through the heavens being inconsistent with my systeme, I had considered it very little before your letters put me upon it, & therefore trouble you with a line or two more about it if this come not too late for your use. In my former I {represented} that the diurnal rotations of the Planets could not be derived from gravity but required a divin{e} power to impress them. And tho gravity might give the Planets a motion of descent towards the Sun either directly or with some little obliquity, yet the transverse motions by which they revolve in their several orbs required the divine Arm to impress them according to the tangents of their orbs I would now add that the Hypothesis of matters being at first eavenly spread through the heavens is, in my opinion, inconsistent with the Hypothesis of innate gravity without a supernatural power to reconcile them, & therefore it infers a Deity. For if there be innate gravity its impossible now for the matter of the earth & all the Planets & stars to fly up from them & become eavenly spread throughout all the heavens without a supernatural power, & certainly that which can never be hereafter without a supernatural power could never be heretofore without the same power.

I. Newton

http://www.newtonproject.ox.ac.uk/view/texts/normalized/THEM00256


Solar system formation problems:

http://kgov.com/list-of-solar-system-formation-problems


Origin of uranium:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1885776#msg1885776 (two consecutive messages)


The trouble with tides:

http://immanuelvelikovsky.com/NewtonEinstein&Veli.pdf (pages 9 - 24)


FE tides:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1486127#msg1486127

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 29, 2018, 06:03:32 AM
SUNSPOTS DEFY NEWTONIAN MECHANICS

The best works which describe the relation between solar activity/solar tides and the orbits of planets (heliocentrical theory):

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20070025111.pdf

http://ozwx.plasmaresources.com/wilson/Syzygy.pdf

The Sun exhibits a variety of phenomena that defy contemporary theoretical understanding.

Eugene N. Parker


It is not coincidence that the photosphere has the appearance, the temperature and spectrum of an electric arc; it has arc characteristics because it an electric arc, or a large number of arcs in parallel.

British physicist C. E. R. Bruce


It is likely that the problem of the dynamics of the explosions affecting the prominences will only be solved when the electrical conditions obtaining in the chromosphere and inner corona are better understood.

Italian solar astronomer Giorgio Abetti


Observations give a wealth of detail about the photosphere, chromosphere and the corona. Yet we have difficulty in matching the observations with a theory.

Solar Interior & Atmosphere, J.-C. Pecker


The modern astrophysical concept that ascribes the sun’s energy to thermonuclear reactions deep in the solar interior is contradicted by nearly every observable aspect of the sun.

Ralph E. Juergens


The above-referenced papers do explain the precise relation between solar activity/tides and orbits of the planets but fail to show HOW these planets could possibly influence sunspots dynamics.


Graphics and article by Rolf Witzsche:

(http://www.ice-age-ahead-iaa.ca/small/planets2013.jpg)

The resulting interaction has noticeable effects that become visible in the sunspots on the Sun!

These effects that are observed, however, present a paradox, because what is observed shouldn't really happen.

In order to solve the paradox, let me begin by saying that the story, which the planets tell us, begins with the planets' alignment with each other, as their alignment has an apparent effect on the Sun. 

(http://www.ice-age-ahead-iaa.ca/small/sunspots_6.jpg)

Many people are puzzled by the planets having an effect on the sunspots. When the major planets are in line with each other their combined effect weakens the sunspots. 

For example, it has been recognized by researchers that the intensity of the sunspots decreases when the sunspots come into the view of the Earth. This shouldn't be possible. 

Our tiny earth, shouldn't have such a strong effect, to affect the sunspots over such a great distance. The planets are shown in scale here, by size, but not by distance. The Earth is about 100 times as distant from the Sun as the Sun is wide. And Neptune is over 3,000 times as distant. None of the planets should affect the Sun. Definitely not the Earth, with the Sun being 332,000 times more massive. Still, in spite of what one would expect from this interrelationship, an effect is being observed.

What has been observed doesn't make any sense then, right? 

It is not possible that one of the smallest planets in the solar system affect our gigantic Sun so strongly that the results become visible in the dynamics of the sunspots, some of which are thousands of kilometers wide? 

The difference between even the combined mass of planets, and the mass of the Sun, is so immensely great that the planets altogether contain only 14 one hundredth of a percent of the mass of the solar system, with the Sun containing all by itself 99.86% of it.

How then is it possible that this minuscule portion of mass that the planets represent, affect the gigantic mass of the Sun in any way at all?

As one observer has asked recently: 'We have been noticing that active sunspots deteriorate as they are facing earth, and then power back up as they turn away. What would cause this?'

The gravitational effect of the Earth is simply too minuscule to affect something as powerful as the sunspots on the Sun. 

Even if the alignment of Jupiter with the Earth was considered as a potential cause, with Jupiter having a 12 times greater gravitational affect on the Sun, than the Earth has, the combined result will still not be sufficient for any effect whatsoever to be noticeable. This applies to all the major planets in the same manner. The combined 'tidal' action of the Earth and Jupiter together, on the Sun, would still be only six one-thousands as strong of the tidal effect of the Moon on the Earth. This, too, is far too little for an effect to be observable. Thus the question remains, what has the power to produce the change of the sunspots on the Sun, and other similar phenomena?

The continuing paradox implies that a different principle, other than mass via gravity interaction, is in operation that produces the observed effects.

One researcher has hinted in such a direction when he found it puzzling, for example, that the observed effect of Saturn on the solar sunspots is nearly as extensive as that of Jupiter, with Jupiter being 3 times more massive and only half as distant from the Sun!

He recognized that the observed effect in this case does not really agree with the assumption, and thereby puts into doubt the entire base of assumptions. 

In puzzling over how to resolve the enigma the researcher noted, that like the Sun, Saturn and Jupiter are both strong sources for cosmic radio emissions. Based on this knowledge, he reasoned that perhaps other forces of energy, other than gravitational attraction, might be involved in affecting the sunspots in relationship to the solar system.

Nelson Effect:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1645824#msg1645824 (synchronized relationship between the Sun’s periodic peak sunspot cycles and the orbital positions of the Jovian planets -- Jupiter and Saturn)


My messages posted on the only1rad.proboards (Adorno-Beatles-Led Zeppelin-Jethro Tull-Rolling Stones connection), Jan. 5 2016 to May 28, 2018:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1079187#msg1079187

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1079938#msg1079938

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 30, 2018, 01:18:02 AM
KORONIUM III

(https://image.ibb.co/eTU5yJ/kor1.jpg)

Koronium has an atomic weight lower than hydrogen.

This element must be composed of the subdivisions of the protons (quarks) and the subdivisions of the electron (preons).

That is, it ALREADY finds itself at the first state of ether (baryon state of ether).

This fact poses another huge problem for heliocentricity.

The baryon state of ether is the etheric level of matter: the implosion of the atom means the attaining of one of the four possible states of ether, baryon - meson - quark - subquark (the fifth state of ether is the aether).

The element Koronium is already in an imploded state of ether: it has a lower atomic weight than hydrogen.

Any kind of implosion of matter toward the first state of ether means the activation of the ANTIGRAVITATIONAL Whittaker potential scalar longitudinal wave.

The DePalma effect, the Biefeld-Brown effect, the Nipher effect, the Podkletnov effect, the Allais effect, all are possible because of the partial implosion of the atom.

The rotation/spinning at a high rate of an object will cause the atoms to slightly implode: to achieve the baryon state of ether. That is, the centrifugal action of the rotation will cause the normal configuration of the atom (groups of 18 subquarks) to change into groups of 9 subquarks (baryons, fourth state of ether; mesons are the third state of ether, quarks the second state, and subquarks represent the first position of ether).  The outer surface (or edge) of the object will have a higher distribution of the slightly imploded atoms, thus attracting the Whittaker potential ether waves to the rotating body. The ether waves will form a torsion field around the object, partially shielding it from the influence/effect of the pressure gravity (dextrorotatory string), thus resulting in a lower value of the g acceleration.

In the Biefeld-Brown effect, the charging of the capacitor under high voltage, will activate the laevorotatory subquarks of the capacitor causing a slight implosion of the object, and the forming of a torsion field around it, which will act as a gravity shield.

However, these effects take place with the context of a PARTIAL implosion of the atom: Koronium is ALREADY in a fully imploded state of ether (baryon level).

This means that ANY kind of attractive gravitational force will have no effect at all on this lighter than hydrogen element.

Any kind of rotational/translational movement of the Sun/Earth will simply leave Koronium behind in outer space: the Sun could not possible exhibit the green coronal spectral line discovered by Harkness and Young in 1869 in the context of Newtonian mechanics/heliocentricity.

Since Koronium is a lighter than hydrogen element, it finds itself at the first level of ether: an implosion of the atom from the proton/electron state of matter to the baryon state of ether.

As we have seen in parts I-II of this series, a 2 million degree temperature of the Sun's corona was invented ad-hoc in order to avoid having to admit the existence of an element lighter than hydrogen. But this huge temperature requires pseudo-science: magnetic reconnection, a concept fully debunked by the Nobel prize laureate Dr. Hannes Alfven.


The use of the superconducting quantum interference device (SQUID) has permitted scientists to record the existence of the energy field around the human body.

"In 1963, Gerhard Baule and Richard McFee of the Department of Electrical Engineering, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY detected the biomagnetic field projected from the human heart. They used two coils, each with 2 million turns of wire, connected to a sensitive amplifier.

In 1970, David Cohen of MIT, using a SQUID magnetometer, confirmed the heart measurements. By 1972, Cohen had improved the sensitivity of his instrument, enabling him to measure magnetic fields around the head produced by brain activities.

Subsequently, it has been discovered that all tissues and organs produce specific magnetic pulsations, which have come to be known as biomagnetic fields. The traditional electrical recordings, such as the electrocardiogram and electroencephalogram, are now being complemented by biomagnetic recordings, called magnetocardiograms and magnetoencephalograms. For various reasons, mapping the magnetic fields in the space around the body often provides a more accurate indication of physiology and pathology than traditional electrical measurements."

"In the early 1980’s, Dr. John Zimmerman began a series of important studies on therapeutic touch, using a SQUID magnetometer at the University of Colorado School of Medicine in Denver. Zimmerman discovered that a huge pulsating biomagnetic field emanated from the hands of a TT practitioner. The frequency of the pulsations is not steady, but "sweeps" up and down, from 0.3 to 30 Hz (cycles per second), with most of the activity in the range of 7-8 Hz.

Confirmation of Zimmerman’s findings came in 1992, when Seto and colleagues, in Japan, studied practitioners of various martial arts and other healing methods. The "Qi emission" from the hands is so strong that they can be detected with a simple magnetometer consisting of two coils, of 80,000 turns of wire."

The biomagnetism of the human aura consists of elements (similar to Koronium) lighter than hydrogen: the SQUID magnetometer can only detect the baryonic elements found in the etheric body; feelings, emotions and thoughts are to be found at the quark and subquark level.

The gas discharge visualization (GDV) camera, developed by the Dr. Korotkov Co., St. Petersburg, Russia, is perhaps the best-known form of contemporary high-voltage electrophotography based on the Kirlian effect (Kirlian and Kirlian, 1961) and was first discovered in Russia in 1948.

An example of the raw data, a single GDV image from a single finger, is shown:

(http://www.faim.org/sites/default/files/styles/medium/public/rubik-figure20-05.jpg?itok=d_YZTCGh)

GDV photograph of corona discharge from human thumb, raw data.

Kirlian photography of plants:

(http://webspace.webring.com/people/gl/lemagicien/kfpage/kfjava/flor1.gif)

(http://webspace.webring.com/people/gl/lemagicien/kfpage/kfjava/flor2.gif)


On a spherical Earth, which undergoes a galactic orbit, no life forms would be possible at all: the auras of plants, animals and humans would disappear in an instant of a second since they are NOT susceptible to the influence of attractive terrestrial gravitation.

Life is possible ONLY on a stationary Earth, where these auras are sustained by the continuous radiation of the laevorotatory ether waves, the phenomenon is called biochirality:

https://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488624#msg1488624

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 31, 2018, 12:40:32 AM
NEWTONIUM

(http://wwwcdn.skyandtelescope.com/wp-content/uploads/2017-08-25_59a052d4a22b7_infrared_lores.jpg)

Newtonium is the first element listed in D. Mendeleev's 1906 periodic table of the elements:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2045088#msg2045088

While Koronium was emitted by the Sun, Newtonium is released by the Black Sun (actually a very deep red color); since astronomers could not possibly say that the Moon is radiating Newtonium, they had to ascribe this emission to the Sun.

Again, modern science resorted to using an explanation which involved high levels of ionization (Fe X), extremely large temperatures (over 1 million degrees Celsius), and magnetic reconnection in order to explain the red spectral line, but these notions have been shown to be false:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2057945#msg2057945

The radiation of the Black Sun, Newtonium, consists of strings of subquarks (also called Vril).

The Allais effect proves that the Moon could not possibly cause the solar eclipse:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg760382#msg760382

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.

These antigravitational effects were caused by the emission of Newtonium by the Black Sun, during the solar eclipses.

Here is an amazing photograph, featuring both Koronium and Newtonium:

(https://image.ibb.co/b68PtJ/solareclipse_shadia_habbal.png)

(S. Habbal, Institute for Astronomy at the University of Hawaii, using an Atik 414EX camera)

Koronium is being emitted by the Sun, while Newtonium is released by the Black Sun.

Newtonium is lighter than Koronium: it is the lightest element of all (strings of subquarks).

Newtonium comprises the Whittaker potential scalar waves.

Newtonium = fourth state of ether, subquarks

Newtonium causes biochirality (left-handed form of molecules).

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1676115#msg1676115 (the Black Sun and laevorotatory subquarks)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 02, 2018, 09:01:43 AM
NEWTONIUM II

(https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/images/707001main_20121113-eclipse-full.jpg)

The hypothesis regarding the very hot temperature of the solar corona originated with B. Edlen's analysis of the unusual spectral features.

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fspas.2018.00009/full

He was faced with a basic choice: either accept that at least two lighter than hydrogen elements are emitted by the Sun (even though Newtonium is released by the Black Sun), or put forth an outrageous hypothesis where the temperature of the solar corona becomes at least 400 times hotter than the temperature of the photosphere (even though the reverse temperature gradient of the Sun contradicts every original expectation of the thermonuclear model). This implausible supposition had to be accompanied by an even more outlandish explanation: magnetic reconnection.

(https://rnumata.org/research/img/recon_schematic_e.png)

Now scientists think that the temperature of the solar corona can exceed even the temperature of the core itself:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080625183153/http://rocinante.colorado.edu/~mnowak/PR/text.html

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/asna.200710803

In 1949, H. Friedman put forth another related hypothesis: that solar x-rays emissions had a thermal origin.

However, x-rays from the Sun are not generated thermally, electromagnetic particles are being accelerated through the Sun's own ether field to create x-rays. The cause of the solar x-rays is electrical, not thermal.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2057945#msg2057945 (Koronium and articles on the magnetic merging pseudo-science)

Within the context of a gaseous solar model, it is not surprising that extreme temperatures must be invoked. A gaseous Sun has no other means of producing highly ionized species.

"Since the corona must be excessively hot to produce such
ions in a gaseous context, the continuous spectrum of the K-corona
has been dismissed as a strange artifact, produced
by electronic scattering of photospheric light. Otherwise,
the coronal continuous spectrum would be indicating
that apparent coronal temperatures are no warmer than those
of the photosphere. It would be impossible for the gaseous
models to account for the presence of highly ionized
species within the outer solar atmosphere.

Current temperature estimates are
flirting with violations of both the first and second laws of
thermodynamics: it is difficult to conceive that localized temperatures
within flares and the corona could greatly exceed
the temperature of the solar core."

P.M. Robitaille

'MAGNETIC MERGING' THEORIES

What we have found means that we can describe plasma phenomena inside a finite volume only if no electric current crosses the surface. In the terminology of the magnetic field description, this means we can describe plasma phenomena inside a finite volume only if the perpendicular component of the curl is zero at every point of the surface. All theories of 'magnetic merging' (or 'field line reconnection') which do not satisfy this criterion are misleading or erroneous, and deserve no attention.

Dr. Hannes Alfven, Cosmic Plasma

https://web.archive.org/web/20130204074026/http://plasma.colorado.edu/phys7810/articles/Alfven_FieldLines_1976.pdf

On Frozen-In Lines and Field-Line Reconnection

Dr. Hannes Alfven

https://web.archive.org/web/20130204074019/http://plasma.colorado.edu/phys7810/articles/Falthammar_MovingFieldLines_2007.pdf

On the Concept of Moving Magnetic Field Lines

C.G. Falthammar

The criticism of the magnetic reconnection hypothesis was removed by Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Magnetic_reconnection&oldid=419843114#Criticism_of_the_reconnection_concept

Dr. W. Heikkila has analysed the dayside reconnection and nightside reconnection problems:

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1988Ap%26SS.144...85H (pg. 90 - 94)


However, none of the astrophysicists involved in the study of magnetic reconnection have taken into consideration the fact that the magnetic field consists of TWO STREAMS OF PARTICLES, North - South and also South - North.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2009680#msg2009680

The modern study of the magnetic field/electromagnetism ONLY includes the South to North flow.

Yet, there are TWO continuous streams of different particles.

Whittaker proved that the potential consists of pairs of bidirectional longitudinal scalar waves, and that the same equation governs both gravity and magnetism.

The second flow/stream of particles IS THE GRAVITATIONAL WAVE, which has a dextrorotatory spin. Both flows/streams form the ELECTROGRAVITATIONAL FIELD.

That is, magnetic reconnection HAS TO BE ACCOMPANIED BY gravitational reconnection as well.

Magnetic reconnection refers to the breaking and reconnecting of oppositely directed magnetic field lines in a plasma.

However, the breaking of the magnetic field lines (South to North lines) would ALSO mean the breaking of the gravitational field lines (North to South lines).

At this point, the solar corona would become a gigantic gas centrifuge, with no outer casing and zero g force.

"The Sun is a giant ball of hot plasma held together by its gravity."

http://www.igpp.ucla.edu/public/mkivelso/refs/PUBLICATIONS/high_beta-shibasaki.pdf

(https://image.ibb.co/hq7Bvy/gerhana_artsoul_homestead_com.jpg)

The key to understanding the fallacy of the magnetic reconnection hypothesis is to understand that Whittaker proved the existence of the potential scalar waves, a bidirectional flow of magnetism/electricity and gravity: magnetic reconnection has to be accompanied by gravitational reconnection. The breaking of the magnetic lines also means the breaking of the gravitational lines, rendering that portion of the solar corona with zero g force.

Newtonium  is the very first element of Mendeleev's periodic table: it is emitted by the Black Sun and constitutes the fourth state of ether (subquark strings).


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 03, 2018, 12:50:29 AM
COMET P17/HOLMES II

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1619877#msg1619877 (part I)

"I have never in my experience as a cometary scientist seen such a symmetric structure in emitted material," admits Carey Lisse of Johns Hopkins University's Applied Physics Laboratory.

This comet's behavior, particularly the perfectly spherical outer halo, has confounded even the experts.

(Sky and Telescope, Astronomy News, Nov. 15, 2007)

Formerly, the Sun was the largest object in the Solar System. Now, comet 17P/Holmes holds that distinction.

The diameter of the coma of the comet was measured at 1.4 million kilometers (0.9 million miles) on 2007 November 9 by Rachel Stevenson, Jan Kleyna and Pedro Lacerda of the University of Hawaii Institute for Astronomy.

The comet is an unprecedented half a million times brighter than before the eruption began. This amazing eruption of the comet is produced by dust ejected from a tiny solid nucleus made of ice and rock, only 3.6 km (roughly 2.2 miles) in diameter.

How does such a gravitationally minuscule body hold in place a uniform, spherical coma 7 million kilometers in diameter?

How could it maintain a spherical shape against the effects of the solar wind?

The unexplained ability of a relatively minuscule comet nucleus to hold in place a highly spherical coma, up to millions of miles in diamater, against the force of the solar wind.

(http://www.spaceweather.com/comets/holmes/05nov07/sadegh-ghomizadeh-comet17-PHolmes.4.nov._1194324271.jpg)
(http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/michael/blog/0711/071107-Comet.jpg)
(http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/michael/blog/0711/071104-Holmes-web.jpg)
(http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/michael/blog/0711/071103-0392-CometHolmes-web.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/96/17P-Holmes_Auvergne_2007_11_02.jpg/800px-17P-Holmes_Auvergne_2007_11_02.jpg)
(https://i-cdn.embed.ly/1/display?key=fd92ebbc52fc43fb98f69e50e7893c13&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.spaceweather.com%2Fcomets%2Fholmes%2F26oct07%2FEduardo-Hernandez1.jpg)
(http://spaceweather.com/comets/holmes/25oct07/Ilia-Teimouri1.jpg)

Comet Holmes 17P has made international headlines with an energetic outburst that has left astronomers speechless. The website skyandtelescope.com has called it "the weirdest new object to appear in the sky in memory." "For no apparent reason," the comet began to increase in luminosity, rapidly brightening from 17th magnitude to about 2.5 -- approximately a million-fold increase in brightness.

In the span of a few days, the comet's coma grew to such an enormous and bright disk that it could be seen with the naked eye, though it never gets as close to the Sun as the planet Mars, and when it suddenly erupted, it was moving AWAY from the Sun.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 03, 2018, 08:11:58 AM
COMET P17/HOLMES III

(http://www.zam.fme.vutbr.cz/~druck/astro/Halebopp/Hb_hy_comp/Hb_hy.png)

Comet Hyakutake on April 17, 1996
Comet Hale - Bopp on April 8, 1997

(http://www.zam.fme.vutbr.cz/~druck/astro/Holmes/Hb_hy_ho/Hb_hy_ho.png)

Comet Hyakutake on April 17, 1996
Comet Hale - Bopp on April 8, 1997
Comet Holmes on December 9, 2007

Comet 17P/Holmes' coma RETAINS its spherical shape.

SOLAR RADIATION PRESSURE AND SOLAR WIND INFLUENCE ON COMET 17P/HOLMES

In the case of an outburst (comet 17P/Holmes), the grain particles in the coma WILL NOT be affected by solar radiation pressure.

http://www.comet-toolbox.com/include/VINCENT-C076.pdf (gravitational + solar pressure equation factor)

The efficiency factor of the solar radiation pressure is the most important term in the equation:

http://www.on.br/cce/2016/en/arq/L2.pdf (page 40)

In practice, however, the efficiency factor depends on the wavelength, leading to a complex equation.

The motion of dust depends on the β parameter.

β = Fpr/Fg

Fpr is directly proportional to the efficiency factor of the solar radiation pressure, Qpr.

Since both forces are radial and opposite and vary as r-2, a dust particle will follow a Keplerian trajectory that corresponds to an "effective" gravitational field reduced by the factor (1 - β)Fg.

In the case of outburst activity the particles are immediately accelerated to very large velocities (~500 m/s). Therefore, the impact of radiation pressure could be not important at early stages of coma evolution.

http://www2.ess.ucla.edu/~jewitt/papers/2010/SKJ10.pdf

"We do not detect any systematic acceleration of the fragments
between 2007 November 6 and 2007 November 14 UT,
since a single mean velocity over the observational data set predicts
a time of ejection that agrees with the published eruption
time (Wilkening et al. 2007). This suggests two things: first,
that radiation pressure does not significantly affect the motion
of the fragments."

Especially if the expansion velocity is high, it may completely dominate the radiation-pressure effects for days or even weeks.

This means that the β factor is equal to zero.


Watch video clips on "Comet Machholz Returns! (April 6, 2007)", and "Comet 96P/Machholz in SOHO field 2012" that show Comet 96P/Machholz on two occasions has had its gas tail almost aligned to the Sun, these events were during the Sun's magnetic pole was reserved, where the magnetic Ring Center of the Solar System was supposedly very near or inside the Sun, with Saturn, Sun and Jupiter arranged in their near superior conjunction. As observed by the SOHO spacecraft, these are the immutable observational proofs for comet gas tail does not align with the Sun; this anomaly during the perihelion visits for this short-period comet is inexplicable with the conventional wisdom of cometary science.

This anomaly was also empirically observed by the SOHO spacecraft for several other comets, such as the Comet NEAT event, and this can be further confirmed by checking the solar wind speed data recorded by the SOHO spacecraft.

These empirical observations showed that the conventional wisdom on solar wind causing the gas tail of comet to always point directly away from the Sun, is a myth.

Comet NEAT as observed by the SOHO spacecraft, was subjected to two corona mass ejections at its near passage of the Sun, and in between the solar wind had fluctuated from a hourly average low speed of 354 km/s to a hourly average high speed of 916 km/s as recorded by the SOHO's CELIAS/MTOF Proton Monitor, yet the comet gas tail deflection was observed to be not affected by the solar wind fluctuation at all; this is an empirical evidence that the gas tail of comet is not blown away by solar wind to point directly away from the Sun.

https://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/pickoftheweek/old/06apr2007/


While passing close to the Sun, the tail is always at a constant angle with respect to the Sun. It is not being deflected by direct solar wind blasts at all. At a much larger distance, other factors come into play (neglected by modern astrophysics), the barycenter of the jovian planets, the electrostatic atmosphere confinement of the comet.

(comet 96P/Machholz unaffected by solar wind)

The tail does simply trail along behind the comet, while passing next to the Sun, in the face of direct solar wind blasts.

(comet NEAT unaffected by solar wind)

(three different comets, including NEAT, no tail lag whatsoever)

Comet C/2011 L4 (PanSTARRS) completely unaffected by direct solar wind blasts:





The tail is not pointing away from the Sun, nor is it interracting with the solar wind blast.

http://umtof.umd.edu/pm/crn/archive/CRN_1999.HTML (the solar wind speed data recorded by the SOHO spacecraft)

Here is the formula for solar wind blasts:

https://books.google.ro/books?id=CcSUeymd-14C&pg=PA155&lpg=PA155&dq=comet+tail+solar+wind+lag&source=bl&ots=u4TZVffFJQ&sig=aRyTgPRMglxRHShybkwkO-QS5DU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjg2q-VsbrbAhUEApoKHdoGD_cQ6AEISTAE#v=onepage&q=comet%20tail%20solar%20wind%20lag&f=false

tan ε = V/ω

V = component of the comet's orbital velocity perpendicular to the radius vector
ω = radial solar-wind speed
ε = tail lag or aberration angle

While passing very close the Sun, NO TAIL LAG ANGLE IS VISIBLE AT ALL, none whatsoever, in the face of direct solar wind blasts.


Without the solar radiation pressure and the solar wind factors taken into consideration, one is left with the normal gravitational equation.

F = Gm1m2/rcomet nucleus-particle2

m1 = mass of the comet 17P/Holmes

and

F = Gmsunm2/rsun-comet2

m2 (the mass of the olivine grain) is the same for both equations, as is G.

m1 = 8.3 x 109 kg

rcomet nucleus-particle = 700,000 km

msun = 1.989 x 1030 kg

rsun-comet = 2.43 AU = 363,522,825.801 km

Thus, the force exerted by the Sun on a grain particle of the coma of comet 17P/Holmes will be much larger (by a factor of ~1014) than the force exerted by the comet itself on the grain particle.

(http://www.zam.fme.vutbr.cz/~druck/astro/Holmes/2007_10_26-27a/2007_10_26_ha.png)

26.10.2007

(http://www.zam.fme.vutbr.cz/~druck/astro/Holmes/2007_10_27-28a/2007_10_27_ha.png)

27.10.2007

(http://www.zam.fme.vutbr.cz/~druck/astro/Holmes/2007_10_31-01a/2007_10_31_rubinar1000.png)

31.10.2007

(http://www.zam.fme.vutbr.cz/~druck/astro/Holmes/2007_10_31-01c/2007_10_31_rubinar2000.png)

31.10.2007

(http://www.zam.fme.vutbr.cz/~druck/astro/Holmes/2007_11_04-05a/2007_11_05_rubinar500.png)

5.11.2007

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 05, 2018, 11:45:18 AM
INERTIAL ELECTROSTATIC CONFINEMENT OF COMETS: KORONIUM AND NEWTONIUM EFFECTS

A rare admission from modern astronomy:

(https://image.ibb.co/ncz5dT/comle2.jpg)

Dr. Stuart D. Bale, UC Berkeley

The solar wind (both the visible Sun and the Black Sun) contains Koronium and Newtonium. Both these lighter than hydrogen elemens will reach a comet first, well before the stream of plasma and particles.

If a comet did not have some kind of shielding mechanism from these etheric elements, it would disintegrate immediately, since the effect of electrostatic levitation of dust and gas particles would then be greatly increased.

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/rog.20005 (section 4)

https://www.colorado.edu/physics/phys7810_005/phys7810_005_fa09/articles/Sickafoose_JGR_2002.pdf

(https://image.ibb.co/nM97Q8/comle.jpg)

The only possible shield against the antigravitational effects of Koronium and Newtonium is cold inertial electrostatic confinement. Although this subject has been studied for almost one hundred years, the creation of such a confinement was achieved only by N. Tesla (100 meter diameter ball lightning spheres used at Tunguska)  and by the Vril society german scientists (Projekt Kronos).

An electrostatic wave is a longitudinal wave.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/231118382_A_photon_rest_mass_and_the_propagation_of_longitudinal_electric_waves_in_interstellar_and_intergalactic_space

The nested atmosphere cloud of comet Hale-Bopp:

(http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cms/cpg15x/albums/userpics/cometaryhydrogencloud1.jpg)

The hydrogen cloud surrounding comet Hale Bopp in 1997 far exceeds the comet’s visible tail (inset). Although not visible from the Earth, the hydrogen envelope is enormous, completely dwarfing the Sun which is shown as the yellow dot in the lower right corner.
Credit: SOHO/SWAN (ESA & NASA) & J.T.T. Mdkinen et al.

http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cosmos/C/Cometary%2BHydrogen%2BCloud

Just like in the case of the Sun, the nested hydrogen shell must be encapsulated in a  larger nested etheric cloud composed of elements lighter than hydrogen.

The only way, in my opinion, for a comet to generate the ball lightning envelope around its coma is using acoustic waves (just like in the case of the Tibetan acoustic levitation).

http://blogs.esa.int/rosetta/2014/11/11/the-singing-comet/

(both the comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko and the Rosetta spacecraft orbit much closer to Earth):

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1894620#msg1894620
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 07, 2018, 07:11:57 AM
SAGNAC EFFECT WITHOUT AN AREA OR A CLOSED LOOP

Phase Conjugate Mirror

"Let us begin with the properties of a phase conjugate mirror. A phase conjugate mirror is like a mirror, in that it reflects incident light back towards where it came from, but it does so in a different way than a regular mirror.

In a regular mirror, light that strikes the mirror normal to its surface, is reflected straight back the way it came (A). This is also true of a phase conjugate mirror (B). When the light strikes a normal mirror at an angle, it reflects back in the opposite direction, such that the angle of incidence is equal to the angle of reflection. (C)

(http://cns-alumni.bu.edu/~slehar/PhaseConjugate/PhaCon1.jpg)

In a phase conjugate mirror, on the other hand, light is always reflected straight back the way it came from, no matter what the angle of incidence. (D)

This difference in the manner of reflection has significant consequences. For example if we place an irregular distorting glass in the path of a beam of light, the parallel rays get bent in random directions, and after reflection from a normal mirror, each ray of light is bent even farther, and the beam is scattered.

(http://cns-alumni.bu.edu/~slehar/PhaseConjugate/PhaCon2.jpg)

With a phase conjugate mirror, on the other hand, each ray is reflected back in the direction it came from. This reflected conjugate wave therefore propagates backwards through the distorting medium, and essentially "un-does" the distortion, and returns to a coherent beam of parallel rays travelling in the opposite direction."

(http://cns-alumni.bu.edu/~slehar/PhaseConjugate/PhaCon3.jpg)

Steven Lehar


http://www.physics.iitm.ac.in/~cvijayan/opc-review.pdf

Optical phase conjugation: principles, techniques, and applications

Over the last three decades, optical phase conjugation (OPC) has been one of the major
research subjects in the field of nonlinear optics and quantum electronics.

Optical phase conjugation (OPC)1 is a new laser-based technique developed since
1970s. As this technique is feasible for use in many significant applications, the study
of OPC has become one of the most active research subjects in the areas of nonlinear
optics and quantum electronics.

In the area of OPC-related studies, a huge number (more than thousands) of
research papers and conference presentations have been published since 1970s.



https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0609/0609202.pdf

Test of the one-way speed of light and the first-order experiment of
Special Relativity using phase-conjugate interferometers

The use of the phase-conjugate mirror in optical interferometry has produced huge breakthroughs.

"The Michelson-Morley experiment is a second-order experiment, i.e., the possible effect is proportional to (v/c)2, where v is the speed of the system.

A first-order interference experiment has an intrinsic advantage over the second-order experiment. The possibility of the first-order experiment comes from the utilization of the nonlinear optical properties. While the conventional interferometers utilize beam splitters, mirrors and lenses that have linear optical properties, the utilization of the nonlinear optical properties brings a magnificent change to the interferometers. Phase-conjugate mirrors (PCMs), the nonlinear optical devices, have an important property of phase reversal.

More generally, Lorentz’s conclusion that the interference experiments cannot detect the first-order effects is not true for a phase-conjugate interferometer because the possibility of the phase reversal is not considered.

(https://image.ibb.co/g629jS/lis5.jpg)

The equation which expresses the relationship between interference fringes and time differences is F=dt[c/λ] (where dt = 4vL/c^2).

This experiment shows us two important points. First, it confirms the phase reversal of a PCM and demonstrates the Sagnac effect in an arc segment AB, not a closed path. Second, it gives us important implications: The result, φ = 4πRΩL/cλ, can be re-written as φ = 4πvL/cλ where v is the speed of the moving arc segment AB (where R is the radius of the circular motion, Ω is the rotational rate).

If we increase the radius of the circular motion as shown in Fig. 6, the arc segment AB will approach a linear segment AB, the circular motion will approach the linear motion, the phase-conjugate Sagnac experiment will approach the phase-conjugate first-order experiment as shown in Fig. 4, and the phase shift is always φ = 4πvL/cλ.


The Sagnac effect for a ROTATING LINEAR SEGMENT interferometer IS: 2vL/c^2, where v=RΩ.

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0609/0609222.pdf


The first phase-conjugate Sagnac experiments on a segment light path were conducted in 1986.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/44579053_Phase-conjugate_fiber-optic_gyro

Phase-conjugate fiber-optic gyro, P. Yeh, I. McMichael, M. Khoshnevisan, Applied Optics 25(7):1029-30 · April 1986

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/26797550_Self-pumped_phase-conjugate_fiber-optic_gyro

Self-pumped phase-conjugate fiber-optic gyro, I. McMichael, P. Yeh, Optics Letters 11(10):686-8 · November 1986 

The articles can be read here:

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a170203.pdf (appendices 5.1 and 5.4)


Using the phase-conjugate mirror for the Sagnac interferometer (a rotating linear segment, without an area or a loop), we can obtain the Sagnac phase shift formula for the Michelson-Gale experiment.

That is, in order to compute the SAGNAC EFFECT for an interferometer located away from the center of rotation (on a flat earth or on a spherical earth) one needs to use the phase-conjugate mirror: the phase shift of the rotating linear segment (equal in length to the  sides of the rectangle which actually measure the Coriolis and the Sagnac effects) will be equal to the phase shift of the interferometer in the shape of a rectangle.

(http://image.ibb.co/iQWfJ7/cir2.jpg)

A rectangular interferometer, sides L and h.

The lower leg, L, is located at a distance h from the center of the turntable.

The upper leg L is located at a distance 2h from the center of the turntable.


Let us now unfold the perimeter of the sides where the light beams of the interferometer will be acted upon by the rotation of the turntable:

P = 2L

Now, we will have a rotating linear segment of length P, located at a distance of 2h from the center of the turntable.

The Sagnac formula will be:

dt = 2vPP/c2

vP = Ω x 2h

2h is the radius to the linear segment of length P

Thus, the Sagnac formula for the unfolded perimeter (now a rotating linear segment) will be THE SAME as the Sagnac formula for a rectangle with sides 4h and P (P = 2L), whose center coincides with that of the circle/turntable.


Let us now unfold the perimeter of the rectangular interferometer used in the Michelson-Gale experiment.

The lower leg of the rectangle will be a distance of 6,377.825 km from the center of the rotation (in the heliocentrical version, the radius from the center of the Earth to Clearing, Illinois, is less than 6,378.164 km).

The upper leg of the rectangle will be located at a distance of 6,378.164 km (6,377.825 + 1113 ft (339.24 m = 0.33924 km)) from the center of the rotation.

Unfolding the sides: P = 2L.

Now, we will have a rotating linear segment of length P, located at a distance of 6,378.164 km from the center of the rotation.

The Sagnac formula will be:

dt = 2vPP/c^2

vP = Ω x 6,378.164 km

Thus, the Sagnac formula for the the rotating linear segment (whose length is equal to 2L) will be THE SAME as the Sagnac formula for a rectangle with sides 12,756.328 km and P (P = 2L), whose center coincides with that of the rotation itself.


Thus, by contrast, A. Michelson and H. Gale actually calculated the Sagnac formula for a rectangle with sides 2010 ft (612.65 m) and 1113 ft (339.24 m) which is placed at the center of the rotation.

This is equivalent to calculating main term of the Coriolis effect formula, if we place the rectangular interferometer at the surface of the Earth, as was done in the Michelson-Gale experiment.

The ratio of the correct Sagnac formula to the Coriolis effect formula will be:

6,378.164/0.33924.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 08, 2018, 10:30:28 PM
SAGNAC EFFECT WITHOUT AN AREA OR A CLOSED LOOP II

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/44579053_Phase-conjugate_fiber-optic_gyro

Phase-conjugate fiber-optic gyro, P. Yeh, I. McMichael, M. Khoshnevisan, Applied Optics 25(7):1029-30 · April 1986

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a170203.pdf (appendix 5.4)

Dr. P. Yeh
PhD, Caltech, Nonlinear Optics
Principal Scientist of the Optics Department at Rockwell International Science Center
Professor, UCSB
"Engineer of the Year," at Rockwell Science Center
Leonardo da Vinci Award in 1985
Fellow of the Optical Society of America, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers

The first phase-conjugate Sagnac experiment on a segment light path with an external pump configuration.

Regular Sagnac experiments use closed loops (Michelson-Gale, Hammar, ring laser gyroscopes); the phase-conjugate mirror permits the experiment to be performed WITHOUT either a closed loop or an area (of the interferometer): just a single segment of light (containing both straight and curved paths).

(https://image.ibb.co/iue4co/yeh1.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/eOczCo/yeh2.jpg)

The fiber coil is rotated with the rest of the setup remaining fixed at various rotation rates (CW and CCW).


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/26797550_Self-pumped_phase-conjugate_fiber-optic_gyro

Self-pumped phase-conjugate fiber-optic gyro, I. McMichael, P. Yeh, Optics Letters 11(10):686-8 · November 1986 

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a170203.pdf (appendix 5.1)

The first phase-conjugate Sagnac experiment on a segment light path with a self-pumped configuration.

Two separate experiments are being performed.

In the second experiment, two separate light beams (CW and CCW, each) are transmitted in a single segment (which features both straight and curved paths), and the Sagnac phase shift is being recorded. All optical parts are rotating together.

(https://image.ibb.co/c4HSyT/yeh3.jpg)


Professor R. Wang has extended these experiments by letting the arc segment AB approach a LINEAR SEGMENT AB, while the circular motion approaches a linear motion.

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0609/0609202.pdf

Test of the one-way speed of light and the first-order experiment of
Special Relativity using phase-conjugate interferometers

(https://image.ibb.co/g629jS/lis5.jpg)

The Sagnac effect for a ROTATING LINEAR SEGMENT interferometer IS: 2vL/c^2, where v=RΩ.

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0609/0609222.pdf


These experiments prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Sagnac effect can be measured/recorded using interferometers which feature no area and no closed loop at all.

The use of the phase-conjugate mirror (optical phase conjugation technology) allows the calculation of the Sagnac phase shift for the Michelson-Gale experiment which utilizes an interferometer with two different radii (before 1975, this technology was not available): see the previous message.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 10, 2018, 06:31:24 AM
MICHELSON-GALE FORMULA: CORIOLIS FORCE EFFECT ON THE CONVEX AND CONCAVE AREAS OF THE INTERFEROMETER

(http://memory.loc.gov/ndlpcoop/ichicdn/n0762/n076242.jpg)

Dr. Ludwik Silberstein, a physicist on the same level with Einstein and Michelson, partially inspired and supported the Michelson-Gale experiment.

In 1921, Dr. Silberstein proposed that the Sagnac effect, as it relates to the rotation of the Earth or to the effect of the ether drift, must be explained in terms of the Coriolis effect: the direct action of Coriolis forces on counterpropagating waves.

http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Michelson-Gale/Silberstein.pdf

The propagation of light in rotating systems, Journal of the Optical Society of America, vol. V, number 4, 1921

Dr. Silberstein developed the formula published by A. Michelson using very precise details, not to be found anywhere else.

He uses the expression kω for the angular velocity, where k is the aether drag factor.

He proves that the formula for the Coriolis effect on the light beams is:

dt = 2ωσ/c2

Then, Dr. Silberstein analyzes the area σ and proves that it is actually a SUM of two other areas (page 300 of the paper, page 10 of the pdf document).

The effect of the Coriolis force upon the interferometer will be to create a convex and a concave shape of the areas: σ1 and σ2.

The sum of these two areas is replaced by 2A and this is how the final formula achieves its final form:

dt = 4ωA/c2

A = σ1 + σ2

That is, the CORIOLIS EFFECT upon the light beams is totally related to the closed contour area.

In 1922, Dr. Silberstein published a second paper on the subject, where he generalizes the nature of the rays arriving from the collimator:

http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Historical%20Papers-Mechanics%20/%20Electrodynamics/Download/2645

In 1924, one year before the Michelson-Gale experiment, Dr. Silberstein published a third paper, where he again explicitly links the Coriolis effect to the counterpropagating light beams in the interferometer:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14786442408634503

Thus A. Michelson knew well in advance that he was going to actually measure the Coriolis effect and not the Sagnac effect.


In a rare admission, even N. Ashby states that the Coriolis force is responsible for the term commonly used in GPS technology for the Sagnac effect:

(https://image.ibb.co/geRwSo/kel11.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/fkfHYT/kel10.jpg)

If the interferometer is located away from the center of rotation, there will be three effects which should be recorded/measured: the Coriolis effect, the rotational Sagnac effect, and the orbital Sagnac effect.

The Coriolis effect is proportional to the area of the interferometer, as proven above.

The rotational/orbital Sagnac are proportional to the linear velocity of rotation.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2023979#msg2023979 (topological considerations of the Sagnac effect, part I)

"Since the Sagnac effect is an effect in light that is enclosed inside an optical fiber we can conclude that Sagnac effect is distributed along a line and not over an area. No light and no rotation exists in the enclosed area. Sagnac detected therefore an effect of translation although he had to rotate the equipment to produce the effect inside the fiber.

We conclude that the later expression

Δt = 4vL/c^2

is the correct interpretation."

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2024144#msg2024144 (Michelson-Gale experiment hoax, ten consecutive messages)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2029623#msg2029623

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1023972214666

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0103091.pdf

Coriolis Force and Sagnac Effect

Because of acting of gravity-like Coriolis force the trajectories of co- and anti-rotating photons have different radii in the rotating reference frame, while in the case of the equal radius the effective gravitational potentials for the photons have to be different.

Two different radii = the interferometer is located away from the center of rotation

Thus, the Coriolis effect will be registered first, and this effect is much smaller in magnitude than the rotational Sagnac (which is proportional to the radius of rotation, and proportional to the linear velocity).

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2049574#msg2049574 (Michelson formula and the stationary Earth)

Prior to 1975, the rotational Sagnac formula for an interferometer located away from the center of rotational could not be derived.

The use of the phase-conjugate mirror changed everything: the Sagnac effect can now be measured in a single segment of light with no area and no closed loop.

Thus, the rotational Sagnac can be derived easily for the Michelson-Gale experiment (see the two previous messages); same length of the sides actually involved in the effect on the counterpropagating beams, same latitude as in the MGX:

dt = 2vPP/c^2

vP = Ω x 6,378.164 km

Thus, the Sagnac formula for the the rotating linear segment (whose length is equal to 2L) will be THE SAME as the Sagnac formula for a rectangle with sides 12,756.328 km and P (P = 2L), whose center coincides with that of the rotation itself.

By contrast, A. Michelson and H. Gale actually calculated the Sagnac formula for a rectangle with sides 2010 ft (612.65 m) and 1113 ft (339.24 m) which is placed at the center of the rotation.

This is equivalent to calculating main term of the Coriolis effect formula, if we place the rectangular interferometer at the surface of the Earth, as was done in the Michelson-Gale experiment.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 11, 2018, 01:06:31 AM
SAGNAC EFFECT VS CORIOLIS EFFECT MYSTERY SOLVED

(https://cdn.steemitimages.com/0x0/https://steemitimages.com/DQmZqugMj6GndBg3Lb3xNeqMGLoxT94LXknH8WFETv9qfpB/Screenshot_20180309_150637.jpeg)

The Coriolis force effect on the counterpropagating light beams is A PHYSICAL EFFECT.

The Sagnac effect is AN ELECTROMAGNETIC EFFECT.

The Coriolis effect arises when an interferometer is placed at a certain distance from the center of rotation (turntable, Earth) and has a much lower magnitude than the rotational Sagnac effect.

The actual path of the light beams will be physically altered, as proven by Dr. Silberstein: this is not an electromagnetic effect.

The Coriolis effect requires a closed contour area (closed loop) and two different radii to be measured.

It deals only with the area and the two different radii.

It is not related to the RADIUS OF ROTATION at all.

It simply measures the PHYSICAL EFFECT of rotation upon the light beams in an interferometer.


By contrast, the SAGNAC EFFECT is an ELECTROMAGNETIC EFFECT.

No physical modifications of the actual path of the light beams takes place.

The delay/increase in time is due to the effect of the ether drift upon the light beams.

(https://image.ibb.co/k5ye17/ky1.jpg)

For an interferometer which is placed away from the center of rotation, as was the Sagnac interferometer (1913), there will be a modification of the light paths due to the Coriolis effect. No modification of the light paths occurs only for when the center of rotation coincides with the geometrical center of the interferometer.

It applies to linear/translational/uniform motion and can also be detected by rotation.

The use of the phase conjugate mirror has eliminated the need for either an area or a closed loop of the interferometer.

Professor Yeh has measured the Sagnac effect in a single segment of light, using the PCM.


The Coriolis force will deflect the light beam.

The Sagnac effect is related to the direct action of the ether drift upon the bosons of the subquark strings themselves.


https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0103091.pdf

Coriolis Force and Sagnac Effect

Because of acting of gravity-like Coriolis force the trajectories of co- and anti-rotating photons have different radii in the rotating reference frame, while in the case of the equal radius the effective gravitational potentials for the photons have to be different.


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/288491190_SAGNAC_EFFECT_A_consequence_of_conservation_of_action_due_to_gauge_field_global_conformal_invariance_in_a_multiply-joined_topology_of_coherent_fields

Moreover, in the Sagnac effect there are two vector potential components with respect to clockwise and counterclockwise beams. The measured quantity, as will be explained more fully below, is then the phase factor or the integral of the potential difference between those beams and related to the angular velocity difference between the two beams. Therefore, as the vector potential measures the momentum gain and the scalar potential measures the kinetic energy gain, the photon will acquire “mass.”

A photon = a boson = a neutrino = the Kaluza-Klein particle

Protons, electrons, baryons, quarks are composed of subquarks.

Mesons also have a subquark subdivision.

Subquarks are strings of bosons and antibosons which propagate in double torsion fashion.

Therefore, the distinction of quantum mechanics between fermions and bosons does not take into account the fact that all subatomic particles consist of subquarks and bosons.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1998110#msg1998110 (two consecutive messages)


The Coriolis force effect upon the light beams is totally different from the Sagnac effect.

The Coriolis force deals only with the physical effect upon the light beams, while the Sagnac effect is concerned only with the quantum mechanical consequences on the same light beams (the effect of the ether drift on the bosons).

The Coriolis force is concerned only with the physical effect of the ether drift on the light beam as it pertains to an actual deflection of the path. It requires both an area and a closed loop.

In the Sagnac effect there is no deflection of the path: the delay/increase in time is due to the ether drift action on the bosons themselves. It is related to the path/line of light, and does not require either an area or a closed loop to be measured.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 14, 2018, 12:52:06 AM
SAGNAC EFFECT VS CORIOLIS EFFECT MYSTERY SOLVED II

(http://www.fs.wettzell.de/LKREISEL/GrossRing/cii_block.jpg)

The original papers published by G. Sagnac (The Luminiferous Ether is Detected as a Wind Effect Relative to the Ether Using a Uniformly Rotating Interferometer):

http://zelmanov.ptep-online.com/papers/zj-2008-07.pdf

http://zelmanov.ptep-online.com/papers/zj-2008-08.pdf

In 1913, Georges Sagnac measured ONLY the Coriolis effect, and not the true Sagnac effect (proportional to the linear velocity and radius of rotation).

Here is the shape of the interferometer used by Sagnac:

(https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S1631070517300907-gr001.jpg)

Different sets of radii and the center of rotation do not coincide with the geometrical center of the interferometer.

That is why Sagnac had to use the formula which features the area and the angular velocity: he only measured the CORIOLIS EFFECT.

Even if the shape of the interferometer is made to look more symmetrical, there are still two different radii to deal with:

(https://image.ibb.co/kisGKd/mgrot5.jpg)

Before 1920, there were only three papers published on the Sagnac effect, the two articles by Sagnac and the 1911 paper by M. von Laue which deals with the theoretical aspects.

That is why, in 1921, Dr. Ludwik Silberstein published the most in-depth analysis ever done on the relationship between the Coriolis force effect and the Sagnac interferometer.

http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Michelson-Gale/Silberstein.pdf

The propagation of light in rotating systems, Journal of the Optical Society of America, vol. V, number 4, 1921

He proved that the real cause of the phenomenon measured by Georges Sagnac was the CORIOLIS FORCE EFFECT.

(https://image.ibb.co/bZAaCy/mgrot4.jpg)

Dr. Silberstein reveals the error committed by M. von Laue in the paper published in 1911:

"Laue seems, by the way, to be under the misapprehension that the light rays relative to the rotating table are straight lines, which they are not."

Dr. Silberstein proved that the effect measured by Sagnac is A PHYSICAL EFFECT, a deflection/inflection of the light beams due to the CORIOLIS FORCE.

In 1922, he extended the definition used in his 1921 paper on the nature of the rays arriving from the collimator:

http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Historical%20Papers-Mechanics%20/%20Electrodynamics/Download/2645

In the study (in Russian, The Sagnac Effect) which features over 300 references, G. Malykin omitted the very important article published by Dr. Silberstein in 1922.


The precise proofs published by Dr. Ludwik Silberstein in 1921 show that the Coriolis force will exert a physical effect on the light beams, if the center of rotation does not coincide with the center of the interferometer.

Michelson, Morley, Sagnac, Pogany, Hammar, Dufour and Prunier, Miller, Post all measured the Coriolis effect on the interferometer which was located away from the center of rotation. The Coriolis effect is a physical effect, proportional to the area and the angular velocity.

Professor Yeh and Professor Wang detected the true Sagnac effect which is an electromagnetic effect, and is proportional to the linear velocity and the radius of rotation.

CORIOLIS EFFECT on the Sagnac interferometer which is placed away from the center of rotation: the physical modification of the light beams (inflection and deflection) as proven by Dr. Silberstein.

SAGNAC EFFECT on the interferometer: the modification of the velocities of the light beams, c + v and c - v.

That is why the Coriolis effect is much smaller in magnitude than the true Sagnac effect, which is proportional to the radius of rotation.


Phase-conjugate fiber-optic gyro, P. Yeh, I. McMichael, M. Khoshnevisan, Applied Optics 25(7):1029-30 · April 1986

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a170203.pdf (appendix 5.4)

Dr. P. Yeh
PhD, Caltech, Nonlinear Optics
Principal Scientist of the Optics Department at Rockwell International Science Center
Professor, UCSB
"Engineer of the Year," at Rockwell Science Center
Leonardo da Vinci Award in 1985
Fellow of the Optical Society of America, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers

The first phase-conjugate Sagnac experiment on a segment light path with an external pump configuration.

Regular Sagnac experiments use closed loops (Michelson-Gale, Hammar, ring laser gyroscopes); the phase-conjugate mirror permits the experiment to be performed WITHOUT either a closed loop or an area (of the interferometer): just a single segment of light (containing both straight and curved paths).

Final formula published by Dr. Yeh:

(https://image.ibb.co/j5n75J/mgrot3.jpg)

v = RΩ

4πRLΩ/c^2 = 4πvL/c^2

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 15, 2018, 08:52:25 AM
SAGNAC EFFECT VS CORIOLIS EFFECT MYSTERY SOLVED III

(https://image.ibb.co/mtGWny/mgrot6.jpg)

The most ingenious experiment performed by Professor Yeh: light from a laser is split into two separate fibers, F1 and F2 which are coiled such that light travels clockwise in F1 and counterclockwise in F2.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/26797550_Self-pumped_phase-conjugate_fiber-optic_gyro

Self-pumped phase-conjugate fiber-optic gyro, I. McMichael, P. Yeh, Optics Letters 11(10):686-8 · November 1986 

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a170203.pdf (appendix 5.1)

The first phase-conjugate Sagnac experiment on a segment light path with a self-pumped configuration.

The Sagnac phase shift for the first fiber F1:

+2πR1L1Ω/λc

The Sagnac phase shift for the second fiber F2:

-2πR2L2Ω/λc

These are two separate Sagnac effects, each valid for the two fibers, F1 and F2.

The use of the phase conjugate mirror permits the revealing of the final formula, the total phase difference:

φ = -2(φ2 - φ1) = 4π(R1L1 + R2L2)Ω/λc

To obtain the correct Sagnac effect for two separate segments (which feature different lengths and different speeds) of an interferometer which is located away from the center of rotation, one has to add (not substract) the two distinct components.

Let us go back now to the derivation provided by A. Michelson for the 1925 MGX experiment:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2024700#msg2024700

dt = l1/(c - v1) - l1/(c + v1) - (l2/(c - v2) - l2/(c + v2))

Of course, by proceeding as in the usual manner for a Sagnac phase shift formula for an interferometer whose center of rotation coincides with its geometrical center, we obtain:

2v1l1/(c2 - v21) - 2v2l2/(c2 - v22)

l = l1 = l2

2l[(v1 - v2)]/c2

2lΩ[(R1 - R2)]/c2

R1 - R2 = h

2lhΩ/c2

By having substracted two different Sagnac phase shifts, valid for the two different segments, we obtain the CORIOLIS EFFECT formula.

The Coriolis effect means that the phase shift will be caused by the physical modification of the light paths (inflection and deflection due to the Coriolis force effect on the light beams).

l1/(c - v1) - l2/(c - v2) (we combine the terms which feature c - v1,2)

(l1c - l1v2 - l2c + l2v1)/(c2 - cv2 - cv1 +v1v2)

Factoring out c and observing that the terms l1v2/c, l2v1/c and v1v2/c can be neglected, we obtain:

(l1 - l2)/(c - v2 - v1)

Since l1 ~= l2, we can see that the velocity addition equations for the true Sagnac effect, c + v and c - v (in this case c + v1 + v2 and c - v1 - v2) are not applicable to the Coriolis effect situation.

The Coriolis effect is caused by the physical deflection/inflection of the light beams, not by the modification of the velocities.


Let us proceed now exactly as Professor Yeh did in the phase conjugate mirror experiment described above:

dt = l1/(c - v1) - l1/(c + v1) + (l2/(c - v2) - l2/(c + v2))

2[(l1v1 + l2v2)]/c2

Now, we have the correct, true Sagnac effect formula valid for an interferometer which is located away from the center of rotation.

Averaging (v1 + v 2)/2 = v, and (l1 + l2)/2 = l, v1 ~= v2 = v, l1 ~= l2 = l, we obtain:

4lv/c2

Moreover, we can see that now the velocity addition equations are valid:

(l1 + l2)/(c - v2 - v1)

To obtain the Coriolis effect phase shift, we substract the phase differences for each separate segment.

This formula is proportional to the area and the angular velocity.

To get the Sagnac effect phase shift, we have to add the phase differences for each separate segment

This formula is proportional to the linear velocity (and the radius of rotation), and will feature the addition of the two separate speeds and segment lengths. We can average the lengths and the velocities, to get a final formula which features one length and one velocity.

This is the great omission in the calculation done by A. Michelson.

Instead of adding the phase differences to get the true Sagnac effect, he substracted the phase differences and obtained the formula for the Coriolis effect.

The two separate segments are distinct entities, with different velocities and lengths, thus they have two non-identical Sagnac phase differences. They have to be added to get a final phase formula, which, by averaging the lengths and the velocities, can feature a single length and a single velocity.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 18, 2018, 02:27:13 AM
SAGNAC EFFECT VS CORIOLIS EFFECT MYSTERY SOLVED IV

(https://image.ibb.co/hfYYpd/mgrot.jpg)

The turning of the MGX area at the hypothetical rotational speed of the Earth takes place a distance of some 4,250 km from the center of the Earth (latitude 41°46').

And yet, this crucial fact was totally omitted by Michelson, even though the calculations offered a very important clue.

dt = l1/(c - v1) - l1/(c + v1) - (l2/(c - v2) - l2/(c + v2))

For each separate segment/arm of the interferometer, each with a slightly different length and a slightly distinct velocity, the calculations proceed as follows:

l1/(c - v1) - l1/(c + v1) = 2l1v1/c2

l2/(c - v2) - l2/(c + v2) = 2l2v2/c2

The phase differences have already been obtained.

By substracting these phase differences, one is actually going to derive the Coriolis effect formula:

https://www.ias.ac.in/article/fulltext/pram/087/05/0071

Spinning Earth and its Coriolis effect on the circuital light beams

Since the phase differences have already been calculated, one has to ADD them in order to get the final, total Sagnac effect:

2[(l1v1 + l2v2)]/c2

This fact has never been observed to the present day.

For a Sagnac interferometer, located away from the center of rotation, one has to ADD the separate phase differences in order to obtain the full Sagnac effect:

dt = l1/(c - v1) - l1/(c + v1) + (l2/(c - v2) - l2/(c + v2))


FULL CORIOLIS EFFECT FOR THE MGX:

4AΩsinΦ/c2

FULL SAGNAC EFFECT FOR THE MGX:

4Lv(cos2Φ1 + cos2Φ2)/c2


Sagnac effect/Coriolis effect ratio:

R((cos2Φ1 + cos2Φ2)/hsinΦ

R = 4,250 km

h = 0.33924 km

(actually, here is how to exactly calculate the radius of the hypothetical spherical Earth at a certain latitude:
https://web.archive.org/web/20150919165338/http://www.usenet-replayer.com/faq/comp.infosystems.gis.html )

The rotational Sagnac effect is much greater than the Coriolis effect for the MGX.

Michelson proceeded with his calculations AS IF he had placed a rectangular interferometer with the dimensions of 2010 ft (612.65 m) by 1113 ft (339.24 m) with its center of rotation coinciding with the center of rotation of the Earth (radius of 6,376.164 km).

Once the interferometer is moved away from the center of rotation, the Coriolis effect will be measured first: the formula involves the substraction of the separate phase differences.

By contrast, the much greater Sagnac effect formula will be derived by adding the separate phase differences.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 19, 2018, 02:47:26 AM
GENERALIZED SAGNAC FORMULA

‘We dance in a circle and suppose, while the secret sits in the centre and knows.’

Robert Frost

Sagnac formula for an interferometer whose center of rotation coincides with its geometrical center:

Δt = l/(c - v) - l/(c + v)

Sagnac formula for an interferometer located away from the center of rotation (different radii, different velocities):

Δt = (l1 + l2)/(c - v1 - v2) - (l1 + l2)/(c + v1 + v2)

Proof:

Δt = l1/(c - v1) - l1/(c + v1) + (l2/(c - v2) - l2/(c + v2))

The use of the phase conjugate mirror has permitted, for the very first time in 1986, the derivation of the Sagnac formula for an interferometer which features two different lengths and linear velocities.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/26797550_Self-pumped_phase-conjugate_fiber-optic_gyro

Self-pumped phase-conjugate fiber-optic gyro, I. McMichael, P. Yeh, Optics Letters 11(10):686-8 · November 1986 

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a170203.pdf (appendix 5.1)

φ = -2(φ2 - φ1) = 4π(R1L1 + R2L2)Ω/λc

Since Δφ = 2πc/λ x Δt, Δt = 2(R1L1 + R2L2)Ω/c2.


l1/(c - v1) + l2/(c - v2) = (l1c - l1v2 + l2c - l2v1)/(c2 - cv1 - cv2 + v1v2)

l1/(c + v1) + l2/(c + v2) = (l1c + l1v2 + l2c + l2v1)/(c2 + cv1 + cv2 + v1v2)

Since we have already added the correct Sagnac differences, corresponding to the (l1 + l2)/(c - v1 - v2) and (l1 + l2)/(c + v1 + v2) terms, now the final phase difference can be correctly derived:

(l1c - l1v2 + l2c - l2v1)/(c2 - cv1 - cv2 + v1v2) - (l1c + l1v2 + l2c + l2v1)/(c2 + cv1 + cv2 + v1v2) = 2[(l1v1 + l2v2)]/c2

The Coriolis effect formula by contrast is just the physical effect of the Coriolis force upon the light beams, a modification of the paths of the light beams leading to a final formula where the effect is directly proportional to the area and to the angular velocity.

The Sagnac effect is an electromagnetic effect, the modification of the velocities of the light beams, c + v1 + v2 and c - v1 - v2, leading to the final formula where the Sagnac effect is directly proportional to the linear velocity (radius of rotation x angular velocity) and the length of the segments of the interferometer.

Michelson only measured the Coriolis effect and not the rotational Sagnac effect, since he substracted twice within the same derivation, he obtained a Coriolis effect formula:

http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1925ApJ....61..137M&amp;data_type=PDF_HIGH&amp;whole_paper=YES&amp;type=PRINTER&amp;filetype=.pdf


Sagnac formula for an interferometer whose center of rotation coincides with its geometrical center:

Δt = l/(c - v) - l/(c + v) = 2lv/c2

Sagnac formula for an interferometer located away from the center of rotation (different radii, different velocities):

Δt = (l1 + l2)/(c - v1 - v2) - (l1 + l2)/(c + v1 + v2) = 2[(l1v1 + l2v2)]/c2

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 21, 2018, 03:23:01 AM
GENERALIZED SAGNAC FORMULA II

Velocity addition equations for the rotational Sagnac effect: c + v1 + v2 and c - v1 - v2.

The Heaviside-Lorentz equations are not invariant under Galilean transformations.

However, the original J.C. Maxwell dynamical equations are invariant under Galilean transformations:

(https://image.ibb.co/gcfFwJ/md12.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/gpLyGJ/md14.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/dikXbJ/md15.jpg)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2058884#msg2058884 (Dynamical Maxwell equations)

Equation (2.24) represents two waves: one wave propagating forward at a speed of (c+u) in the direction of the positive x axis and another wave propagating backward at a speed of (c-u) in the direction of the negative x axis.

(https://image.ibb.co/dbZ7Kd/gsac2.jpg)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 22, 2018, 12:42:40 AM
GENERALIZED SAGNAC FORMULA III

(http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s2-07/2-07_files/image001.gif)

Sagnac effect formula (center of rotation coincides with the geometrical center of the interferometer):

Δt = l/(c - v) - l/(c + v) = 2lv/c2

l = 2πr


(http://image.ibb.co/iQWfJ7/cir2.jpg)

Sagnac effect formula (interferometer located away from the center of rotation):

Δt = (l1 + l2)/(c - v1 - v2) - (l1 + l2)/(c + v1 + v2) = 2[(l1v1 + l2v2)]/c2

Coriolis effect formula:

4AΩ/c2


(http://earthmeasured.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/michelson-gale-1.png)

Sagnac effect formula (interferometer located on the surface of the Earth, at a certain latitude):

Δt = (l1 + l2)/(c - v1 - v2) - (l1 + l2)/(c + v1 + v2) = 2[(l1v1 + l2v2)]/c2

Coriolis effect formula:

4AΩsinΦ/c2


It is interesting to note that Michelson, Silberstein, Lorentz, Miller, Post could not derive the correct Sagnac effect formula (interferometer located away from the center of rotation).

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 22, 2018, 01:46:44 AM
TESLA'S NONLINEAR CIRCUIT THEORY

http://www.cheniere.org/references/TeslaOSC.pdf

Barrett, T.W., "Tesla's nonlinear oscillator-shuttle-circuit (OSC) theory."   Annales de la Fondation Louis de Broglie, 16, pp. 23-41, 1991

Dr. Terence Barrett (Stanford Univ., Princeton Univ., U.S. Naval Research Laboratory, Univ. of Edinburgh) analyzes Tesla's electrical circuit design theory, conclusion: Tesla did not use either Kirchhoff's laws or Ohm's law.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 23, 2018, 12:11:34 AM
ETHER BLACKBODY RADIATION

“Now the apparent temperature of the Sun is obviously nothing but the temperature of the solar rays, depending entirely on the nature of the rays, and hence a property of the rays and not a property of the Sun itself. Therefore it would be not only more convenient, but also more correct, to apply this notation directly, instead of speaking of a fictitious temperature of the Sun, which can be made to have meaning only by the introduction of an assumption that does not hold in reality”

M. Planck

On the Temperature of the Photosphere: Energy Partition in the Sun

http://vixra.org/pdf/1310.0140v1.pdf

If the  local thermal equilibrium and its extension of Kirchhoff’s formulation fails to guarantee that a blackbody spectrum is produced at the center of the Sun, then the gaseous models have no mechanism to generate its continuous emission. In part, this forms the basis of the solar opacity problem.

Stellar Opacity: The Achilles’ Heel of the Gaseous Sun

http://vixra.org/pdf/1310.0139v1.pdf

Given the problems which surround solar opacity, it remains difficult to understand how the gaseous models of the Sun have survived over much of the twentieth century. Local
thermal equilibrium does not exist at the center of the Sun. Both Kirchhoff and Planck require rigid enclosure which is not found in the Sun. Planck has also warned that the Sun fails to meet the requirements for being treated as a blackbody.

On the validity of Kirchhoff's law of thermal emission

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1265348/

https://www.libertariannews.org/2014/04/04/kirchhoffs-law-proven-invalid-the-implications-are-enormous/

Further, all blackbodies are limited to solids, since only they can be perfect absorbers, and unlike liquids, they cannot sustain convection.  Prof. Robitaille also explains why gases do not follow these laws because they do not emit radiation in a continuous manner, further discrediting the standard model of stars.  The emissivity of a real gas drops with temperature. Planck’s equation remains the only fundamental equation that has yet to be linked to physical reality, which is a direct result of Kirchhoff’s error.

Prof. Robitaille notes that the standard gaseous Sun model uses equations of radiative transfer, and those equations all have, at their source, KLTE.  The invalidity of KLTE means there cannot be blackbody radiation at the center of the Sun, which means the entire standard model of the gaseous Sun is invalid.

https://principia-scientific.org/new-study-invalidates-kirchhoff-s-law-of-thermal-emission/

https://web.archive.org/web/20160211150839/http://www.ptep-online.com/index_files/2015/PP-41-04.PDF

“The Theory of Heat Radiation” Revisited:
A Commentary on the Validity of Kirchhoff’s Law of Thermal Emission
and Max Planck’s Claim of Universality


The ether's blackbody radiation = CMBR:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1828839#msg1828839


Potential gravitational waves blackbody radiation:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1612.04199.pdf

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 25, 2018, 03:02:58 AM
SACRED CUBIT EXACT SPACING FORMULA FOR THE ZETA FUNCTION

In the currently accepted theory, the average gap/spacing formula between consecutive zeros is just a side note; in my opinion, it plays a far greater role in determining the values of the zeros of the zeta function.

2π/log(z/2π) = 4/{sc x lnz  +  [sc x ln(sc/4)]}

π = 2/sc (sc = sacred cubit)

2π/log(t/2π) = 4/{ln[(t ⋅ sc)/4]}sc

It is actually a sacred cubit formula.

In the conventional theory of Riemann's zeta function, this formula represents the average spacing between the zeros of the zeta function on the 1/2 line.

In the theory which uses the fact that the height of the Gizeh pyramid is 141.34725 meters (14.134725 is the value of the first zero of the zeta function), this formula becomes an exact sacred cubit spacing equation, if the ln term can be expressed directly in terms of integers and sacred cubit constants.

ln 20sc = 4 sc

4/{ln[(t ⋅ sc)/4]}sc, t = 80

4/{ln[(80 ⋅ sc)/4]}sc = 1/sc2

Zeta zeros

79.337
82.91

80 + 1/sc2 = 82.47

82.47 - 79.337 = 3.13288
82.91 - 82.47 = 0.44
80 - 79.337 = 0.663

0.44 = 0.6632

Sacred cubit constants:

1/sc2 = 2.47, 2.4753, 0.24753...

1/(1-sc) = 2.744, 0.2744...

1.309 = 2.618/2 (2.618 x 12 = 2/sc x 10)

0.309 = 0.618/2

0.84 = 0.535/sc

3.39 = 0.535sc , also 3.4025 = 2.5 x 1.361

7.2738 = missing apex height (286.1 si, sacred inches)

1.4305 (2.861/2 = 1.4305)

2.5442 or 2.5424 (100 sacred inches)

3.1815 = 5sc

3.8178 = 6sc

1.1444 = 0.2861 x 4


ln 4sc = 2sc/(2 - sc)

ln2 = 8sc2- 4sc

ln 80sc = 16sc2 - 4sc

ln 1000 = 5 + 3sc

ln 2.5 = 1/3(1-sc)

ln 3 = 2/2.861sc

ln 5 = (2/3sc + 7)/5

ln 7 = 1/2sc3

ln sc = 2sc/(2 - sc) - 2ln2


4/{ln[(t ⋅ sc)/4]}sc

t = 2n10

n= 2

4/{ln[(40 ⋅ sc)/4]}sc = 3.3945

Zeta zeros

37.586
40.9187
43.327

40 + 3.3945 = 43.3945

43.3945 - 37.586 = 5.8085 = 8 x 0.726

43.3945 - 40.9187 = 2.4758 = 1/sc2

In this case, the sacred cubit formula gives the exact distance to the zeta function zero.

43.3945 - 43.327 = 0.0675

2.4758 + 0.0675 = 2.5433 = 100si

These precise mathematical relationships can be observed only if the average spacing formula is written in terms of sacred cubits.

4/{ln[(t ⋅ sc)/4]}sc

n = 3 (case examined earlier)

4/{ln[(t ⋅ sc)/4]}sc

n = 4

4/{ln[(160 ⋅ sc)/4]}sc = 1.9408

Zeta zeros

158.85
161.189

160 + 1.9408 = 161.9408

161.9408 - 158.85 = 3.0908 = 6.1816/2

161.189 - 161.9408 = 0.7518

0.7518 x sc = 0.4784
3.0908 x sc = 1.9666

1.9666 x 0.4784 = 0.9408

4/{ln[(t ⋅ sc)/4]}sc

n = 5

4/{ln[(320 ⋅ sc)/4]}sc = 1.5986

Zeta zeros

318.853
321.16

320 + 1.5986 = 321.5986

321.5986 - 318.853 = 2.7456 = 1/(1-sc)

321.5986 - 321.16 = 0.4386

4/{ln[(t ⋅ sc)/4]}sc

n = 6

4/{ln[(640 ⋅ sc)/4]}sc = 1.359

Zeta zeros

639.928
640.6948
641.945

641.359 - 639.928 = 1.431 = 2.862/2
641.359 - 640.6948 = 0.6642
641.945 - 641.359 = 0.586

1.431 + 0.6642 = 1/(1/sc2 - 2)

4/{ln[(t ⋅ sc)/4]}sc

n = 7

4/{ln[(1280 ⋅ sc)/4]}sc = 1.18177

Zeta zeros

1279.3328
1280.1559
1281.828

1281.18177 - 1279.3328 = 1.849
1281.18177 - 1280.1559 = 1.02587
1281.828 - 1281.18177 = 0.64723

1.849 + 1.02587 = 2.87487
1.849 + 0.64723 = 1/0.28602 - 1

4/{ln[(t ⋅ sc)/4]}sc

n = 8

4/{ln[(2560 ⋅ sc)/4]}sc = 1.045475

Zeta zeros

2559.234
2560.2633
2561.4056

2561.045475 - 2559.234 = 1.8115
2561.045475 - 2560.2633 = 0.782175
2561.4056 - 2661.045475 = 0.360125

0.782175 + 0.360125 = 1.1423 =~ 1.1444 = 0.2861 x 4

4/{ln[(t ⋅ sc)/4]}sc

n = 9

4/{ln[(5120 ⋅ sc)/4]}sc = 0.93736

Zeta zeros

5119.366
5120.24
5121.0835

5120.93736 - 5119.366 = 1.57136 = 1/sc

4/{ln[(t ⋅ sc)/4]}sc

n = 10

4/{ln[(10240 ⋅ sc)/4]}sc = 0.84952

Zeta zeros

10239.5405
10240.3278
10241.2142
10241.492

10240.84952 - 10239.5405 = 1.309017 = 2.618034/2, again an exact value
10241.2142 - 10240.84952 = 0.364683 = 1 - 1sc

4/{ln[(t ⋅ sc)/4]}sc

n = 11

4/{ln[(20480 ⋅ sc)/4]}sc = 0.776725

Zeta zeros

20479.1428
20479.8897
20481.07
20481.91135

20480.776725 - 20479.1428 = 1.634
20480.776725 - 20479.8897 = 0.887
20481.07 - 20480.776725 = 0.2933
20481.91135 - 20480.776725 = 1.1346

1.1346 - 0.887 = 0.2476 = 1/10sc2

4/{ln[(t ⋅ sc)/4]}sc

n = 12

4/{ln[(40960 ⋅ sc)/4]}sc = 0.7154

Zeta zeros

40959.6213
40960.28154
40961.49
40961.796

40960.7154 - 40959.6213 = 1.094
40960.7154 - 40960.28154 = 0.43388
40961.49 - 40960.7154 = 0.7746

0.7746 - 0.43388 = 0.34072 = 0.5354sc = 2.5 x 1.362

Now, a more difficult test.

http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/zeta_tables/index.html

4/{ln[(t ⋅ sc)/4]}sc

n = 13

4/{ln[(81920 ⋅ sc)/4]}sc = 0.6631

Zeta zeros

81919.8862
81920.0323
81921.321

81920.6631 - 81919.8862 = 0.77689
81920.6631 - 81920.0323 = 0.6308
81921.321 - 81920.6631 = 0.6579

0.77689 + 0.6579 = 1.43479 = 2.86595/2

4/{ln[(t ⋅ sc)/4]}sc

n = 14

4/{ln[(163840 ⋅ sc)/4]}sc = 0.6178905 = 1/sc x 2.5424

Zeta zeros

163839.8017
163840.154
163840.632
163841.17

163840.6178905 - 163839.8017 = 0.81619
163840.6178905 - 163840.154 = 0.46389
163840.632 - 163840.6178905 = 0.01411
163841.17 - 163840.6178905 = 0.55211

0.81619 + 0.55211 = 1.3683
0.46389 - 0.01411 = 0.45 = 0.2861sc

4/{ln[(t ⋅ sc)/4]}sc

n = 15

4/{ln[(327680 ⋅ sc)/4]}sc = 0.57846

Zeta zeros

327679.5804
327680.803
327681.19467

327680.57846 - 327679.5804 = 0.99806
327680.803 - 327680.57846 = 0.22454
32768119467 - 327680.803 = 0.61614

0.99806 - 0.61614 = 0.38192 = 6sc/10

4/{ln[(t ⋅ sc)/4]}sc

n = 16

4/{ln[(655360 ⋅ sc)/4]}sc = 0.54376

Zeta zeros

655359.3515
655359.697
655359.9748
655360.9358
655361.3667
655361.8966

655360.54376 - 655359.3515 = 1.19226
655361.8966 - 655360.54376 = 1.35284

1.35284 + 1.19226 = 2.5451 = 100si


4/{ln[(t ⋅ sc)/4]}sc

Let t = 100sc

4/{ln[(100sc ⋅ sc)/4]}sc = 2.71376

Zeta zeros

60.8317
65.1125
67.079

66.34376 - 60.8317 = 5.51836
66.34376 - 65.1125 = 1.23756 = 2.47512 = 1/sc2
67.079 - 66.34376 = 0.72894, where 7.2738 = 286.1si


Lehmer pairs

4/{ln[(t ⋅ sc)/4]}sc

175sc = 111.353

4/{ln[(175sc ⋅ sc)/4]}sc = 2.1856

Zeta zeros

111.03
111.87
114.32

113.5386 - 111.03 = 2.508
113.5386 - 111.87 = 1.6681

2.508 - 1.6681 = 0.84 = 0.535/sc

4/{ln[(t ⋅ sc)/4]}sc

7005.1 = 11008sc (sc = 0.63636446)

11008 = 256 x 43

ln43 = 1.4134725 x 2.66
ln43sc = 2.618/2 + 2

4/{ln[(7005.1 ⋅ sc)/4]}sc = 0.895485

Zeta zeros

7005.062866
7005.100564
7006.74

7005.995485 - 7005.062866 = 0.93262
7005.995485 -  7005.100564 = 0.894921
7006.74 - 7005.995485 = 0.7445

0.93262 - 0.894921 = 1/26.53 26.66 = 53.33/2
0.93262 + 0.894921 = 2.872sc
0.93262 - 0.7445 = 0.18812 = 1/(2 x 2.658)

The hidden structure of the zeros of the zeta function:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1855591#msg1855591 (18 parts)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2006274#msg2006274 (5 parts)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 30, 2018, 05:42:54 AM
SACRED CUBIT EXACT SPACING FORMULA FOR THE ZETA FUNCTION II

The average number of zeta zeros on the entire critical strip:

N(T) = (T/2π)(lnT/2π) - T/2π + S(T)

http://inspirehep.net/record/1245512/files/arXiv%3A1307.8395.pdf (average number of zeros on the critical line)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2007826#msg2007826

http://numbers.computation.free.fr/Constants/Miscellaneous/zetazeros.pdf

http://web.yonsei.ac.kr/haseo/Rikkyo.pdf

http://www.mat.uniroma3.it/users/pappa/sintesi/24_Menici.pdf

The main term is a sacred cubit formula:

N(T) = (T ⋅ sc)[ln(t ⋅ sc)/4 - 1)\]/4

If L(T) = 4/{ln[(t ⋅ sc)/4]}sc (average spacing formula), then

N(T) = T(1/L(T) - sc/4)

If N(T) can be expressed directly in terms of sacred cubit constants, then it becomes an exact sacred cubit spacing formula.

T = 40

N(T) = 5.41765

L(T) = 3.3945

Zeta zeros

40.9187
43.327

8N - 43.327 = 0.1 - 3x0.02861

8N - 40.9187 = 1.361 x 5.33/3

43.3945 - 8N = 0.0533


T = 80

N(T) = 20sc(4sc - 1) = 19.661

L(T) = 1/sc2 = 2.47

Zeta zeros

79.337
82.91

82.47 + 79.337 = 161.807

4N = 78.644

80 - 4N ~= 1.361

79.337 - 4N = 0.44/sc

82.91 - 82.47 = 0.44

82.91 - 4N = 2 x 5.343 x 0.4


T = 160

N(T) = 56.9723

Zeta zeros

161.189
158.85

3N - 161.189 = 3.4 x 2.861

3N - 158.85 = 12.06688

63.6363 - 16.1773 = 47.459 (five elements subdivision)

47.459
12.066
7.11885
4.7459
2.373


T = 320

N(T) = 149.246

Zeta zeros

318.853
321.16

318.853 - 2N = 32sc = 8 x 2.545 = 2 x 10.18

10.18 = 4 x 2.545

321.16 - 2N = 136.01/6 = 20 + 2.668


T = 640

N(T) = 369.096

Zeta zeros

639.928
640.6948
641.945

2N - 639.928 = 154.43sc

617.72/4 = 154.43

617.72 x sc = 1/0.0025442

2N - 641.945 ~= 136.1 x 1.41347/2

2N - 640.6948 = 27.45 x 1/0.25424


T = 1280

N(T) = 879.3987

Zeta zeros

1279.3328
1280.1558
1281.828

1279.3328 - N = 400

1280.1558 - N = 7.5 x 53.434

1281.828 - N ~= 2.4 x π x 53.43 = 4.8/sc x 53.43


T = 100sc

N(T) = 13.32147

Zeta zeros

60.8317
65.1125
67.079

60.8317 - 4N = 7.54582 = 2.4 x π

5N - 65.1125 = 1/(1-sc) - 2

67.079 - 5N = 1/sc2 - 2

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 07, 2018, 02:06:32 AM
SACRED CUBIT EXACT SPACING FORMULA FOR THE ZETA FUNCTION III

N(T) = (T ⋅ sc)[ln(t ⋅ sc)/4 - 1)\]/4

L(T) = 4/{ln[(t ⋅ sc)/4]}sc (average spacing formula)

N(T) = T(1/L(T) - sc/4)


14.1347 + 6.3636 = 20.4977

Zeta zeros:

21.022
25.0108

N = 0.5951616

40N = 23.80646

25.0108 - 40N = 100si (1/sc2 - 2) = 4.5 x 0.2676

40N - 21.022 = 4.5 x 0.61877


14.134725 + 6.363 + 0.477225 = 20.975

3.1815
0.80886
0.477225
0.31815
0.159075

N = 0.68586

40N - 21.022 = 12 x 0.5344

40N - 25.0108 = 6 x sc2


14.134725 + 9.545 = 23.68

N = 1.231466

20N - 21.022 = 4 - 1/100si

25.0108 - 20N = 6sc/10


14.134725 + 9.545 + 0.995 = 24.675

16.1773 - 9.545 = 6.6328

6.6328
1.68632
0.99492
0.66328
0.33164

N = 1.444851

20N - 25.0108 = 1/sc3

30.424 - 20N = 2.4 x sc

20N - 21.022 = 2.861 x 1/(1-sc) = 5sc x 1/sc2


T = k10n x sc, 2n10, or other suitable values involving the sacred cubit

Let T1 = T + L(T)

N(T1) = (T + L(T))/2π {ln[(T + L(T)) ⋅ sc/4] - 1} = N1


T = 22 x 10 = 40

L(T) = 3.3945 = 5.335sc

T1 = 43.3945

N = 5.41765

N1 = 6.44

Zeta zeros

37.586 = z1
40.9187 = z2
43.327

8(N + N1) - 2z1 = 19.6892

8(N + N1) - 2z2 = 13.0238

8(N + N1) - z1 - z2 = 16.3565

16N - z1 - z2 = 8.1777

16N1 - z1 - z2 = 24.5353


8(N + N1) - z1 - z2 = 2 x (16N - z1 - z2) = 32N - 2z1 - 2z2

z1 + z2 = 32N - 8(N + N1)

This is the first exact formula ever for the sum of two consecutive zeta zeros obtained in terms of N, N1 and integers.

This means, in my opinion, that there exists a recurrence formula, precise to the nth decimal, which features Nk, Lk(T), and which has to involve the second zeta function.

For T = 20 and T = 80 there are symmetrical equations involving N and N1, but not the precise formula obtained for T = 40; an exact formula might be more complex for these values and for T = k10n (as an example).


T = 14.134725

N = -0.425722

L = 7.74977

N1 = 0.86345

z1 = 14.134725
z2 = 21.022

20N1 = 17.269
40N1 = 34.538

N1 - N = 1.2892

N1 + N = 0.43773

-20(N1 - N) + z1 + z2 = 9.362175

z1 + z2 - 40N1 = 0.618725 = 2.4749/4

40N1 - z2 = 13.516


40N1 - z2 - z1 - z2 + 40N1 ~= (N1 - N)10

80N1 - 10(N1 - N) - z1 ~= 2z2

Since we know the value of z1 (height of the Gizeh pyramid is 141.34725), we can immediately find the value of z2.


Again, a confirmation of the fact that there must exist a hidden recurrence formula, starting with 14.134725, which then will provide each subsequent zeta zero, one at a time. Obviously, such a recurrence formula, involving perhaps both zeta functions, would be very complex, since it must detect the Lehmer pairs if needed.

Also, there are shortcut formulas, for values such as 2n10 or k10nsc, suitable to obtain the adjacent zeta zeros values.


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 08, 2018, 12:56:20 AM
RADIUS OF THE SUN PARADOX

Within the context of modern solar theory, the Sun cannot have a distinct surface. Gases are incapable of supporting such structures. Modern theory maintains the absence of this vital structural element. Conversely, experimental evidence firmly supports that the Sun does indeed possess a surface. For nearly 150 years, astronomy has chosen to disregard direct observational evidence in favor of theoretical models.

Dr. P.M. Robitaille

http://www.ptep-online.com/2011/PP-26-08.PDF

On the Presence of a Distinct Solar Surface: A Reply to Herve Faye

(https://image.ibb.co/nnigj8/rds.jpg)

Spectacular images of the solar surface have been acquired in recent years, all of which manifest phenomenal structural elements on or near the solar surface. High resolution images acquired by the Swedish Solar Telescope reveal a solar surface in three dimensions filled with structural elements.

Beyond the evidence provided by the Swedish Solar Telescope and countless other observations, there was clear Doppler confirmation that the photosphere of the Sun was behaving as a distinct surface. In 1998, Kosovichev and Zharkova published their Nature paper X-ray flare sparks quake inside the Sun. Doppler imaging revealed transverse waves on the surface of the Sun, as reproduced in Figure 2: “We have also detected flare ripples, circular wave packets propagating from the flare and resembling ripples from a pebble, thrown into a pond”. In these images, the “optical illusion” was now acting as a real surface. The ripples were clearly transverse in nature, a phenomenon difficult to explain using a gaseous solar model. Ripples on a pond are characteristic of the liquid or solid state.


http://vixra.org/pdf/1310.0159v1.pdf

Commentary on the Radius of the Sun:
Optical Illusion or Manifestation of a Real Surface?

Observational astronomy continues to report increasingly precise measures of solar radius and diameter. Even the smallest temporal variations in these parameters would have profound implications relative to modeling the Sun and understanding climate fluctuations on Earth. A review of the literature convincingly demonstrates that the solar body does indeed possess a measurable radius which provides, along with previous discussions (Robitaille P.M. On the Presence of a Distinct Solar Surface: A Reply to Herve Faye. Progr. Phys., 2011, v. 3, 75–78.), the twenty-first line of evidence that the Sun is comprised of condensed-matter.

For theoretical solar physicists, any variation in the dimensions of the Sun would have severe consequences with respect to the gaseous models. The latter would be hard-pressed to account for fluctuations in radius. This helps to account for the reassurance experienced when the solar radius is perceived as constant.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 25, 2018, 03:57:10 AM
STANDARD ATMOSPHERE VALUE FOR A COLUMN OF WATER PARADOX

(https://scitechdaily.com/images/earth-losing-mass.jpg)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3768090/

According to the official chronology of history, the effects of the "atmospheric pressure" upon a column of water of considerable height were measured as early as 1640 AD.

(https://image.ibb.co/hLgQTo/phy0021301490005.jpg)

Illustration of Gasparo Berti's experiment using a very long lead tube containing water.

A column of water 32.381' (π2 m) (cross-section 1 square inch) generates a pressure at the bottom of one atmosphere.

The magnitude of the value is exactly equal to that of the g acceleration.

Even if we take the value of 10.336 meters to be true, then 10.336/π2 = 1.0472 which is exactly π/3!

Under the spherical Earth hypothesis, this is supposed to be just a random coincidence.

However, this fact cannot be true.

Modern science assumes that the proportions of the ingredients of the air (distribution of gases) have varied since the formation of the Earth, yet we are to believe that now the atmospheric pressure on a column of water will generate a height of the liquid in the glass tube of exactly π2 m (the value of the g acceleration).

In addition, there is the atmospheric escape which takes place every year.

How could these random fluctuations in the chemical composition/mass of the Earth's atmosphere have lead to the precise value of π2 m for the height of the water in the glass tube experiment?

In the flat earth theory, this fact is easily explained: the effect of the laevorotatory waves upon the column of water (π2 meters) will equal exactly the magnitude of the value of the g acceleration (π2).

The height of the liquid column does not rise because of atmospheric pressure. It is an extraordinary antigravitational effect and a proof of the existence of laevorotatory subquark strings.

g acceleration = π2 m/s2

http://www.aetherometry.com/Aetherometry_Intro/pratt_aether_grav.php#g3 (section 3, Gravitational Pendulums, g related to π2)

Again, even if we take the value of 10.336 meters to be true, then 10.336/π2 = 1.0472 which is exactly π/3!

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 25, 2018, 08:10:24 AM
TECHNICAL ATMOSPHERE VALUE FOR A COLUMN OF WATER PARADOX II

The standard atmosphere, defined as being exactly equal to 101,325 pascals, is the reference value for the average atmospheric pressure at sea level.  A torr is fixed by definition as being precisely equal to 1/760th of a standard atmosphere. The value of a millimeter of mercury is determined by: 1) the definition of gravity, 2) to the density of mercury (13.595 078(5) g/ml @ 0 °C, NIST value), and 3) to the temperature at which mercury's density is taken. However, the barometric pressure can vary by thousands of Pa in a single week.

The older concept of a technical atmosphere was phased out even though it worked very well in practice.

https://sizes.com/units/atmosphere-technical.htm

Using the technical atmosphere, we get 28.96 inHg and exactly 10 meters of water.

100,000/101,325 = π2/10

http://www.aetherometry.com/Aetherometry_Intro/pratt_aether_grav.php#g3

The true gravitational acceleration at the Earth's surface corresponds to the gravitational field intensity E, and not to the net resultant acceleration, which varies with latitude.

"Traditionally, this field intensity is considered to be counteracted by the centrifugal force created by the Earth's rotation; the centrifugal acceleration is zero at the poles and reaches a maximum of 0.03392 m/s2 at the equator. One of the problems in the current understanding of gravity is that the difference between the gravitational acceleration at the poles and at the equator is greater than any centrifugal reaction can account for. This discrepancy is conventionally explained by the Earth being not a perfect sphere but an oblate spheroid, or rather a triaxial spheroid.

Assuming that g = π2m/s2, and taking account of the centrifugal reaction, the value of g at the equator should be 9.83568 m/s2, whereas the measured value is far lower: 9.780524 m/s2. Modern technology permits more exact determinations of the measured values of net g at the poles and the equator, along with better determinations of the polar and equatorial radii. This makes it possible to accurately determine the angular velocity function (Ω) that is a constituent of the gravitational field intensity. It is pointed out that if we employ the values for net g at the poles (where no centrifugal reaction exists) along with the polar radii to determine the value of Ω, and then use this value together with the known equatorial radius to determine the gravitational field intensity at the equator, this will be found to be exactly π2m/s2, to the fourth digit!

This rules out geometric explanations for the actual value of net g at the equator, as the differences in terrestrial geometry are already taken into account. So something besides the centrifugal force or geometry must account for the counteraction of gravity at the equator by Δ = (π2 - 0.03392) - 9.780524 = 0.05516 m/s2."

Therefore, this extra factor (which could be accompanied by other antigravitational factors to be accounted for) has to be substracted as well from the height of the column of water.

In the end, the magnitude of the true value of g, π2, will equal the calculated height of the column of water, or be extremely close to it.

The mysterious antigravitational factor discovered by Dr. P. Correa is directly related to the effects exerted by the laevorotatory subquark strings.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 26, 2018, 01:51:30 AM
TECHNICAL ATMOSPHERE VALUE FOR A COLUMN OF WATER PARADOX III

(http://www.aldokkan.com/photos/great_pyramid/30_great_pyramid.jpg)

The sacred cubit is designated in the form of a horseshoe projection, known as the "Boss" on the face of the Granite Leaf in the Ante-Chamber of the Pyramid. By application of this unit of measurement it was discovered to be subdivided into 25 equal parts known now as: Pyramid inches.

The value chosen in 1954 by the 10th Conférence Générale des Poids et Mesures (CGPM) for the standard atmosphere is directly related to the sacred cubit.

https://www.bipm.org/jsp/en/ViewCGPMResolution.jsp?CGPM=10&RES=4

1013250 dynes per square centimetre (101325 Pa).

4 x 101,325 = 405,300

405,3001/2 = 636.63176

2/π = one sacred cubit = 0.636619772

A four digit perfect match.

100,000/101,325 = 0.9869233

π2/10 = 0.98696044

A four digit perfect match.

Dr. C. Goldblatt, one of the foremost experts on atmospheric physics in the world (Space Science and Astrobiology Division, NASA Ames Research Center) explains the total and complete random nature of the Earth's atmosphere evolution.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1710.10557.pdf

Then, he explains these facts in the context of the faint young sun paradox:

https://www.clim-past.net/7/203/2011/cp-7-203-2011.pdf

"Geology has been viewed as a collection of events derived from insignificant causes, a string of accidents."

Yet, out of this string of accidents, we obtain a four digit perfect match between the value of the standard atmosphere and the magnitude of the g acceleration, and between the sacred cubit and the value of the standard atmosphere.

The main reason why the technical atmosphere (one kilogram-force per square centimeter) was phased out is connected in a direct way to the fact that by using this value, the figure for the column of water will be exactly 10 meters, a fact impossible to explain in the context of the random fluctuations of the atmosphere's chemical composition/mass.

980.665 mbar = 98.0665 kPa technical atm = 28.959136 inHg = 32.8093 ft of water = 10.00027464 m

The ratio 100,000/101,325 equals exactly π2/10 (g acceleration divided by 10, the height of the column of water using the technical atmosphere).

In 1982, the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) recommended that for the purposes of specifying the physical properties of substances, “standard pressure” should be precisely 100 kPa (1 bar) = 100,000 Pa.

http://goldbook.iupac.org/html/S/S05921.html


The missing apex of the Gizeh pyramid measures 286.1 sacred inches (7.2738 meters), where 286.1 = 450 sacred cubits, and 100 sc = 45 x 1.4134725, 141.34725 = the height of the Gizeh pyramid frustum.

727 Torr = 28.622156 inHg = 9.8839 m of water, a value very close to the g acceleration figure π2 = 9.8696

How many inhg in 1 torr? The answer is 0.039370072825186.

One sacred inch = 0.025424 meters.

1/3.9370073 = 0.254


Now, here is another reason why the technical atmosphere was phased out.

https://www.sensorsone.com/kpa-to-mh2o-conversion-table/

The conversion factor from pascals to meters of water involves this value: 980,665 Pa (one technical atmosphere).

1/9.80665 = 0.1019716213

2/π = 0.636619772

32/100π = 0.10185916

0.1019716213 - 010185916 = 0.00011246129 = 2.861 x 0.0000393083852

1/3.93083852 = 0.2543986

0.2543986/4 = 0.063599661

Then, the conversion factor can be evidenced directly in terms of sacred cubits.

1013250 dynes per square centimetre (101325 Pa).

4 x 101,325 = 405,300

405,3001/2 = 636.63176

2/π = one sacred cubit = 0.636619772

101,325 = (2000/π)2/4 + 6sc

Then, the value of the height of column of water, corresponding to 101,325 Pascals can be expressed directly in terms of sacred cubits.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 29, 2018, 04:07:07 AM
SACRED CUBIT EXACT SPACING FORMULA FOR THE ZETA FUNCTION IV

z1 = 14.134725

L(z1) = 7.74977

14.134725 + 7.74977 = 21.884497

Now, all of the previous results will be applied to obtain the value of the second zero of the zeta function, to four decimal places accuracy, using only the five elements subdivision applied to both zeta functions as a guide.

63.636363
16.1773
9.5445
6.36363
3.1815

9.5445 - 6.36363 = 6.36363 - 3.1815 = 3.1815

3.1815
0.80886
0.477225
0.31815
0.159075


14.134725 + 6.36363 = 20.4977 (lower bound)

First estimate, using the zeta function directed to the left, the lower bound

20.4977 + 0.80886 = 21.30656 (upper bound)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2006301#msg2006301 (basic subdivision of the first 63.63636 sacred cubit interval into five elements ratios)

2.7834

22.29945

Upper bound of first estimate using the zeta function directed to the right.

2.0757

20.22945

Lower bound

Both lower and upper bounds of the estimates both zeta functions  will be used to refine the approximation.


Since the lower bound of the second zeta function has a smaller value than the corresponding figure of the lower bound of the first zeta function, the next value in the five element subdivision is substracted to get an UPPER BOUND.

10.9478
2.7834
1.6422
1.90478
0.5474

8.1644
2.0757
1.22466

0.81644
040822


1.22466

21.069425

This is the new UPPER BOUND for the approximation.

3.1815
0.80886
0.477225
0.31815
0.159075

20.4977 + 0.477225 = 20.975

2.0757 - 1.22466 = 0.85104

0.85104
0.21637
0.127656
0.085104
0.042552

Substracting these bottom four values successively from 21.069425:

20.853055
20.94177
20.984321
21.026873

Since now 20.984321 exceeds the estimate from the other zeta function (20.975), this will be new LOWER BOUND of the approximation.

So far:

Lower bound: 20.984321
Upper bound: 21.069425


0.80886 - 0.477225 = 0.331635

0.331635
0.084315
0.049745
0.0331635
0.016582

Adding 0.084315 to 20.975 will equal 21.0593, a figure which already exceeds the upper bound.

Adding 0.049745 to 20.975 will equal 21.024745.

Adding 0.0331635 to 20.975 will equal 21.0081635.

21.024745 will be the new upper bound of the approximation.

0.085104 - 0.042552 = 0.042552

0.042552
0.01081842
0.0063828
0.0042552
0.0021276

Substracting the bottom four figures from 21.026873 we obtain:

21.016055
21.0205
21.02262
21.024745

21.024745 is the SAME VALUE obtained from the five element subdivision for the first zeta function, this is how we know it is the upper bound of the entire approximation.

The lower bound is 21.016055.

To get the lower bound for the first zeta function, we have to subdivide the interval further.

The last estimate was 21.0081635.

0.084315 - 0.049745 = 0.03457

Using only the first two subdivision values:

0.03457
0.0087891

21.024545 + 0.0087891 = 21.03353, a figure which is too large.

0.049745 - 0.0331635 = 0.016582

Again, using only the first two subdivision values:

0.016582
0.0042157

21.0081635 + 0.0042157 = 21.01238

Continuing in this way we obtain:

21.01786

This will be the new lower bound of the entire approximation.

Continuing even further:

21.0226217 (this corresponds to the subdivision 0.00285253 and 0.00072523; the previous subdivision is 0.003825 and 0.00097247).

This is the same value as the one obtained from the other subdivision.

This will be new UPPER BOUND of the entire approximation.

0.0063828 - 0.0042552 = 0.0021273

0.0021273
0.000540845
0.0003181
0.00021273
0.000106365

21.02262 - 0.000540845 = 21.02207916

21.02262 - 0.00021273 = 21.02240727

To get the new lower bound, a figure higher than 21.016055 has to be obtained from the first zeta function subdivision.

0.003825
0.0009725
0.00057375
0.0003825
0.00019125

The value corresponding to 0.0009725 is 21.0218965.

This now is the new lower bound.


So far:

21.0218965 = lower bound

21.0226217 = upper bound

0.00285253 - 0.00072523 = 0.0021273

This is the same value as that obtained earlier from the second zeta function.

Since 21.02207916 exceeds 21.0218965, it will become the new UPPER BOUND of the entire approximation.

0.0009725 - 0.00057375 = 0.00039875

0.00039875
0.000101378

21.0218965 + 0.000101378 = 21.02199788

This figure will be the new lower bound.

The true value for the second zeta zero is:

21.022039639

Already we have obtained a five digit/three decimal place approximation:

21.02207916

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 30, 2018, 03:22:36 AM
SACRED CUBIT EXACT SPACING FORMULA FOR THE ZETA FUNCTION V

z2 = 21.022

L(z2) = 5.2026

21.022 + 5.2026 = 26.2246

The third zeta zero, to four decimal places accuracy, using only the five elements subdivision applied to both zeta functions as a guide.

63.636363
16.1773
9.5445
6.36363
3.1815

14.134725 + 9.545 = 23.6747

16.1773 - 9.5445 = 6.6328

6.6328
1.68632
0.99492
0.66328
0.33164

23.6747 + 1.68632 = 25.36602

23.6747 + 0.99492 = 24.67462

23.6747 is the first lower bound.

25.36602 is the first upper bound.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2006301#msg2006301 (basic subdivision of the first 63.63636 sacred cubit interval into five elements ratios)

3.7322

25.099425

1.64

23.459425

1.09478

24.001945

0.5474

24.552025

The values are taken from the subdivision:

14.68
3.7322
2.202
1.468
0.734

14.68 - 3.7322  = 10.9478

10.9478
2.7834
1.6422
1.09478
0.5474

Upper bound of first estimate using the zeta function directed to the right:

25.099425

Lower bound:

24.552025

Just like before, we search for a higher lower bound in both subdivisions, and for a lower upper bound in both subdivisions (a comparison, in order to locate the precise and correct subdivision interval for the zeta zero).

So far:

Upper bound

25.099425

Lower bound

24.67462


1.68632 - 099492 = 0.6914

0.6914
0.17578
0.10371
0.06914
0.03457

Adding these bottom four values successively to 24.67462:

24.8504
24.7783
24.77376
24.7092

0.6914 - 0.17578 = 0.51562

0.51562
0.1311
0.077343
0.051562
0.025781

Adding these bottom four values successively to 24.8504:

24.9815
24.9277
24.902
24.8762

From the other zeta function:

0.5474
0.139171
0.08211
0.05474
0.02737

Substracting these bottom four values successively from 25.099425:

24.96025
25.0173
25.044685
25.072055

24.96025 is the new LOWER BOUND.

Since 24.9815 (from the other zeta function) is a higher lower bound, this value will become the new lower bound for the entire approximation.

In order to obtain the new upper bound:

0.51562 - 0.1311 = 0.38452

0.38452
0.09776
0.057678
0.038452
0.019226

Adding these bottom three values successively to 24.9815:

25.039178
25.019952
25.000726

Then, 25.000726 becomes the new lower bound, while 25.019952 is the new upper bound for the first zeta function.

Since 25.0173 (second zeta function) is a lower value than 25.019952, this then is the new UPPER BOUND for the entire approximation.

So far:

25.000726 is the lower bound

25.0173 is the upper bound

0.038452 - 0.019226 = 0.019226

0.019226
0.004888
0.002884
0.0019226
0.0009613

Adding these bottom four values successively to 25.000726:

25.005614
25.00361
25.002649
25.00169

Using the second zeta function:

0.139171 - 0.08211 = 0.057061

0.057061
0.0145072
0.00856
0.0057061
0.00285305

Substracting these bottom four values successively from 25.0173:

25.0028
25.00874
25.0116
25.014447

The new lower bound is 25.00874 (a higher lower bound than 25.005614).

The new upper bound is 25.0116.

0.019226 - 0.004888 = 0.014338

0.014338
0.0036453
0.0021507
0.0014338
0.0007169

Adding these bottom four values successively to 25.005614:

25.00926
25.00776
25.00705
25.006331

0.014338 - 0.0036453 = 0.0106927

0.0106927
0.0027185
0.001604
0.00106927
0.000534635

Adding these bottom four values to 25.00926:

25.012
25.010864
25.01033
25.0098

25.010864 is the new upper bound (a lower upper bound than 25.0116).

25.01033 is the new lower bound.

The true value for the third zeta zero is:

25.01085758

Already we have obtained a six digit/four decimal place approximation:

25.010864

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 31, 2018, 01:34:57 AM
SACRED CUBIT EXACT SPACING FORMULA FOR THE ZETA FUNCTION VI

z3 = 25.0108

L(z2) = 4.54832

29.55912

The fourth zeta zero, to three decimal places accuracy, using only the five elements subdivision applied to both zeta functions as a guide.

63.636363
16.1773
9.5445
6.36363
3.1815

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2006301#msg2006301 (basic subdivision of the first 63.63636 sacred cubit interval into five elements ratios)

14.134725 + 16.1773 = 30.312

16.1773 + 2.373 = 32.685

5.0045

28.81

2.95

30.8694

30.312 is the first lower bound.

30.8694 is the first upper bound.

2.373
0.60331
0.35595
0.2373
0.11865

Adding the bottom three values to 30.312:

30.668
30.55
30.43065

5.0045 - 2.95266 = 2.05184

2.05184
0.509798
0.307776
0.205184
0.102592

Substracting the bottom four values from 30.8694:

30.3596
30.5616
30.664216
30.76681

30.3596 is the new lower bound.

30.5616 is the new upper bound for the second zeta function.

30.43065 is the new upper bound for the first zeta function; since this figure is smaller than 30.5616, it is the upper bound of the entire approximation.

0.11865
0.0301656
0.0177975
0.011865
0.0059325

Adding the bottom four values to 30.312:

30.34216
30.3298
30.324
30.318

0.11865 - 0.0301656 = 0.0884844

Using only the first two subdivisions (corresponding to 534 and 136.1):

0.0884844
0.022496

30.342 + 0.022496 = 30.36465


The subdivisions for the second zeta function.

0.509796 - 0.307776 = 0.202022

0.202022
0.051362

30.5616 - 0.051362 = 30.510238

In order to make a new comparison between the two zeta functions, we have to subdivide further in order to determine the correct upper and lower bounds using subdivisions which have a very close value.

0.202022 - 0.051362 = 0.15066

0.15066
0.038304

30.510238 - 0.038304 = 30.47193

0.15066 - 0.038304 = 0.112356

0.112356
0.0285654

30.47193 - 0.0285654 = 30.44336

0.112356 - 0.0285654 = 0.083791

0.083791
0.021303
0.012569
0.0083791
0.0041895

Substracting the bottom four values from 30.44336:

30.422057
30.43079
30.435
30.43917


The subdivisions for the first zeta function.

0.0884844
0.022496

30.342 + 0.022496 = 30.36465

0.0884844 - 0.022496 = 0.065988

0.065988
0.016777

30.36465 + 0.016777 = 30.38143

0.065988 - 0.016777 = 0.049211

0.049211
0.0125114

30.38143 + 0.0125114 = 30.39394

0.049211 - 0.0125114 = 0.0366996

0.0366996
0.00933051

30.39394 + 0.00933051 = 30.40327

0.0366996 - 0.00933051 = 0.0273691

0.0273691
0.0069583

30.40327 + 0.0069583 = 30.410228

0.0273691 - 0.0069583 = 0.0204108

0.0204108
0.005189242

30.410228 + 0.005189242 = 30.41542

0.0204108 - 0.005189242 = 0.01522156

0.01522156
0.00387

30.41542 + 0.00387 = 30.41928

0.01522156 - 0.00387 = 0.01135156

0.01135156
0.002886

30.41928 + 0.002886 = 30.422176

By comparison with the subdivisions obtained from the second zeta function, we can see that 30.422176 is the new lower bound.

0.01135156 - 0.002886 = 0.0084656

0.0084656
0.0021523

30.422176 + 0.0021523 = 30.424328


Returning to the subdivisions for the second zeta function.

0.112356 - 0.0285654 = 0.083791

0.083791
0.021303
0.012569
0.0083791
0.0041895

Substracting the bottom four values from 30.44336:

30.422057
30.43079
30.435
30.43917

0.021303 - 0.012569 = 0.008734 (this is the interval of the subidivision where the upper and lower bounds of the second zeta function are located)

0.008734
0.0022205
0.0013101
0.0008734
0.0004367

Substracting the bottom values from 30.43079:

30.42857
30.42948
30.429917
30.43035


Returning to the subdivisions for the first zeta function.

0.0084656
0.0021523

30.422176 + 0.0021523 = 30.424328

0.0084656 - 0.0021523 = 0.0063133

0.0063133
0.0016051
0.000947
0.00063133
0.000315665

Adding the bottom three values to 30.424328:

30.425275
30.424959
30.424684


Returning to the subdivisions for the second zeta function.

0.008734 - 0.0022205 = 0.0065135

0.0065135
0.001656

30.42857 - 0.001656 = 30.4269

0.0065135 - 0.001656 = 0.0048575

0.0048575
0.001235

30.4269 - 0.001235 = 30.42566

0.0048575 - 0.001235 = 0.0036255

0.0036255
0.000921
0.00054383
0.00036255
0.0001813

Substracting the four bottom values from 30.42566:

30.42474
30.42512
30.4253
30.42548


30.424684 is the new lower bound.

30.424959 is the new upper bound.

The true value for the fourth zeta zero is:

30.424876126

Already we have obtained a five digit/three decimal place approximation:

30.424684
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 31, 2018, 03:54:21 AM
SACRED CUBIT EXACT SPACING FORMULA FOR THE ZETA FUNCTION VII

z4 = 30.4247

L(z4) = 3.98331

34.408

The fifth zeta zero, to three decimal places accuracy, using only the five elements subdivision applied to both zeta functions as a guide.

63.636363
16.1773
9.5445
6.36363
3.1815

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2006301#msg2006301 (basic subdivision of the first 63.63636 sacred cubit interval into five elements ratios)

16.1773 + 2.373 = 32.685

4.7459 - 2.373 = 2.373

2.373
0.6033
0.356
0.2373
0.118645

Adding to the bottom four values to 32.685:

33.2883
33.041
32.9223
32.8036


1.968

31.8494

0.984

32.8294

6.7106

33.8

32.8294 is the first lower bound.

Since 32.9223 is a higher lower bound, this value is the lower bound of the entire approximation.

To find the first upper bound, we need to subdivide the intervals for the second zeta function further, in order to find a lower upper bound than 33.041.

0.98422
0.25023

33.8 - 0.25023 = 33.55

0.98422 - 0.25023 = 0.734

0.734
0.18661

33.55 - 0.18661 = 33.364

0.734 - 0.18661 = 0.5474

0.5474
0.139171

33.364 - 0.139171 = 33.225

0.5474 - 0.139171 = 0.40823

0.40823
0.103788

33.225 - 0.103788 = 33.1212

0.40823 - 0.103788 = 0.304442

0.304442
0.0774

33.1212 - 0.0774 = 33.0438

0.304442 - 0.0774 = 0.227042

0.227042
0.05772

33.0438 - 0.05772 = 32.9861

32.9861 is the new upper bound of the entire approximation.


0.356 - 0.23729 = 0.11871

0.11871
0.0302
0.01781
0.011871
0.0059355

Adding the bottom four values to 32.9223:

32.9525
32.9401
32.9342
32.928

32.9401 is the new upper bound.


Returning to the subdivisions for the second zeta function.

0.227042 - 0.05772 = 0.16932

0.16932
0.04305

32.9861 - 0.04305 = 32.94305

0.16932 - 0.04305 = 0.12627

0.12627
0.0321
0.01894
0.012627
0.0063135

Substracting the bottom four values from 32.94305:

32.911
32.9241
32.9304
32.93673

32.93672 is the new upper bound.

0.012627 - 0.0063135 = 0.0063135

0.0063135
0.0016052
0.000947
0.00063135
0.000315675

Substracting the bottom four values from 32.93673:

32.935125
32.935783
32.9361
32.936414


Returning to the subdivisions for the first zeta function.

0.01781 - 0.011871 = 0.0059355

0.0059355
0.001509
0.000891
0.00059355
0.000297

Adding the bottom four values to 32.9342:

32.93571
32.935091
32.9348
32.9345

Since 32.935091 is a lower value than 32.935125, this figure is the new upper bound of the entire approximation.

0.0063135 - 0.0016052 = 0.0047083

0.0047083
0.00119704
0.000706245
0.00047083
0.000235415

Substracting the last figure from 32.935125 we obtain 32.93489.

Since this is greater value than 32.9348, it becomes the new lower bound of the entire approximation.

This is further proof that 32.935125 was an upper bound, and that 32.935091 is the new upper bound for the entire approximation.

The true value for the fifth zeta zero is:

32.935061588

Already we have obtained a five digit/three decimal place approximation:

32.935091


Further subdivisions for greater accuracy.

0.00047083 - 0.000235415 = 0.000235415

0.000235415
0.000059852
0.0000353
0.0000235415
0.000011771

Substracting the bottom four values from 32.935125:

32.935065
32.935089
32.935101
32.935113


Returning to the subdivisions for the first zeta function.

0.000891 - 0.00029745 = 0.00029745

0.00029745
0.000075624

32.9348 + 0.000075624 = 32.9348756

0.00029745 - 0.000075624 = 0.000221826

0.000221826
0.0000564

32.9348756 + 0.0000564 = 32.93492

0.000165426
0.000042055

32.93492 + 0.000042055 = 32.934962

0.00012337
0.000031366

32.934962 + 0.000031366 = 32.9349934

0.000092334
0.000023475

32.9349934 + 0.000023475 = 32.93501688

0.000068859
0.0000175067

32.93501688 + 0.0000175067 = 32.9350344

0.000051353
0.000013056

32.9350344 + 0.000013056 = 32.93504746

0.000038297
0.00000973663

32.93504746 + 0.00000973663 = 32.9350572

0.000028561
0.00000726135

32.9350572 + 0.00000726135 = 32.93506446

This becomes the new upper bound of the entire approximation (a value smaller than 32.935065 obtained from the second zeta function subdivision).

0.000028561
0.00000726135
0.00000428415

32.9350572 + 0.00000428415 = 32.93506148

The true value for the fifth zeta zero is:

32.935061588

Already we have obtained an eight digit/six decimal place accuracy:

32.93506148

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 01, 2018, 01:10:01 AM
SACRED CUBIT EXACT SPACING FORMULA FOR THE ZETA FUNCTION VIII

z5 = 32.935

L(z5) = 3.7927

36.7277

The sixth zeta zero, to three decimal places accuracy, using only the five elements subdivision applied to both zeta functions as a guide.

63.636363
16.1773
9.5445
6.36363
3.1815

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2006301#msg2006301 (basic subdivision of the first 63.63636 sacred cubit interval into five elements ratios)

14.134725 + 16.1773 + 7.1185 = 37.43

12.066 - 7.1185 = 4.9475

4.9475
1.2577
0.74205
0.49475
0.24735

37.43 + 0.24735 = 37.67735

2.64

37.8794

3.96

36.56942

37.6773 is the first upper bound.

36.56942 is the first lower bound.


0.24735
0.062886
0.0371
0.024725
0.012367

Adding the bottom four values to 37.43:

37.4929
37.467
37.455
37.442

0.24735 - 0.062886 = 0.184464

0.184464
0.0469

37.4929 + 0.0469 = 37.54

0.184464 - 0.0469 = 0.137564

0.137564
0.034974
0.02063
0.0137564
0.00688

Adding the bottom four values to 37.54:

37.575
37.5606
37.553756
37.54688

37.575 is the new lower bound.


3.96 - 2.6395 = 1.3205

1.3205
0.335724
0.198075
0.13205
0.066025

Substracting the bottom values from 37.8794 (the upper bound for the second zeta function):

37.54367
37.681
37.74735
37.81337

0.335724 - 0.198075 = 0.137649

0.137649
0.03499581
0.02064735
0.0137649
0.00688245

Substracting the bottom four values from 37.681:

37.6460042
37.66035
37.66724
37.6741

0.137649 - 0.03499581 = 0.1026532

0.1026532
0.0261

37.6460042 - 0.0261 = 37.61991

0.1026532 - 0.0261 = 0.0765532

0.0765532
0.019463

37.61991 - 0.019463 = 37.600447

0.0765532 - 0.019643 = 0.0571

0.0571
0.0145146
0.008565
0.0057
0.002855

Substracting the bottom four values from 37.600447:

37.5859324
37.592
37.5947
37.5976

37.5859324 is the new lower bound of the entire approximation.


Returning to the subdivisions for the first zeta function.

0.137564 - 0.034974 = 0.10259

0.10259
0.0260825
0.0153885
0.010259
0.0051285

Adding the bottom four values to 37.575:

37.601
37.5904
37.58526
37.58013

37.5904 is the new upper bound.

The true value for the sixth zeta zero is:

37.586178159

Already we have obtained a five digit/three decimal place approximation:

37.5859324
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 01, 2018, 09:10:19 AM
The five element subdivision algorithm is superior to the Riemann-Siegel formula: effortlessly, one can obtain the zeros of the zeta function on the 1/2 line using only elementary mathematics. B. Riemann discovered that the zeros of the zeta function are related to the primes numbers. Here, it has been shown that the five elements subdivision process generates the zeros of the zeta function in a most precise and remarkable way.

Each and every mathematician who has studied the Riemann zeta function has totally ignored the second zeta function (negative zeros located on the 1/2 line, 1/2 - it). Yet, there are two zeta functions, and their interplay is revealed by realizing that 14.134725, the value of the first zeta zero, is directly related to the sacred cubit:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2006301#msg2006301

It is the points where the two subdivisions have approximately equal values that form the set of zeta zeros.

That is, the law of five elements of proportions applied to the sacred cubit distance will reveal the approximate location of the zeta zeros.

Then, a precise algorithm featured in the previous messages will compute each and every zeta zero to the nth decimal digit.

Lehmer pairs have a definite pattern to their location on the 1/2 line:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1858153#msg1858153

The Lehmer phenomenon, a pair of zeros which are extremely close, is related to the close proximity of some of the values of the two subdivisions of the 63.6363... segment.

Only the five element subdivision can detect and at the same time explain extreme Lehmer pairs such as these:

1.30664344087942265202071895041619 x 1022

1.30664344087942265202071898265199 x 1022

The average spacing of zeros at that height is 0.128, while the above pair of zeros is separated by 0.00032 (1/400th times the average spacing).

There is something else mathematicians have overlooked: the fact that Riemann had proven that all of the zeros lie on the 1/2 line some 160 years ago, using the functional equation. There is no way that he would have embarked to derive the Riemann-Siegel asymptotic formula, had he not been totally sure of the fact that all of the zeros lie on the 1/2 line: all he wanted to do is to verify that actually the first few zeros are situated on the 1/2 line.

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0801/0801.4072.pdf

A Necessary Condition for the Existence of the Nontrivial Zeros of the Riemann Zeta Function

(a paper which shows that B. Riemann must have followed a similar kind of argument, using the newly discovered zeta functional equation, to reach the conclusion that all the nontrivial zeros are all located on the ½ line)

That is why the Clay Institute of Mathematics prize description should be modified:

http://www.claymath.org/millennium-problems/riemann-hypothesis

The prize should be awarded for a much more difficult problem.

"Answers to such questions depend on a much more detailed knowledge of the distribution of zeros of the zeta function than is given by the RH. Relatively little work has been devoted to the precise distribution of the zeros. The main reason for the lack of research in this area was undoubtedly the feeling that there was little to be gained from studying problems harder than the RH if the RH itself could not be proved."

The distribution of the zeros of the zeta function has been proven here to be directly explained in terms of the five element subdivision of the sacred cubit segment.

The values of the first six zeta zeros have been obtained in an elegant and precise manner, without using either the Riemann-Siegel formula, or the Euler-Maclaurin summation formula.

The complexity of the Riemann-Siegel coefficients:

(https://image.ibb.co/fC1joy/riem3.jpg)

The Riemann-Siegel formula does not deal with the distribution of zeros.

Nor can it reveal the hidden pattern/structure of the zeta zeros.

The five element subdivision algorithm creates the zeta zeros, which in turn are related to the distribution of the prime numbers.

"These zeros did not appear to be scattered at random. Riemann's calculations indicated that they were lining up as if along some mystical ley line running through the landscape."

The mystical ley line has been revealed here: it is the five element subdivision algorithm.

All of the zeta zeros have to be located on the 1/2 line, since otherwise the five element subdivision algorithm would be disrupted, reverberating all the way to the first 63.6363... segment, and thus to the very value of the first zeta zero, 14.134725.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1859799#msg1859799

The five element subdivision algorithm is much simpler than the Riemann-Siegel formula, and it reveals the hidden pattern of the zeta zeros to the nth decimal precision. It does not require a huge sum of terms, nor extremely complex remainders, it is even an art form to derive the zeta zeros, carefully keeping track of the upper and lower bounds of the approximations.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 05, 2018, 04:15:39 AM
It is clearly a preliminary note and might not have been written if L. Kronecker had not
urged him to write up something about this work (letter to Weierstrass, Oct. 26 1859). It
is clear that there are holes that need to be filled in, but also clear that he had a lot more
material than what is in the note. What also seems clear : Riemann is not interested in an asymptotic formula, not in the prime number theorem, what he is after is an exact formula!

(Lecture given in Seattle in August 1996, on the occasion of the 100th anniversary
of the proof of the prime number theorem, Atle Selberg comments about Riemann’s
paper: A. Selberg, The history of the prime number theorem, A SYMPOSIUM on
the Riemann Hypothesis, Seattle, Washington)

This exact formula has been obtained here: the five element subdivisions of the interval lead directly and precisely to the values of the zeta zeros, to the nth decimal precision desired.

The Riemann-Siegel formula is a local expression, while the Five Element Subdivision algorithm is a global formula.

It involves no transcendental or algebraic functions, but only the four elementary operations of mathematics.

From a quantum physical point of view, the two counter-propagating zeta function waves represent sound waves which travel over the sacred 63.6363... distance back and forth inside a boson (or inside an antiboson).

Thus, all of the zeros of the zeta function must be located on the 1/2 critical line: if any of the Riemann zeta function ζ(s) non-trivial zeros would lay off the critical line, s = σ + it, σ = 1/2 - ε, then the values of all of the other zeros would have to be modified as well, all the way to the first zero, 14.134725.

The sum of any two sides of a triangle is greater than the third side.

(https://i.stack.imgur.com/mNgiI.jpg)

The five elements sequence of proportions would be disrupted as the distance from the previous zero to the zero which is off the critical line, and from the zeta zero which finds itself on the σ = 1/2 - ε line to the next zero would be greater than the distances from that previous zero to the next two zeta zeros to be found on the critical line.

Moreover, since there are two counter-propagating zeta function waves, there would have be to TWO zeros off the critical line within the same 63.6363... segment.

To see the issues involved, here are the first five element subdivisions (first upper and lower bounds) for the second and third zeta zeros.

21.022

14.134725 + 6.3636 = 20.4975

14.134725 + 6.3636 + 0.80886 = 21.30656

(14.134725 + 63.6363) - 16.1773 - 12.066 - 8.998 - 6.7106 - 5.0045 - 3.732 - 2.7834 = 22.29945

(14.134725 + 63.6363) - 16.1773 - 12.066 - 8.998 - 6.7106 - 5.0045 - 3.732 - 2.7834 - 2.0757 = 20.22945

25.0108

14.134725 + 9.5445 + 1.68632 = 25.36602

14.134725 + 9.5445 + 0.99492 = 24.67

(14.134725 + 63.6363) - 16.1773 - 12.066 - 8.998 - 6.7106 - 5.0045 - 3.732 = 25.099425

(14.134725 + 63.6363) - 16.1773 - 12.066 - 8.998 - 6.7106 - 5.0045 - 3.732 - 1.64 = 23.459

Even the slightest deviation from the 21.022039639 and 25.010857580 values would invalidate the entire five element subdivision algorithm.

The difference between the value of the second zeta zero, 21.022, and the value of the third zero, 25.0108 is seen at a glance to be a simple substraction of 2.7834 and 2.0757 from 3.732, as opposed to substracting 1.64 from 3.732, and at the same time, adding 0.80886 to 6.3636 for the second zero, while for the third zero the figure (1.5 x 6.36363) + 1.68632 is added.

This is the great advantage of the five element subdivisions algorithm: one can observe directly the hidden pattern/structure of the distribution of the zeta zeros.

The values of the zeta zeros are a consequence of the precise five element subdivisions fractal.

Thus, if a zero should be located off the critical line, it would mean that all of the values of the previous zeros would have be modified as well, all the way to the first zero which is 14.134725.

From a quantum physical perspective, if a zero is located off the critical line, then the sound wave would no longer be aligned with the 1/2 line, and its path would be modified by an lateral angle, meaning that it would never reach again the 1/2 line. Since there are two counter-propagating waves within the same sacred 63.6363... segment, there would have to be two zeros off the critical line. That is, the second sound wave would be disrupted as well.

s = rθ

θ = 5.34, 1.361, 0.8, 0.534, 0.267

r = 68.05 (136.1/2)

s = 363.4, 92.6, 54.44, 36.36, 18.17.

92.6 - 54.44 = 38.16 = 60 sacred cubits

(https://image.ibb.co/h12HQd/pyr1_zps536964c8.jpg)

As our drawing clearly shows, not only the pyramid's envelope but also everything inside
it was determined with the aid of three equal circles. Theodolitic equipment placed within shaft D beamed upward a key vertical line whose function we shall soon describe. But first this equipment beamed out the horizontal rock/masonry line, on which the centers of the three circles were placed. The first of these (Point 1) was at D; Points 2 and 3, where its circle intersected the line, served as centers for the other two, overlapping circles. To draw these circles the pyramid's architects, of course, had to decide on the proper radius.

Our own calculations show that the radius adopted for the three circles envisioned by us was equal to 60 such Sacred Cubits; the number 60 being, not accidentally, the base number of the Sumerian sexagesimal mathematical system. This measure of 60 Sacred Cubits is dominant in the lengths and heights of the pyramid's inner structure as well as in the dimensions of its base.


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 06, 2018, 07:02:40 AM
EXACT DISTRIBUTION OF THE ZETA ZEROS FORMULA

"These zeros act like telephone poles, and the special nature of Riemann’s zeta function dictates precisely how the wire — its graph — must be strung between them.”"

D. Rockmore

"The lack of a proof of the Riemann hypothesis doesn't just mean we don't know all the zeros are on the line x = 1/2 , it means that despite all the zeros we know of lying neatly and precisely smack bang on the line x = 1/2 , no one knows why any of them do, for if we had a definitive reason why the first zero 1/2 + 14.13472514 i has real value precisely 1/2 we would have a reason to know why they all do. Neither do we know why the imaginary parts have the values they do.

Answers to such questions depend on a much more detailed knowledge of the distribution of zeros of the zeta function than is given by the RH. Relatively little work has been devoted to the precise distribution of the zeros."

C. King

All of the zeros of the zeta function on the critical line are linked by the five element subdivisions.

The average spacing formula:

2π/ln(t/2π)

The five element subdivisions algorithm provides the exact spacing intervals.

21.022

14.134725 + 6.3636 = 20.4975

14.134725 + 6.3636 + 0.80886 = 21.30656

(14.134725 + 63.6363) - 16.1773 - 12.066 - 8.998 - 6.7106 - 5.0045 - 3.732 - 2.7834 = 22.29945

(14.134725 + 63.6363) - 16.1773 - 12.066 - 8.998 - 6.7106 - 5.0045 - 3.732 - 2.7834 - 2.0757 = 20.22945

63.6363 - 16.1773 - 12.066 - 8.998 - 6.7106 - 5.0045 - 3.732 - 2.7834 = 8.1645

63.6363 - 16.1773 - 12.066 - 8.998 - 6.7106 - 5.0045 - 3.732 - 2.7834 - 2.0757 = 6.0888

2π/ln(14.134725/2π) = 7.7498, the average spacing

By contrast, the five element subdivisions algorithm produces the exact spacing intervals effortlessly:

6.3636 and 7.17246

6.0888 and 8.1645

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2082278#msg2082278 (these upper and lower bounds are the precise starting points for the further subdivision of these intervals according to the five elements sequence of proportions, leading directly to the value of the zeta zero, to the nth decimal precision)


25.0108

14.134725 + 9.5445 + 1.68632 = 25.36602

14.134725 + 9.5445 + 0.99492 = 24.67

(14.134725 + 63.6363) - 16.1773 - 12.066 - 8.998 - 6.7106 - 5.0045 - 3.732 = 25.099425

(14.134725 + 63.6363) - 16.1773 - 12.066 - 8.998 - 6.7106 - 5.0045 - 3.732 - 1.64 = 23.459

63.6363 - 16.1773 - 12.066 - 8.998 - 6.7106 - 5.0045 - 3.732 = 10.948

63.6363 - 16.1773 - 12.066 - 8.998 - 6.7106 - 5.0045 - 3.732 - 1.64 = 9.308

2π/ln(21.022/2π) = 5.2026

21.022 - 14.134725 = 6.8873

By contrast, the five element subdivisions algorithm produces the exact spacing intervals, using only the elementary four operations of basic mathematics:

10.54 and 11.23

9.308 and 10.948

Substracting 6.8873 from each of these values:

4.077

2.437

4.344

3.648

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2082601#msg2082601


By subdividing the sacred cubit distances (63.6363...) using the five elements sequence of proportions fractal, the precise intervals (exact spacing) of the location of the zeta zeros are obtained without employing transcendental or algebraic functions, or cumbersome sums/complex form remainders.

The five element subdivisions algorithm is superior to the Riemann-Siegel formula, and reveals the hidden structure/pattern of the distribution of the zeta zeros.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2006301#msg2006301

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 13, 2018, 05:04:44 AM
SACRED CUBIT EXACT SPACING FORMULA FOR THE ZETA FUNCTION IX: NEW FEATURES/RESULTS

It is my belief that RH is a genuinely arithmetic question that likely will not succumb to methods of analysis. Number theorists are on the right track to an eventual proof of RH, but we are still lacking many of the tools.

J. Brian Conrey

"...the Riemann Hypothesis will be settled without any fundamental changes in our mathematical thoughts, namely, all tools are ready to attack it but just a penetrating idea is missing."
 
Y. Motohashi

"...there have been very few attempts at proving the Riemann hypothesis, because, simply, no one has ever had any really good idea for how to go about it."

A. Selberg

"I still think that some major new idea is needed here"

E. Bombieri

The previous derivation/calculation for the sixth zeta zero:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2083623#msg2083623

The upper bound can also be used within the same derivation to obtain new estimates.

14.134725 + 16.1773 + 7.1185 = 37.43

12.066 - 7.1185 = 4.9475

4.9475
1.2577
0.74205
0.49475
0.24735

37.43 + 0.24735 = 37.67735

0.24735
0.062886
0.0371
0.024725
0.012367

Adding the bottom four values to 37.43:

37.4929
37.467
37.455
37.442


Now, the same values will be substracted from the upper bound, 37.6773:

0.062886
0.0371
0.024735
0.012367

Obtaining:

37.6144
37.6402
37.6525
37.665


The second lower bound for the second zeta function is 37.54367.

Now, this value will be used to add the corresponding values belonging to the derivation of the first zeta function.

0.062886
0.0371
0.024735
0.012367

Adding these values (belonging to the first zeta function subdivisions) to 37.54367:

37.6066
37.581
37.568
37.556


Conversely, the upper bound of the first zeta function, 37.6773, will be used to get new estimates belonging to the second zeta function.

1.3205
0.335724
0.198075
0.13205
0.066025

Substracting the bottom four values from 37.6773:

37.3416
37.479
37.545
37.6113


The lower bound can also be used within the same derivation to obtain new estimates.

0.137649
0.03499581
0.02064735
0.0137649
0.00688245

Adding the bottom four values to 37.54367:

37.5786
37.56432
37.5574
37.5505


The new estimates are: 37.545 as a lower bound, 37.6113 as an upper bound.

Then, 37.6066 becomes the new upper bound, while 37.581 is the new lower bound.

By observation, 37.600447 (the value previously calculated) becomes the new upper bound of the entire approximation.

Then, 37.5904, the value from the first zeta function subdivision is the new upper bound, while 37.58526 is the new lower bound.


Thus, these new features/results greatly simplify the entire sequence of five elements subdivisions estimates: now one can also add/substract the upper/lower bounds as needed, and use an estimate from the first zeta function (or from the second zeta function) as an upper/lower bound starting point value to use in the subdivisions calculations for the second zeta function (or for the first zeta function).


https://medium.com/@JorgenVeisdal/the-riemann-hypothesis-explained-fa01c1f75d3f

"Present an argument or formula which (even barely) predicts what the next prime number will be (in any given sequence of numbers)."

The relationship between log p and the values of the zeta zeros:

http://www.dam.brown.edu/people/mumford/blog/2014/RiemannZeta.html

The log-prime figures give oscillating terms whose discrete frequencies correspond to the true zeros of the zeta function. And this method can be extended to large primes.

Since we now know that the five element subdivision algorithm creates the actual zeta zeros values, then these values can be anticipated in a very precise fashion, thus making possible the prediction of the next prime number.


The year: 1972. The scene: Afternoon tea in Fuld Hall at the Institute for Advanced Study. The camera pans around the Common Room, passing by several Princetonians in tweeds and corduroys, then zooms in on Hugh Montgomery, boyish Midwestern number theorist with sideburns. He has just been introduced to Freeman Dyson, dapper British physicist.

Dyson: So tell me, Montgomery, what have you been up to?
Montgomery: Well, lately I've been looking into the distribution of the zeros of the Riemann zeta function.
Dyson: Yes? And?
Montgomery: It seems the two-point correlations go as.... (turning to write on a nearby blackboard):

(https://www.americanscientist.org/sites/americanscientist.org/files/20036410348_150.gif)

Dyson: Extraordinary! Do you realize that's the pair-correlation function for the eigenvalues of a random Hermitian matrix? It's also a model of the energy levels in a heavy nucleus—say U-238.


""Finding this system could be the discovery of the century," [Berry] says. It would become a model system for describing chaotic systems in the same way that the simple harmonic oscillator is used as a model for all kinds of complicated oscillators. It could play a fundamental role in describing all kinds of chaos. The search for this model system could be the holy grail of chaos. Until [it is found] we cannot be sure of its properties, but Berry believes the system is likely to be rather simple, and expects it to lead to totally new physics. It is a tantalising thought."

"A variety of evidence suggests that underlying Riemann's zeta function is some unknown classical, mechanical system whose trajectories are chaotic and without [time-reversal] symmetry, with the property that, when quantised, its allowed energies are the Riemann zeros. These connections between the seemingly disparate worlds of quantum mechanics and number theory are tantalising."


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2006301#msg2006301 (precise description of how the two zeta functions counter-propagate within a boson)


The five element subdivision algorithm is a global formula: the exact spacing intervals are obtained very fast, without actually having to calculate the zeta zeros values (which can be derived easily using the same subdivision algorithm), for each 63.6363... segment.


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 14, 2018, 02:13:27 AM
EXACT DISTRIBUTION OF THE ZETA ZEROS FORMULA II

The fact that the five element subdivisions algorithm can be applied to each separate 63.6363... segment can immediately be used to great advantage to calculate the zeta zeros  for extremely large values of t (1/2 + it). So far, the computations of the Riemann zeta function for very high zeros have progressed to a dataset of 50000 zeros in over 200 small intervals going up to the 1036-th zero.

The main problem is the calculations of the exponential sums in the Riemann-Siegel formula.

However, the five element subdivisions algorithm suffers from no such restrictions.

The 63.6363... segment can be shifted to any desired height, using arbitrary-precision arithmetic.

Therefore, computations of zeros around the first Skewes number, 1.39822 x 10316 become possible using the Schönhage–Strassen algorithm for the multiplication/addition of very large numbers.

The Riemann-Siegel requires the addition of all of the terms in the formula, involving the evaluation of cosines, logarithms, square roots, and a complex set of remainders.

With the five element subdivision algorithm, only the following calculations are required: k x 63.6363..., where k can be 1.39822 x 10316 or 1010,000 (10 followed by ten thousand zeros). No divisions are required, no evaluation of elementary transcendental or algebraic functions is needed. The five element sequence of proportions are T, 63.6363... x T/250, 3T/10, T/10, T/20: simple multiplications by 1/250, 3/10, 1/10 and 1/20.

The only figure remaining to be calculated very precisely is the actual value of the sacred cubit distance.

14/22 = 0.63636363...

2/π = 0.636619722...

286.1/450 = 0.6357777...

14.134725 x 45 = 636.062625....

π has been calculated to over one million digits, the first zeta zero to over 40,000 digits.

The precise figure can be deduced by using the five element subdivision algorithm to the following heights: 636.63, 6,363.63, 63,636.63, 636,363.63.


Two examples which prove that the 63.6363 segment can be shifted to higher intervals on the critical 1/2 line, with no previous knowledge of the values of the other zeta zeros.

Zeta zero: 79.337375020

14.134725 + 63.63 = 77.7647

L(77.7647) = 2.4975 (average spacing estimate 80.262)

77.7647 + 0.80886 = 78.57356

77.7647 + 3.1815 = 80.9462

141.3947 - 16.1773 - 12.066 - 8.998 - 6.7106 - 5.0045 - 3.7322 - 2.7834 - 2.0757 - 1.548 - 1.1544 - 0.861 = 80.2836

141.3947 - 16.1773 - 12.066 - 8.998 - 6.7106 - 5.0045 - 3.7322 - 2.7834 - 2.0757 - 1.548 - 1.1544 - 0.861 - 0.692 = 79.598

141.3947 - 16.1773 - 12.066 - 8.998 - 6.7106 - 5.0045 - 3.7322 - 2.7834 - 2.0757 - 1.548 - 1.1544 - 0.861 - 0.692 - 0.4661 = 79.1318

3.1815 - 0.80886 = 2.3726

2.3726
0.60332
0.3559
0.23726
0.11863

Adding the bottom four values to 78.57356:

79.177
78.929
78.811
78.6922

79.177 is the first lower bound.

2.3726 - 0.60322 = 1.7694

1.7694
0.45
0.26541
0.17694
0.08847

Adding the bottom four values to 79.177:

79.627
79.442
79.354
79.2655

79.598 is the first upper bound.


0.4661
0.275
0.1833
0.09

Substracting these values from 79.598:

79.1318
79.323
79.4147
79.508

79.323 is the new lower bound.

79.354 is the new upper bound.

0.17694 - 0.08847 = 0.08847

0.08847
0.0225

79.2655 + 0.0225 = 79.288

0.08847 - 0.225 = 0.06597

0.06597
0.016772

79.288 + 0.016772 = 79.30437

0.06597 - 0.016772 = 0.0492

0.0492
0.01251

79.30437 + 0.01251 = 79.3173

0.0492 - 0.01251 = 0.03669

0.03669
0.009328

79.3173 + 0.009328 = 79.32663

79.362663 is the new lower bound.

0.03669 - 0.009328 = 0.027362

0.027362
0.0069565
0.0041043
0.0027362
0.00131681

Adding the bottom four values to 79.3266:

79.3336
79.3307
79.32937
79.328

0.027362 - 0.0069565 = 0.0204055

0.0204055
0.0051879
0.003061
0.00204055
0.00102

Adding the bottom four values to 79.3336:

79.33879
79.336661
79.33564
79.33462

0.0204055 - 0.0051879 = 0.0152176

0.0152176
0.003869
0.00283
0.00152176
0.000761

Adding the bottom four values to 79.33879:

79.34266
79.3416
79.3403
79.3395


The calculations for the second zeta function.

0.275 - 0.1833 = 0.0917

0.0917
0.0233

79.4147 - 0.0233 = 79.3914

0.0917 - 0.0233 = 0.0684

0.0684
0.0174

79.3914 - 0.0174 = 79.374

0.0684 - 0.0174 = 0.051

0.051
0.012966

79.374 - 0.012966 = 79.361

0.051 - 0.012966 = 0.038034

0.038034
0.00967

79.361 - 0.00967 = 79.35133

79.35133 is the new upper bound.

0.038034 - 0.00967 = 0.028364

0.028364
0.00721

79.35133 - 0.00721 = 79.34412

0.028364 - 0.00721 = 0.021154

0.021154
0.0053782
0.003773
0.0021154
0.001058

Substracting the bottom values from 79.34412:

79.338742
79.34095
79.342
79.34306

0.021154 - 0.0053782 = 0.015776

0.015776
0.004011
0.0023664
0.0015776
0.000789

Substracting the bottom four values from 79.338742:

79.33473
79.3364
79.337164
79.33795

Now, the new features/results from the previous message will be used.

0.0917
0.0233
0.013755
0.00917
0.004585

Adding the bottom four values to 79.323:

79.3276
79.3322
79.3367
79.3453

0.17694 - 0.08847 = 0.08847

0.08847
0.022493
0.013271
0.008847
0.0044235

Substracting the bottom four values from 79.354:

79.33151
79.34073
79.3455
79.3496

79.3367 is the new lower bound.

79.33879 is the new upper bound.

Since 79.337164 is a higher figure than 79.3367, 79.337164 is the new lower bound for the entire approximation.

Without any knowledge of the values of the previous zeta zeros, a five digit/three decimal place approximation of the zeta zeros was obtained.


Zeta zero: 143.111845808

14.134725 + 63.63 + 63.63 = 141.3947

L(141.3947) = 2.018 (average spacing estimate 143.4126)

141.3947 + 0.80886 = 142.20356

141.3947 + 0.60322 = 142.8068

141.3947 + 0.45 = 143.2568

141.3947 + 0.335 = 143.592

205.0247 - 16.1773 - 12.066 - 8.998 - 6.7106 - 5.0045 - 3.7322 - 2.7834 - 2.0757 - 1.548 - 1.1544 - 0.861 = 143.9187

205.0247 - 16.1773 - 12.066 - 8.998 - 6.7106 - 5.0045 - 3.7322 - 2.7834 - 2.0757 - 1.548 - 1.1544 - 0.861 - 0.692 = 143.2277

205.0247 - 16.1773 - 12.066 - 8.998 - 6.7106 - 5.0045 - 3.7322 - 2.7834 - 2.0757 - 1.548 - 1.1544 - 0.861 - 0.692 - 0.4661 = 142.7618

142.8068 is the first lower bound.

143.2277 is the first upper bound.

1.7694
0.45
0.26541
0.17694
0.08847

Adding the bottom four values to 142.8068:

143.2568
143.07221
142.984
142.8953


0.4661
0.275
0.1833
0.09

Substracting these values from 143.2277:

142.7618
142.9527
143.0444
143.1377

Now, the new features/results from the previous message will be used.

1.7694
0.45
0.26541
0.17694
0.08847

Substracting the bottom three values from 143.2568:

142.9914
143.0798
143.16833


0.4661
0.275
0.1833
0.09

Adding the bottom three values to 142.7618:

143.0368
142.945
142.8518

143.07221 is the new lower bound.

143.1377 is the new upper bound.


Careful calculations should be performed using the five element subdivisions algorithm to be compared to the known values of the Lehmer pairs:

A treatise which specializes in the calculation of Lehmer pairs (see pages 64-87 for a list):

http://www.slideshare.net/MatthewKehoe1/riemanntex


The five element subdivisions algorithm can detect the first Lehmer pair effortlessly:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1950822#msg1950822 (very close values right from the first level of the subdivision algorithm, 111.317 and 111.38)

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1612.08627.pdf (pg. 7: 111.02953554 and 111.87465918, the first Lehmer pair)


Then, the five element subdivision algorithm should be applied to the same intervals used in the zeta zeros approximations around the 1036th zero:

NEW COMPUTATIONS OF THE RIEMANN ZETA FUNCTION ON THE CRITICAL LINE

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1607.00709.pdf

As a byproduct of our search for large values, we also find large values of S(t). It is always the case in our computations that when ζ(1/2 + it) is very large there is a large gap between the zeros around the large value. And it seems that to compensate for this large gap the zeros nearby get “pushed” to the left and right. A typical trend in the large values that we have found is that S(t) is particularly large and positive before the large value and large and negative afterwards.

The calculations involve more than 50000 zeros in over 200 small intervals going up to the 1036th zero.

S(t) is related to the large gaps between the zeta zeros where high extreme values of peaks occur, where it seems to protect the zeta function from attaining the tightly packed spikes conjectured by mathematicians.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 18, 2018, 03:19:51 AM
EXACT DISTRIBUTION OF THE ZETA ZEROS FORMULA III

The number of zeta zeros whose imaginary part is less than T:

N(T) = T/2π (logT/2π - 1) + 7/8 + o(1) + Nosc(T)

Nosc(T) = S(T) = 1/π Im log ζ(1/2 + iT), the oscillatory part of the formula

<N(T)> = N(T) - Nosc(T)

Nosc(T) = S(T) is a manifestation of the apparent randomness of the actual location of the zeros.

(https://image.ibb.co/eWAFCe/stnt.jpg)

Graphs of <N(T)> and S(T): every jump in the graph of N(T) occurs at a zero crossing of Z(t). While <N(T)> is a smooth function, S(T) oscillates at the zero crossings.

http://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/berry-keating1.pdf

Nosc(T) = S(T) = -1/π ΣpΣm=1[exp(-mlogp/2)/m]sin(tmlogp), p = prime numbers, t = zeta zero

S(T) can be calculated exactly:

https://web.viu.ca/pughg/RiemannZeta/RiemannZetaLong.html

https://logic.pdmi.ras.ru/~yumat/talks/manchester_2012/TandNT_p.pdf

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8506/b09a2cf8eb4e9cd84a88464287c23f606f4b.pdf (pg. 11-13)


No one else has observed that the <N(T)> formula is directly connected to one of the five element subdivisions values for each zeta zero, and this property can hold even for values of t > 280, independent of the values of S(t) = Nosc (as t → ∞, |S(T)| < 1 for T < 280, |S(T)| < 2 for T < 6800000, and the largest value of |S(T)| found so far is around 3.2).

For the zeta zero 21.022:

<N(21.022)> = T/2π (logT/2π - 1) + 7/8 = 1.57

<N(22.3)> = 1.822

<N(23.43)> = 2.054

The average number of zeta zeros approaches the value of an integer exactly at the five element subdivision figures.

<N(25.0108)> = 2.3933

<N(26.61)> = 2.753

<N(27.34)> = 2.922

<N(28.07)> = 3.095


<N(30.424)> = 3.671

<N(31.8494)> = 4.0337


<N(32.935)> = 4.317

<N(35.058)> = 4.8875

<N(36.58)> = 5.3091


For the first Lehmer pair:

<N(111.3)> = 33.954
<N(111.87)> = 34.338

<N(111.317)> = 34.085

For the second Lehmer pair:

<N(150.05)> = 52.771
<N(150.92)> = 53.21

<N(149.55)> = 52.5186
<N(150.94)> = 53.221

This means a pair of zeta zeros whose values are very close can be detected by computing the five element subdivision figure closest to 53.

It also means that a recurrence formula is possible.

More information on S(T):

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2007826#msg2007826

S(t) is associated with the large gaps between the zeta zeros where high extreme values of peaks occur, where it seems to protect the zeta function from attaining the tightly packed spikes conjectured by mathematicians.

It is very possible that S(T) might be related to a different five element subdivision sequence.

53.4
106.8
136.1
160
534

63.63
19.091
16.1773
12.7272
6.363

44.5453
13.363
11.3252
8.91
4.454
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 20, 2018, 12:32:12 AM
RADIUS OF THE SUN PARADOX II

Does the Sun have a surface? Dr. P.M. Robitaille:



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 23, 2018, 01:57:55 AM
EXACT DISTRIBUTION OF THE ZETA ZEROS FORMULA IV

(https://image.ibb.co/nmf8gJ/riem.jpg)

"It was all very fascinating seeing the same pictures cropping up in both  areas,  but who could  point to  some  genuine  contribution  to  prime  number  theory  that  these  connections  had  made possible?  Peter Sarnak  offered  the  quantum  physicists  a  challenge:  use  the  analogy  between quantum  chaos  and  prime  numbers  to  tell  us  something  we  don't  already  know  about Riemann's landscape - something specific that couldn't be hidden behind statistics.

There  are  certain  attributes  of  the  Riemann  zeta  function,  called  its  moments,
which  it  was  known  should  give  rise  to  a  sequence  of  numbers.  The  trouble  was  that mathematicians  had very  little  clue  as  to  how  to  calculate  the sequence  itself.

Before  the  Seattle  meeting,  Conrey  had  done  a  huge  amount  of  work  on  the  problem  of the  next  number  in collaboration  with  a  colleague, Amit  Ghosh,  which  suggested  that  the third number in the sequence (after 1 and 2) was a big jump away, at 42. For Conrey, that this should be the number next in the sequence  'was  kind  of  surprising'.

In  the  meantime,  Conrey  had  joined  forces  with  another  mathematician,  Steve  Gonek. With a  huge  effort,  squeezing all  they  could  from  their  knowledge  of  number  theory,  they came  up  with  a  guess  for  the  fourth  number  in  the  sequence  -  24,024.  'So  we  had  this sequence: 1, 2, 42, 24,024, . . . We tried like the Dickens to guess what the sequence was. We knew our method couldn't go any further because it was giving a negative answer for the next number in the sequence.' It was known that all the numbers in the sequence were bigger  than  zero.  Conrey  arrived  at  Vienna  prepared  to  talk  about  why  they  thought  the next number in the sequence was 24,024.

'Keating  arrived  a  little  late.  On  the  afternoon  he  was  going  to  give  his  lecture  I  saw  him, and  I'd  seen  his  title  and  I  had  begun  to  wonder  whether  he  had  got  it.  As  soon  as  he showed  up  I  went  and  immediately  asked  him,  "Did  you  figure  it  out?"  He  said  yes,  he'd got the 42.' In fact, with his graduate student, Nina Snaith, Keating had created a formula that  would  generate  every  number  in  the  sequence.  'Then  I  told  him  about  the  24,024.' This  was  the  real  test.  Would  Keating  and  Snaith's  formula  match  Conrey  and  Gonek's guess of 24,024? After all, Keating had known that he was meant to be getting 42, so he might  have  cooked  his  formula  to  get  this  number.  This  new  number,  24,024,  was completely new to Keating and not one he could fake."

(from Music of the Primes)

The challenge for the quantum physicists then, was to use their quantum methods to check the number 42 and to calculate further moments in the series, while the number theorists tried to do the same using their methods.

Prof Jon Keating and Dr Nina Snaith at Bristol describe the energy levels in quantum systems using random matrix theory. Using RMT methods they produced a formula for calculating all of the moments of the Riemann zeta function. This formula confirmed the number 42.

Two years after Seattle, Keating and Snaith attended a follow-up conference at the Schrodinger Institute in Vienna to present their formula. Meanwhile, number theorists Conrey and Gonek had suggested the next moment in the series.

When Keating and Snaith's formula was used to calculate this moment, it coincided with the number theorists' suggestion: 24,024. The formula really works.

Usually pure mathematics supports physics, supplying the mathematical tools with which physical systems are analysed, but this is a case of the reverse: quantum physics is leading to new insights into number theory.

http://www.bristol.ac.uk/maths/research/highlights/riemann-hypothesis/

24024/286 = 84 = 42 x 2

84 x 1sc = 53.4

(286.1 is the displacement factor of the Gizeh pyramid)


https://arxiv.org/pdf/math/0602270.pdf

On the spacing distribution of the Riemann zeros: corrections to the asymptotic result

We give here arguments indicating that to leading order these deviations are the same as those of unitary random matrices of finite dimension Neff = log(E/2π)/√12Λ, where Λ = 1.57314 . . . is a well defined constant.

1.57314 = 1/sc

12/sc = 1.4134725 x 40/3


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1607.00709.pdf

New computations of the Riemann zeta function

Contains graphics of Z(t) from t = 238 to t = =88837796029624663862630219091105, also diagrams of S(t) for very large values of t.


Riemann's nachlass = manuscripts, lecture notes, calculation sheets and letters left by G.F.B Riemann

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281403728_To_unveil_the_truth_of_the_zeta_function_in_Riemann_Nachlass

The authors assert that not all of the formulas left by Riemann in his notes have been taken into consideration, and that these neglected equations were used by Riemann to actually prove the RH.


Z(t) and S(t) for very large values of the zeta function:

(https://image.ibb.co/ndx7kz/stnt2.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/g9Chkz/stnt3.jpg)


Currently, the values of the zeta zeros are thought to be totally random:

http://math.sun.ac.za/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Bruce-Bartlett-Random-matrices-and-the-Riemann-zeros.pdf

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/fc82/c1f7e35f23eb1695b0c78830c366e1258c88.pdf

One of the best mathematicians in the world, Dr. Yuri Matiyasevich (who solved Hilbert's tenth problem), dared to touch this red line and was refused publication for his results which prove that there is definite relationship between the values of the zeta zeros:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265478581_An_artless_method_for_calculating_approximate_values_of_zeros_of_Riemann's_zeta_function

https://phys.org/news/2012-11-supercomputing-superproblem-journey-pure-mathematics.html


As has been proven in this thread, the zeta zeros are generated by the five element subdivision algorithm.

This means that the values of the energy levels of all of the atoms are not random numbers: this is the reason why modern mathematics has preferred to concentrate on the Riemann hypothesis and not on research on the actual values of the zeta zeros. The question arises: how could an unconscious nature have known, well ahead of the big bang event, how to subdivide an interval into a five element sequence fractal?

http://wwwf.imperial.ac.uk/~hjjens/Riemann_talk.pdf

Subtle relations: prime numbers, complex functions, energy levels and Riemann

Prof. Henrik J. Jensen, Department of Mathematics, Imperial College London

http://www.ejtp.com/articles/ejtpv10i28p111.pdf

Riemann Zeta Function and Hydrogen Spectrum


In the previous message in this series, it was shown that the average number of zeta zeros formula nearest to an integer is directly related to the values of the five element subdivision figures closest to the respective zeta zero.

It is also assumed by modern mathematics that the fluctuations (oscillatory nature) of S(t) are totally random.

It is my belief that S(t) also is directly related to the five element subdivision figures.

The oscillatory nature could be described as follows: S(t) is a ratio.

6.3636 and 7.17246

6.0888 and 8.1645

6.3636 + 7.17246 + 6.0888 + 8.1645/(4 x 8.1645) = 0.851, a value very close to the known figures of S(t):  |S(T)| < 1 for T < 280, |S(T)| < 2 for T < 6800000, and the largest value of |S(T)| found so far is around 3.2; however, G. França and A. LeClair offer very interesting arguments to the fact that actually -1 < S(T) < 1:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2104086#msg2104086

10.54 and 11.23

9.308 and 10.948

10.54 + 11.23 + 9.308 + 10.948/(4 x 11.23) = 0.935

The random oscillatory nature of S(t) is generated by the four values of the five element subdivision algorithm. Of course, a general formula has to include the very slow increase of S(t), a sign function, but its most important feature, the apparent random oscillatory attribute, is definitely related to the values of the subdivision algorithm.

That is, <N(t)> (average number of zeta zeros) + S(t) (oscillatory part) = N(t) (total number of zeta zeros formula) = one of the values of the five element subdivision algorithm close to the respective zeta zero (which is different than the five element partition figure which is closest to an integer in the average number of zeta zeros formula). Then, since <N(t)> is easily calculated, we can find out the value of S(t) by a simple substraction.

Still, the fact that <N(t)> is very close to the value of an integer exactly at one of the four subdivision points of the five element algorithm, means that there is precise criterion by which to evaluate the multiple five element partition figures.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 24, 2018, 12:31:01 AM
SACRED CUBIT EXACT SPACING FORMULA FOR THE ZETA FUNCTION IX

z6 = 37.586

L(z6) = 3.5126

41.098

The seventh zeta zero, to three significant digits accuracy, using only the five elements subdivision applied to both zeta functions as a guide.

63.636363
16.1773
9.5445
6.36363
3.1815

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2006301#msg2006301 (basic subdivision of the first 63.63636 sacred cubit interval into five elements ratios)

14.134725 + 16.1773 + 7.1185 = 37.43

12.066 - 7.1185 = 4.9475

4.9475
1.2577
0.74205
0.49475
0.24735

37.43 + 1.2577 = 38.6877

4.9475 - 1.2577 = 3.6898

3.6898
0.9381
0.55347
0.36898
0.1845

Adding the bottom four values to 38.6877:

39.6258
39.24117
39.05668
38.8722


5.309

44.2

8.998

40.52

40.52 is the first lower bound.

44.2 is the first upper bound (even though 44.2 is greater than the eighth zeta zero, 43.327)


Now, the new features/results from the previous message on this page will be used.

8.998 - 5.309 = 3.689

3.689
0.9379
0.55335
0.3689
0.18445

Adding the bottom four values to 40.52:

41.458
41.073
40.889
40.704

40.889 is the new lower bound.

41.073 is the new upper bound.

38.6877 + 3.6898 = 42.378

1.2577
0.74205
0.4947
0.24735

Substracting 1.2577 from 42.378 we obtain 41.1203.

3.6898
0.9381
0.55347
0.36898
0.1845

Substracting the bottom four values from 41.1203:

40.1823
40.567
40.7513
40.9358

Since 40.9358 is a smaller value than 41.073, 40.9358 is the new upper bound of the entire approximation.

The true value for the seventh zeta zero is: 40.918719012

Already we have obtained a three significant digit approximation:

40.9358


A more difficult approach, without using the new features/results, would be use the five element subdivision algorithm, starting with 44.2 for the second zeta function (44.2, 43.262, 42.5632, 42.04172, 41.6526, 41.3624, 40.5112 and 41.146, 40.9846, 40.9136 and 40.93726) and continuing with the value of 38.6877 for the first zeta function (39.6258, 40.3254, 40.847126 and 40.9236, 40.86658, 40.8811, 40.892, 40.90007).

Once the four subdivision figures are obtained, there is no need to even bother to find the value of the corresponding zeta zero: all that matters are the five element subdivision points, then the zeta zero can be computed effortlessly if so desired.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 27, 2018, 12:15:46 AM
RADIUS OF THE SUN PARADOX III

“Young people, especially young women, often ask me
for advice. Here it is, valeat quantum. Do not undertake
a scientific career in quest of fame or money. There
are easier and better ways to reach them. Undertake it
only if nothing else will satisfy you; for nothing else is
probably what you will receive. Your reward will be
the widening of the horizon as you climb. And if you
achieve that reward you will ask no other.”

Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin


http://vixra.org/pdf/1310.0134v1.pdf

Commentary Relative to the Distribution of Gamma-Ray Flares on the Sun:
Further Evidence for a Distinct Solar Surface

http://vixra.org/pdf/1310.0108v1.pdf

The Solar Photosphere: Evidence for Condensed Matter

http://vixra.org/pdf/1310.0110v1.pdf

Forty Lines of Evidence for Condensed Matter — The Sun

Dr. P.M. Robitaille, Department of Radiology, The Ohio State University
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 28, 2018, 12:54:59 AM
SACRED CUBIT EXACT SPACING FORMULA FOR THE ZETA FUNCTION X

z7 = 40.9187

L(z7) = 3.353

44.272

The eighth zeta zero, to three significant digits accuracy, using only the five elements subdivision applied to both zeta functions as a guide.

63.636363
16.1773
9.5445
6.36363
3.1815

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2006301#msg2006301 (basic subdivision of the first 63.63636 sacred cubit interval into five elements ratios)

14.134725 + 16.1773 + 12.066 = 42.378

14.134725 + 16.1773 + 12.066 + 1.77 = 44.148


5.309

44.2

8.998

40.51


1.77
0.45
0.2655
0.177
0.0885

Adding the bottom four values to 42.378 (which is the first lower bound):

42.83
42.64
42.555
42.46


Substracting the bottom four values from 44.148 (the first upper bound), thus using the new results/features posted on this page:

43.7
43.88
43.97
44.06


For the second zeta function:

8.998 - 5.309 = 3.689

3.689
0.9379
0.55335
0.3689
0.18445

Substracting the bottom four values from 44.2:

43.262
43.646
43.8311
44.015

Adding the bottom four values to 42.378:

43.316
42.93
42.747
42.562

42.83 is the new lower bound; since 43.316 has a greater value than 42.83, 43.316 is the new lower bound for the entire approximation.

43.7 is the new upper bound.

At this point, a three digit approximation has already been obtained (true value of the eighth zeta zero is 43.327073281); however, the five element subdivision algorithm will be continued, in order to show the precise calculations.


Since 43.262 is the lower bound for the second zeta function (while 43.646 is the upper bound), we already know that the true value of the eighth zeta zero is to be found in the 0.9379 - 0.55335 interval.


3.689 - 0.9379 = 2.7511

2.7511
0.699
0.4126
0.27511
0.1375

Substracting the bottom four values from 43.262:

42.563
42.85
42.987
43.124

Adding the bottom four values to 43.316:

44.015
43.73
43.6
43.45


0.9379 - 0.55335 = 0.38455

0.38455
0.0977
0.0577
0.038455
0.01923

43.646 - 0.0977 = 43.55

0.38455 - 0.0977 = 0.28685

0.28685
0.07293

43.55 - 0.07293 = 43.477

0.28685 - 0.07293 = 0.21392

0.21392
0.0544

43.477 - 0.0544 = 43.42

0.21392 - 0.0544 = 0.15952

0.15952
0.0405

43.42 - 0.0405 = 43.38

0.15952 - 0.0405 = 0.11902

0.11902
0.03026

43.38 - 0.03026 = 43.35

0.11902 - 0.03026 = 0.08876

0.08876
0.022566

43.35 - 0.022566 = 43.327 (a five digit approximation)


Returning to the calculations for the first zeta function.

1.77 - 0.45 = 1.32

1.32
0.3356
0.198
0.132
0.066

Adding the bottom four values to 42.83:

43.1656
43.028
42.962
42.896

Substracting the bottom four values from 43.7:

43.364
43.502
43.568
43.634

1.32 - 0.3356 = 0.9844

0.9844
0.2503
0.14706
0.09844
0.04922

Adding the bottom four values to 43.1656:

43.416
43.315
43.264
43.215

Substracting the bottom four values from 43.364:

43.114
43.216
43.26
43.315

0.9844 - 0.2503 = 0.7341

0.7341
0.1866
0.11
0.07341
0.0367

Adding the bottom four values to 43.416:

43.6
43.526
43.49
43.45


Returning to the calculations for the second zeta function:

0.1375
0.034958
0.0206
0.01375
0.006875

Adding the bottom four values to 43.316:

43.351
43.2826
43.276
43.268


Successively, the new upper bounds are: 43.634, 43.6, 43.568, 43.526, 43.502, 43.45, 43.416, 43.364.

The new lower bounds are: 42.83, 42.93, 42.987, 43.028, 43.215, 43.26, 43.316.

The true value for the eighth zeta zero is: 43.327073281

Already we have obtained a three significant digit approximation:

43.316

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 29, 2018, 01:03:52 AM
TWO ZETA FUNCTIONS SOUND WAVES = MASS OF A BOSON

(https://image.ibb.co/ie8zTU/riemm1.jpg)

“What we call mass would seem to be nothing but an appearance, and all inertia to be of electromagnetic origin”

Henri Poincare

“Light cannot be anything else but a longitudinal disturbance in the ether, involving alternate compressions and rarefactions. In other words, light can be nothing else than a sound wave in the ether”

“It being a fact that radio waves are essentially like sound waves in the air"

Nikola Tesla

"The limiting velocity is c, but a limit has two sides"

Gerald Feinberg

“If a special geometry has to be invented in order to account for a falling apple, even Newton might be appalled at the complications which would ensue when really difficult problems are tackled”

"If we could understand the structure of the particle, in terms of the medium of which it is composed, and if we knew the structure of the rest of the medium also, so as to account for the potential stress at every point—that would be a splendid step, beyond anything accomplished yet”

Oliver Lodge

“We are about to enter the 21st century but our understanding of the origin of inertia, mass, and gravitation still remains what has been for centuries – an outstanding puzzle”

Vesselin Petkov

“The more we study gravitation, the more there grows upon us the feeling that there is something peculiarly fundamental about this phenomenon to a degree that is unequalled among other natural phenomena. Its independence of the factors that affect other phenomena and its dependence only upon mass and distance suggest that its roots avoid things superficial and go down deep into the unseen, to the very essence of matter and space”

Paul Heyl

”Mass is a very important property of matter, and we have nothing in our current theory that says even a word about it”

Claude Detraz, one of the two research directors at CERN

"Instead of asking himself what caused the apple to fall to the ground, Sir Isaac Newton should have asked how it got up there in the first place! What else if not levitation enables a tree to grow upwards against the action of gravity?"

Viktor Schauberger


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2006301#msg2006301 (sacred cubit configuration of a boson)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1774536#msg1774536 (journey inside a boson)

Yang = sound = ether

Yin = silence = aether

The interplay of yin and yang inside a boson takes place in conformity with the five elements subdivision of the sacred cubit distance which generate the two zeta function sound waves.

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr01.htm

The sound waves of the two zeta functions create light inside a boson.

Aether = medium through which the boson strings propagate

Boson = photon = neutrino

A boson is a cavity resonator.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1998110#msg1998110 (longitudinal boson strings within transverse subquark waves)

Chris Hill, theorist at Fermilab, indicated the view in “New Scientist”, 11 May 1996, page 29, “It would suggest that whatever lies inside the quarks is incredibly tightly bound, in a way that theory can’t yet accommodate.”


The sound waves inside a boson (light) create the mass of the boson itself: mass is generated by the Riemann zeta function waves.

Whittaker scalar subquark potential waves:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1994059#msg1994059


https://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0012025.pdf

Did 20th century physics have the means to reveal the nature of inertia and gravitation?

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 02, 2018, 02:00:33 AM
EXACT DISTRIBUTION OF THE ZETA ZEROS FORMULA V

<N(t)> is very close to the value of an integer exactly at one of the four subdivision points of the five element algorithm.

This fact is of great aid in finding the "regular" zeta zeros values.

The ninth zeta zero is 48.005150881.

The four initial five element partition figures:

3.54

45.92

5.309

47.687


3.54

45.98

1.77

47.75

12.066

49.52

Since <N(45.8 )> ~= 8.0 and <N(48.7)> = 8.996, this means that 47.75 is the first lower bound of the entire approximation (and not the upper bound).

3.689
0.9379
0.55335
03689
0.18445

47.687 + 0.9379 = 48.625

<N(48.625)> = 8.972


For Lehmer pairs, the calculations are more involved (corresponding <N(t)> values in the parentheses).

7005.0629 and 7005.10056

7004.0437 (6707.487)
7005.0629 (6708.626)
7005.10056 (6708.667)
7006.74 (6710.498)

That is, the Lehmer pair will be located between the average number of zeta zeros values of 6708 and 6709.

Sacred cubit interval: 63.6363636363...

6999.999
7063.6363


For the first zeta function the values are:

7003.1814
7003.9903
7004.593
7005.0435
7005.17544
7005.379

The calculations for the second zeta function:

7004.541
7005.175
7005.48

Since 7005.175 and 7005.17544 are very close figures, a Lehmer pair must be located in the vicinity of these values.


Using 200/π = 63.66197724 as a sacred cubit interval the results are not as impressive: the nearest values are 7004.6825 and 7004.689, 7005.2652 and 7005.23.


63137.2115 and 63137.2324

63136.537 (82551.023)
63137.2115 (82552.013)
63137.2324 (82552.0434)
63138.2238 (82553.4973)

Sacred cubit interval: 63.6363636363...

63127.21
63190.846


For the first zeta function the values are:

63136.755
63137.42
63137.0866

(+9.5445, +0.66328, +0.33164)

The calculations for the second zeta function lead to these values:

63138.1574
63137.61
63137.063

(...-3.7322, -0.5474, -1.09478)

Since 63137.0866 and 63137.063 are very close figures, a Lehmer pair must be located in the vicinity of these values.

Using 200/π = 63.66197724 as a sacred cubit interval the results are not as impressive; the nearest values are: 63137.32 and 63137.185.


71732.9012 and 71732.91591

71732.02 (95246.674)
71732.9012 (95247.984)
71732.91591 (95248.00608)
71734.097 (95249.76)

Sacred cubit interval: 63.6363636363...

71718.11
71781.75


For the first zeta function the values are:

71734.287
71727.655
71729.341
71730.6
71731.536
71732.235
71732.757

The calculations for the second zeta function:

71732.7936
71732.06
71731.326
71730.6

Two pairs of zeta zeros which are very close: 71730.6 and 71732.757 and 71732.7936.

To distinguish between these choices the second five element subdivision algorithm will be applied.

53.4
106.8
136.1
160
534

63.636363
19.091
16.1773
12.7272
6.363

63.63 - 19.091 = 44.5453

44.5453
13.363
11.3252
8.91
4.454

44.5453 - 13.363 = 31.1823

31.1823
9.3547
7.9278
6.23646
3.11823

31.1823 - 9.3547 = 21.8276

21.8276
6.5483
5.5494
4.36552
2.18276

21.8276 - 6.5483 = 15.2793

15.2793
4.5838
3.88461
3.05586
1.52793

For the first zeta function, the values are:

71737.201
71730.8372
71731.8722
71734.2873
71732.6
71732.938
71732.77

The calculations for the second zeta function:

71733.4
71731.865
71730.337
71732.935
71732.663
71732.721

Since 71730.8372 and 71730.337 are not as close to one another as the corresponding pair using the first five element subdivision algorithm, it means we are not dealing with a Lehmer pair; the same analysis applies to 71731.8722 and 71731.865 (the corresponding pair using the five element subdivision algorithm are not this close to one another).

Amazingly, the two five element subdivision algorithms have located the precise interval of the Lehmer pair: 71732.757 and 71732.7936, 71732.938 and 71732.935.

The actual values are: 71732.9012 and 71732.91591.

Using 200/π = 63.66197724 as a sacred cubit interval the results are not as impressive; the nearest values are: 71732.9171 and 71732.909, after a long series of calculations (more involved than using 63.6363636 as a sacred cubit interval).


220538.853 and 220538.8702

220537.0585 (332251.37)
220537.4266 (332251.98)
220538.853 (332254.36)
220538.8702 (332254.39)
220539.8528 (332256.0258)

220538.853 is the 332254th zero, 220538.8702 is the 332255th zero, where the average spacing is 0.6.

Sacred cubit interval: 63.6363636363...

220499.78
220563.416


For the first zeta function the values are:

220537.0213
220538.341
220538.926
220538.676
220538.824

The calculations for the second zeta function:

220537.925
220538.863


Since 220538.824 and 220538.863 are very close figures, a Lehmer pair must be located in the vicinity of these values. 

Using the second five element subdivision algorithm, the following results are obtained:

220538.471
220538.901
220538.81
220538.64

220535.415
220539.871
220538.534
220538.738
220538.98

Again, the Lehmer pair must be located very close to the value of 220538.9.

Using 200/π = 63.66197724 as a sacred cubit interval the results are not as impressive: the nearest values are: 220538.8085 and 220538.8266.


435852.8393 and 435852.8572

435851.967 (703890.467)
435852.8393 (703892.015)
435852.8572 (703892.046)
435853.455 (703893.107)

Sacred cubit interval: 63.6363636363...

435845.45
435909.0865


435851.814
435852.623
435852.743

435853.6145
435852.7981

The Lehmer pair must be located around the value of 435852.78.


555136.9163 and 555136.9315

555136.284 (917905.02)
555136.9163 (917906.17)
555136.9315 (917906.195)
555137.412 (917907.066)

Sacred cubit interval: 63.63636363...

555099.9944
555163.631


555133.547
555137.2357
555136.385
555136.6
555136.763
555136.8831

555135.3877
555140.3352
555137.44
555136.92
555136.767


773657.1461 and 773657.1559

773656.6413
773657.1461
773657.1559
773658.041

Sacred cubit interval: 63.63636363

773627.265
773.690.9014


773655.51
773.657.278
773657.3665

773657.35


947107.8201 and 947107.8325

947107.2485
947107.8201
947107.8325
947108.2566

Sacred cubit interval: 63.63636363

947099.9905
947163.627


947106.354
947107.163
947107.766

947108.155
947107.7468

Both sets of five element subdivision algorithms are needed to detect the Lehmer pairs, the zeta zeros values which are most difficult to find.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 03, 2018, 07:31:44 AM
EXACT DISTRIBUTION OF THE ZETA ZEROS FORMULA VI

http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/doc/zeta.derivative.pdf

1.30664344087942265202071895041619 x 1022

1.30664344087942265202071898265199 x 1022


The average spacing of zeros at that height is 0.128, while the above Lehmer pair of zeros is separated by 0.00032 (1/400th times the average spacing).

Using a very large number calculator:

205329683587299385104.8399385104 = 13066434408794226520207/63.63636363

12935770065999861261552 =  205329683587299385104 x 63

130664342794365258601.54936752 = 205329683587299385104 x .63636363
 
53.45063194549 = 0.8399835 x 63.63636363


13,066,434,408,794,226,520,153.54936752
13,066,434,408,794,226,520,217.18573115


The calculations for the first zeta function:

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,169.72670085
(+16.17733333)

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,181.79268471
(+12.06598386)

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,190.791012836
(+8.998328126)

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,197.501606019
(+6.710593183)

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,202.506097991
(+5.004491972)

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,206.238247924
(+3.732149933)

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,207.332996246
(+1.094748322)

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,206.785622085
(+0.547374161)

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,206.924786491
(+0.139164406)

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,207.028569738
(+0.103783247)

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,207.105967138
(+0.0773974)

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,207.163687018
(+0.05771988)

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,207.189083398
(+0.02539638)


The computations for the second zeta function:

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,207.64027661
(-9.54545454)

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,207.308682645
(-0.331593965)

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,207.224378195
(-0.08430445)

0.247289515 interval

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,207.187284768
(-0.037093427)


The second five element subdivision algorithm:

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,172.64027661
(+19.090909)

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,186.00391297
(+13.363636)

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,195.35845842
(+9.35454545)

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,201.906640238
(+6.548181818)

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,206.490367508
(+4.58372727)

1.06953636
0.320860909
0.271919
0.21390727
0.106953636

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,206.811228417
(+0.320860909)

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,207.035831017
(+0.2246026)

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,207.193052861
(+0.1572218844)


13,066,434,408,794,226,520,210.82209485
(-6.363636)

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,208.91300395
(-1.9090909)

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,207.576640314
(-1.336363636)

3.11818181

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,207.264822133
(-0.3118181)

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,207.202458497
(-0.062363636)

0.07927665
0.0623636

0.01691303
0.00507391

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,207.197384587
(-0.00507391)

0.0118391
0.003551737

13,066,434,408,794,226,520,207.19383285
(-0.0035517370

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 05, 2018, 12:44:23 AM
EXACT DISTRIBUTION OF THE ZETA ZEROS FORMULA VII

(https://image.ibb.co/fmOEoy/riem2.jpg)

7954022502373.43289015387
7954022502373.43289494012

t2 - t1 = 4.7863 x 10-6 = 0.0000047863

7,954,022,502,331.87047696
7,954,022,502,395.50684059


7,954,022,502,348.04781029
(+16.17733333)

7,954,022,502,360.11379415
(+12.06598386)

7,954,022,502,369.112122276
(+8.998328126)

7,954,022,502,373.071330025
(+3.959207749)

2.751385438
0.69951223
0.412707815
0.2751385438
0.13756927

7,954,022,502,373.3464685688
(+0.2751385438)

0.13756927
0.03497561

7,954,022,502,373.3814441788
(+0.03497561)


0.03497561 = 1/28.5914, where 286.1 is the displacement factor of the Gizeh pyramid

0.10259366
0.0260834

7,954,022,502,373.4075275788
(+0.0260834)

0.07651025
0.019451965

7,954,022,502,373.4269795438
(+0.019451965)

0.057058282

0.0057058282

7,954,022,502,373.432685372
(+0.0057058282)


7,954,022,502,395.50684059

7,954,022,502,379.32950729
(-16.1773333)

7,954,022,502,374.58360426
(-4.74590303)

2.372951517
0.60329919

7,954,022,502,373.98030507
(-0.60329919)


7,954,022,502,373.530388664
(-0.449916406)

1.319735916
0.131973591
0.065986795

7,954,022,502,373.464401869
(-0.065986795)

0.065986795
0.016776482

7,954,022,502,373.447625387
(-0.016776482)

0.04921031
0.01251123

7,954,022,502,373.435114157
(-0.01251123)

0.036699082

7,954,022,502,373.43327920286
(-0.00183495414)

7,954,022,502,373.43281268412
(-0.00046651874)


The second five element subdivision algorithm calculations:

7,954,022,502,350.96138605
(+19.09090909)

7,954,022,502,364.32502241
(+13.36363636)

7,954,022,502,373.67956786
(+9.35454545)



7,954,022,502,376.4159315
(-19.090909)

4.45454545
1.3363636

7,954,022,502,375.0795679
(-1.3363636)

7,954,022,502,374.1441134
(-0.9354545)

2.18272727
0.65481818
0.5549366
0.43654545
0.2182727

7,954,022,502,373.48929522
(-0.65481818)


Using the Riemann-Siegel asymptotic formula, the sum will feature at least O(4.56 x 1010) terms (for t = 1.30664344087942265202071895041619 x 1022):

(http://web.mit.edu/kenta/www/six/parallel/other-files/siegel1.png)

Using the five element subdivision algorithms, we only need to translate/shift the 63.63636363 interval by a factor of k: k = [t/63.6363636363] x 63.6363636363, where [ x ] denotes the integer part, and then simply apply the five element partition process for the two zeta functions to detect both regular zeta zeros and Lehmer pairs, carefully keeping a check on the average number of zeros values which are close to an integer (these are the values which are equivalent to a five element subdivision figure).

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 06, 2018, 01:33:19 AM
UPPER/LOWER BOUNDS FOR THE SIX GATES II

(https://i113.photobucket.com/albums/n206/dharanis1/bunda_zpsfb67a5fa.jpg)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1726000#msg1726000 (part I)

The 28° angle measurement was obtained using the figures published by wikipedia.

http://blog.world-mysteries.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/AG_Giza3B.jpg

One of the readers of the article "Giza: The Time Machine" commented:

What if the 117,5 dimensions are instead 116.26? Therefore, pi*116.26 = 365.242 (the exact length of a solar year)….that is, the circumference of a circle with the diameter = 116.26, that can be formed within the square (117.5 horizontal & vertical dimensions you’ve shown above). This would also make the distance between the small pyramid apexes = 58.13 m, instead of what Wikipedia has stated.

An angle of 27.49° makes more sense: 1/27.49 = 0.036376864 = 0.1 - 0.063623.

2 x 27.49 = 54.98

54.98° = 0.959582 rad

s = r x θ

6106.4248 = 6363.63 x 0.959582

6106.4248/6 = 1017.73747 km, the distance alloted for each gate

The arclength for each gate (space alloted for the each of the six periods running from the winter solstice to the summer solstice, and from the summer solstice to the winter solstice) is 1017.737 km.

There are several possibilities relating to describing the solar precession within the context of the 1017.737 km alloted for the each gate.

Obviously, the upper bound must be 508.87 km (1017.737/2): solar precession = 1.5 km, otherwise at the end of the precessional cycle the solar orbit would intersect the space alloted for the next gate (or the space beyond the tropic of Cancer/Capricorn latitudes).

That is, we would have a mobile section (which would be used by the Sun for 30 days, the maximum interval alloted for each gate, measuring 508.87 km) which now moves westward until it reaches the limit/boundary (that is, it can only move/travel for 508.87 km; its starting point will travel 508.87 km, across a time period of 339.25 years, and its endpoint, already on the 508.87 km mark, will travel another 508.87 km to reach the outer limit/boundary, after 339.25 years, at a precession 1.5 km per year).

The lower bound has to be 254.43 km (1017.737/4): we cannot imagine a precessional cycle which would occupy less than 254.43 km (of the total 1017.737 km).

First upper bound: 339.25 years

First lower bound: 169.62 years

In the new radical chronology of history, the last major planetary cataclysm occurred at least before 1770 AD.

Then, the new lower bound is: 254.43 years (254.43 x 1.5 = 381.645 km, where 381.78 = 600 sc)

1017.73 - (2 x 381.645) = 254.447 (the displacement factor for a single gate)

The only other significant sacred cubit figure between 339.25 and 254.43 is 286.1 (the displacement factor of the Gizeh pyramid).

286.1 x 1.5 = 429.15

1017.73 - (2 x 429.15) = 159.437 (159.09 = 1000sc/4 = 250 sc)

1733 AD + 286 = 2019

1764 AD + 286 = 2050 (105 years after the end of WWII)

Likely upper bound: 286.1 years

Most probable upper bound: 254.43 years

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 15, 2018, 01:13:22 AM
EXACT DISTRIBUTION OF THE ZETA ZEROS FORMULA VIII: FRANÇA-LECLAIR POINTS

Transcendental equations satisfied by the individual zeros of
Riemann ζ, Dirichlet and modular L-functions

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1502.06003.pdf

Statistical and other properties of Riemann zeros based on an
explicit equation for the n-th zero on the critical line

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1307.8395.pdf

<N(T)> = T/2π(logT/2πe) + 7/8 + O(log T)

N(T) = T/2π(logT/2πe) + 7/8 + 1/π(arg ζ(1/2 + iT))+ O(1/T)

Then, a simple observation (that the right hand side of N(T) jumps by one at each zero, with values −1/2 to the left and +1/2 to the right of the zero so that one can replace n → N(T) + 1/2)) leads to this equation:

T/2π(logT/2πe) = n - 11/8

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/LambertW-Function.html

The Lambert W function is the inverse of f(W) = WeW.

Using the transformation T = 2π(n - 11/8)/x,

xex = (n - 11/8)/e

França-LeClair points = 2πe ⋅ eW[(n - 11/8)/e]

Mathematica software for the Lambert W function:

http://functions.wolfram.com/webMathematica/FunctionEvaluation.jsp?name=ProductLog

14.5213, 20.6557, 25.4927, 29.7394, 33.6245, 37.2574, 40.7006,
43.994, 47.1651, 50.2337, 53.2144, 56.1189, 58.9563, 61.7338,
64.4577, 67.133, 69.764, 72.3544, 74.9073, 77.4257, 79.9118, 82.3678,
84.7957, 87.1972, 89.5737, 91.9268, 94.2576, 96.5674, 98.8571,
101.128, 103.38, 105.615, 107.833, 110.036, 112.223, 114.395,
116.554, 118.698, 120.83, 122.949

These points are much closer to the true zeta zeros values than the Gram points.

https://sites.google.com/site/riemannzetazeros/grampoints

(https://i.stack.imgur.com/FfCal.png)

(https://i.stack.imgur.com/4mDAc.png)

(good and bad Gram points)

However, the authors of the articles have not noticed that the 11/8 value is directly related to the sacred cubit.

The 11/8 value, 1.375, is a sacred cubit average of 1.361 and 1.4134725.

1.375 - 1.361 = 0.014

1.4134725 - 1.375 = 0.0384725

0.0384725/0.014 = 2.748 = 0.3638963 = 1 - sc

That is why these estimates, the França-LeClair points, do not capture the exact values of the Lehmer pairs (110.036 and 112.223, where the first Lehmer pair is 111.03 and 111.87); however, they can be used as a first approximation in the equation which features S(t), [1/π(arg ζ(1/2 + iT))], to derive an algorithm (see the papers) for finding the zeta zeros which is easier than the Riemann-Siegel formula, but still features transcendental functions and an evalution of either integral representations of S(t) or convergent series which approximate S(t).

S(t), a sign function and k which captures the oscillatory part of S(t) (k = (f1 + f2 + f3 + f4)/4f4, where fn are the four five element subdivisions figures, and f4 is the largest figure).

However, this would mean one has to find the fn values first, which is equivalent to finding the correct location of each Lehmer pair (the most difficult zeta zeros values to be calculated).

As exemplified in the previous messages, the Lehmer pair values are connected with a combination of the two five element subdivisions algorithms, which can capture directly these figures, without the need to compute S(t).

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1510/1510.06333.pdf

Exploring Riemann’s functional equation (including the França-LeClair points)

https://projecteuclid.org/download/pdf_1/euclid.acta/1485892173

On the roots of the Riemann zeta-function (the classic paper published in 1956 by D.H. Lehmer)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 18, 2018, 01:37:19 AM
RIEMANN'S HYPOTHESIS AND THE SHAPE OF THE EARTH

If Riemann's hypothesis is true, the Earth is flat.

If the de Bruijn-Newman constant equals zero (Λ = 0), the Earth is flat.

If there exists an infinity of Lehmer pairs, the Earth is flat.

(https://image.ibb.co/mcLCwe/leh1.jpg)

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1508.05870.pdf

Lehmer pairs revisited

The Riemann hypothesis means that the de Bruijn-Newman constant is zero.

Unusually close pairs of zeros of the Riemann zeta function, the Lehmer pairs, can be used to give lower bounds on Λ.

Soundararajan’s Conjecture B implies the existence of infinitely many strong Lehmer pairs, and thus, that the de Bruijn-Newman constant Λ is 0.


http://www.math.kent.edu/~varga/pub/paper_209.pdf

Lehmer pairs of zeros and the Riemann ξ-function

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.30.9492&rep=rep1&type=pdf

A new Lehmer pair of zeros and a new lower bound for the de Bruijn-Newman constant Λ

http://www.academia.edu/19018042/Lehmer_pairs_of_zeros_the_de_Bruijn-Newman_constant_and_the_Riemann_Hypothesis

Lehmer pairs of zeros, the de Bruijn-Newman constant Λ, and the Riemann Hypothesis

http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/doc/debruijn.newman.pdf

An improved bound for the de Bruijn-Newman constant

https://www.ams.org/journals/mcom/2011-80-276/S0025-5718-2011-02472-5/S0025-5718-2011-02472-5.pdf

An improved lower bound for the de Bruijn-Newman constant


Recently, it was proven that the de Bruijn-Newman constant is non-negative:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1801.05914.pdf

This means that an infinite sequence of Lehmer pairs of arbitrarily high quality will prove that the de Bruijn-Newman constant is equal to zero (Λ = 0).

https://terrytao.wordpress.com/2018/01/20/lehmer-pairs-and-gue/


692,736.741 and 692,736.7631 (Lehmer pair, zeta zeros 1169838 and 1169839)

692736/63.63 =~ 10887

10888 = 136.1 x 80

692736/136.1 =~ 5090

5.09/2 = 2.545

8595 x 136.1 = 1169779.5
8596 x 136.1 = 1169915.6

135 x 63.63 = 8590

18385 x 63.63 = 1169837.55

135 x 136.1 = 18373.5

These calculations show that there is a formula, expressed in terms of 136.1 and 63.636363, which predicts the sacred cubit interval where a Lehmer pair is located.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 21, 2018, 02:48:29 AM
EXACT DISTRIBUTION OF THE ZETA ZEROS FORMULA IX: LEHMER PAIRS

A proton consists of two laevorotatory quarks and one dextrorotatory quark. A neutron has two dextrorotatory quarks and one laevorotatory quark in its composition.

https://web.archive.org/web/20141027125332/http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_09_4_phillips.pdf (page 502)

A quark has three subquarks. The subquark is formed of some 14 billion bosons distributed in double torsion fashion.

A boson is created by an even smaller particle:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1774536#msg1774536

The smallest particle, a cavity resonator, has Riemann zeta function waves travelling in both directions:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2006301#msg2006301

Lehmer pairs are unusually close pairs of zeros of the Riemann zeta function:

(https://image.ibb.co/cU5MUz/leh4.jpg)

These pairs have symmetrical sacred cubit formulas.

(https://image.ibb.co/fctQpz/leh2.jpg)

7005.0629 and 7005.10056, zeta zeros 6709 and 6710

51 x 136.1 = 6941.11

6941.11 + 63.63 = 7004.74

49 x 136.1 = 6668.9
50 x 136.1 = 6805

39.333 + 6668.9 = 6708.233

110 x 63.63 = 6999.3

105 x 63.63 = 6681.15

6999.3 - 6681.15 = 318.15 = 5 x 63.63

(https://image.ibb.co/kzEC2K/leh3.jpg)

17143.786 and 17143.8218, zeta zeros 18859 and 18860

126 x 136.1 = 17148.6

269 x 63.63 = 17116.47
270 x 63.63 = 17180

138 x 136.1 = 18781.8
139 x 136.1 = 18918

296 x 63.63 = 18834.5

18834.5 - 17116.47 = 286.1 x 6


63137.2115 and 63137. 2324, zeta zeros 82552 and 82553

464 x 136.1 = 63150

606 x 136.1 = 82476.6

82552 - 82476.6 = 75.4 = 24 x π

63137/63.63 = 992.25

992 = 7.2887 x 136.1

82552/63.63 = 1297.37

1361 - 1297 = 64


The five element subdivision points = the location of the zeta zeros, using sacred cubit intervals of 63.63636363 units.

The Lehmer pairs values = the five element subdivision intervals/points, using a larger sacred cubit interval, 6363.636363 units.

Zeta zeros distribution: regular zeros, large gaps between zeros, Lehmer pairs and strong Lehmer pairs.

A strong Lehmer pair is to the Lehmer pairs, what the Lehmer pairs represent in terms of the zeta zeros.

The larger sacred cubit interval, 6363.636363 units, is used to detect both the Lehmer pair interval, and its values.

That is, I believe that these pairs are not randomly located within the distribution of the zeta zeros, but have a precise location.

There are even double Lehmer pairs, two pairs which are very closely located to each other:

1579400.943 and 1579400.968
1579721.076 and 1579721.097

2378769.005 and 2378769.021
2378798.466 and 2378798.483


A 6363.636363 interval has ten 636.36363 subintervals, and one hundred 63.63636 subintervals.

The first Lehmer pair, 111.029 and 111.874 is a regular Lehmer pair.

415.0188 and 415.455 is the first strong Lehmer pair.

The 636.3636 interval can be subdivided according to the five element subdivisions algorithm: one adds/substracts 161.773, 120.66, 89.98, 67.106 ... to locate the Lehmer pairs.

The 6363.6363 interval can be subdivided as follows: one adds/substracts 636.36, 954.54, 1617.733, 1206.6, 899.8, 670.16 ... to locate further Lehmer pairs.

The pairs 630.47 and 630.8, 637.397 and 637.93 are located exactly very close to the 636.36 value.

636.36 + 318.18 = 954.54, while 954.13 and 954.83 is another Lehmer pair.

Each of the values 636.63, 954, 1617.7, 2824, 3724, 4395.2, 4895.6 is located very close to a Lehmer pair. 6363.63 is located exactly next to a large gap.

6999, 7317, 7981, 9187.96, 10087.7, 10758.8, 11259.3, 11632.5, 11910.7, 12118.3 are positioned right next to Lehmer pair values.

As an example, we have the interval from 4836.36 to 5154.5454.

The Lehmer pairs are located at these values (* denotes strong Lehmer pairs):

4862
4870
4888
4890
4893
4900 *
4917
4928 *
4951 *
4960 *
4966 *
4990 *
5010 *
5022
5035 *
5045 *
5052
5064 *
5069
5074
5081
5092 *
5096 *
5108
5115 *
5128 *
5154

4836.36
4899.99
4963.6363
5027.2727
5090.909
5154.5454

Each of these values either coincides with a Lehmer pair figure or is very close to it.

https://web.archive.org/web/20110610163654/http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/zeta_tables/zeros1


There are even certain sacred cubit values connections between some Lehmer pairs:

17143/7005 = 1/sc2 + 63.6363

5124/415 = 5/sc2

1025/415 = 1/sc2

12658/1025 = 5/sc2

17335277232221.245/7005 = 2474700532.793

2.474 = 1/sc2

1336685304932.843/7005 = 190818744.458

1.908 = 3 x 1sc

35615956517.47854/7005 = 5084362.10099

5.084/2 = 2.542, where 0.6363 x 4 = 2.5452

161886592540.9931/17143 = 9443305.87

9.4433 =~ 3 x π

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 24, 2018, 03:39:06 AM
RIEMANN'S HYPOTHESIS AND THE SHAPE OF THE EARTH II

Highest zeta zero ever computed:
t ≈ 81029194732694548890047854481676712.9879 ( n = 1036 + 4242063737401796198).

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1607.00709.pdf

1273315917355388788579148020712834 x 63 = 80218902793389493680486325304908542

1273315917355388788579148020712834 x 0.63636363 = 810291939305055209561529176768134.23182742


81,029,194,732,694,548,890,047,854,481,676,676.23182742
81,029,194,732,694,548,890,047,854,481,676,739.86819105


81,029,194,732,694,548,890,047,854,481,676,692.40916072
(+16.1773333)

81,029,194,732,694,548,890,047,854,481,676,704.47514472
(+12.065984)

81,029,194,732,694,548,890,047,854,481,676,713.47347282
(+8.9983281)

81,029,194,732,694,548,890,047,854,481,676,709.78410162
(+5.3089569)

81,029,194,732,694,548,890,047,854,481,676,710.72208732
(+0.9379857)

81,029,194,732,694,548,890,047,854,481,676,711.42159955
(+0.69951223)

81,029,194,732,694,548,890,047,854,481,676,711.943267789
(+0.521668239)

81,029,194,732,694,548,890,047,854,481,676,712.332307089
(+0.3890393)

81,029,194,732,694,548,890,047,854,481,676,712.622437039
(+0.29012995)

81,029,194,732,694,548,890,047,854,481,676,712.838804339
(+0.2163673)



81,029,194,732,694,548,890,047,854,481,676,723.69085805
(-16.177333)

81,029,194,732,694,548,890,047,854,481,676,711.62487405
(-12.065984)

81,029,194,732,694,548,890,047,854,481,676,716.5720035
(-7.11885455)

81,029,194,732,694,548,890,047,854,481,676,715.3142453
(-1.2577582)

81,029,194,732,694,548,890,047,854,481,676,714.37625955
(-0.93798575)

81,029,194,732,694,548,890,047,854,481,676,713.6767473
(-0.69951225)

81,029,194,732,694,548,890,047,854,481,676,713.15507905
(-0.52166825)


Very interesting comments on the S(t) function:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1407.4358.pdf (page 46)


To test any hypotheses regarding S(t), the five element subdivision algorithms should be used around the zeta zero t = 1010,000, since the 63.636363636363... interval has to be shifted/translated only using arbitrary-precision arithmetic ([1010,000/63.6363636] x 63.63636363, where [ x ] denotes the integral part of x). To detect the correct number of zeros in the interval [1010,000/63.63636363...] x 63.63636363, [1010,000/63.63636363...] x 63.63636363 + 63.636363636363, Gram points, França-LeClair points, Backlund's method should be utilized, and then simply use the five element subdivision algorithms to compute the zeta zeros within that interval, and discover how S(t) behaves at that height (for 1010,000, the average spacing is 0.0002729).
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 03, 2018, 02:31:53 AM
DEPALMA SPINNING EFFECT ON LONG DISTANCE ARTILLERY PROJECTILES III

(https://nationalinterest.org/sites/default/files/styles/desktop__1486_x_614/public/main_images/us_navy_070111-n-4515n-509_guided_missile_destroyer_uss_forest_sherman_ddg_98_test_fires_its_five-inch_gun_on_the_bow_of_the_ship_during_training.jpg?itok=mqEkBgwm)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2029817#msg2029817 (part I)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2032069#msg2032069 (part II, formula)

This is the RE formula for a ballistic trajectory:

R = [vo2sin(2θo)]/g x {1 + [vo2/gRe][cos2θo]}

This is the FE formula for a ballistic trajectory (limit as Re goes to infinity):

R = [vo2sin(2θo)]/g

The difference is considerable: it amounts to kilometers.

That is why no other FE for the past 150 years has been able to address this very important matter. The most that some of them have done, is to deny the actual calculations.

Here are the trajectory range tables used by the US Navy during WWII:

http://www.eugeneleeslover.com/USN-GUNS-AND-RANGE-TABLES/OP-770-1.html

Had the FE formula with a fixed g been used, each and every target during WWI and WWII would have been missed by a large margin (mobile targets - other ships, fixed targets - ports/cities).

However, this is the correct FE formula:

R = [vo2sin(2θo)]/f(k)

k is the variable electrogravitational value, which depends on the altitude, the atmospheric ether tide, the density of ether at a certain altitude, and the spin rate

The curvature factor is ~EQUAL to the antigravitational effect produced by the spin rate of the projectile which forms a torsion field which partially cancels out the g force.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 09, 2018, 02:08:17 AM
HANS COLER'S MAGNETSTROMAPPARAT/STROMZEUGER DEVICES

(http://www.intalek.com/Index/Projects/Research/HansColer/Photos/HanColerReplication.bmp)

"Coler's innovative research on an over-unity ether field generator was interrupted by Allied bombings during World War II. But after the war Coler's project showed enough promise that the British Secret Service interrogated Coler, as well as his colleague and financial backer, Dr. F. Modersohn. On January 7, 1946, British Intelligence produced a 32-page Final Report No. 1043. The document was classified CONFIDENTIAL (it was declassified in 1962). The object of their investigation were two devices that Coler had invented between 1926 and 1945, which produced electrical energy without a chemical or mechanical source of power."

Hans Coler did not apply any external source of power to his magnets. He set up the apparatus and its circuit, adjusted the spacing between the magnets he had arranged in a ring and waited.

https://web.archive.org/web/20080218060731/http://www.rexresearch.com/coler/colerb~1.htm (British Secret Service report on the Hans Coler devices, 1946)

Accordingly Coler was visited and interrogated. He proved to be cooperative and willing to disclose all details of his devices, and consented to build up and put into operation a small model of the so-called "Magnetstromapparat" [Magnet Power Apparatus] using material supplied to him by us, and working only in our presence. With this device, consisting only of permanent magnets, copper coils, and condensers in a static arrangement he showed that he could obtain a tension of 450 millivolts for a period of some hours; and in a repetition of the experiment the next day 60 millivolts was recorded for a short period. The apparatus has been brought back and is now being further investigated.

In 1933 Coler and von Unruh made up a slightly larger model with an output of 70 watts. This was demonstrated to Dr. F. Modersohn, who obtained from Schumann and Kloss confirmation of their tests in 1926.

Entitled "The Invention of Hans Coler, Relating to an Alleged New Source ol Power," B.I.O.S. Final Report no 1043, Item No. 31, Summer 1946, this report consisted of tests and findings on two strange circuits conducted at the University of Berlin between the World Wars under the auspices of none other than Dr. Winfried Otto Schumann, discoverer of the Schumann resonance of the earth. A mere glance will explain why the device attracted the immediate attention of the German Navy, which classified it as a possible source of quiet and limitless energy for submarine propulsion.

It will be noted that this hexagonal construction of coils and magnets and two "rotating" sub-circuits has absolutely no source of power. Yet, to the mystified Coler and Dr. Schumann, it nevertheless managed to produce, or better, transduce power seemingly... from nowhere.

In 1937, Coler built a 6 KW version of the Stromzeuger. In 1942, Modersohn demonstrated the device to the Research Dept. of the German Navy, which intervened and supplied them with materials, meters and tools. Thereafter the research was directed by Oberbaurat (Naval Construction Chief) Seysen, who assigned Dr. H. Frolich to assist Coler for several months. The operation of the newly developed apparatus turned out to be more complicated than they had first thought, but progress was made. The large Stromzeuger was destroyed by a bomb which struck Coler's house in Kolberg (Pomerania) in 1945. Coler had been powering his house with the unit for three years.

Hans Coler German patent (1939):

https://web.archive.org/web/20071114064818/http://www.rexresearch.com/coler/de680761.pdf


http://www.intalek.com/Index/Projects/Research/HansColer/HansColer.htm

http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/coler.html

http://www.rexresearch.com/coler/coler2.htm


Professor W.O. Schumann (Munich) also tested the Stromzeuger in 1926; his 6-page analysis was included in an appendix of the BIOS Report:

"The apparatus in question principally consists of two parallel connected spools, which being bifilarly wound in a special way, are magnetically linked together. One of these spools is composed of copper sheets (the spool is called the plate spool), the other one of a number of thin parallel connected isolated wires (called: spool winding), running parallel at small intervals to the plates. Both spools can be fed by separate batteries; at least two batteries are necessary to put the spools to work.

"The spools are arranged in two halves each, according to the bifilar winding system. The batteries are attached to the starting points, and the current-receivers to the parallel connected ends. Inter-communications are connected between parallel windings of the two halves of the plate spool which contain iron rods with silver connections. These rods are magnetized by a special battery through applied windings (called: exciter windings).

 "According to the statement of the inventor, the production of energy principally takes place in these iron rods, and the winding of the spools plays an important part in it (The form of the spool is a long small rectangle).

"The inventor stated that the apparatus in its installation was very sensitive, especially with regard to the magnetic conditions of the iron cores, and that a wrong treatment [internal measurements] would cause interferences which would be wearisome and very difficult to be eliminated.

"The exciter winding is electrically completely separated from the other windings...

"Installed in the apparatus were 3 current meters for the currents from the 3 batteries, and furthermore current and volt meters for the current receivers. One and two bulbs respectively were employed for this purpose.

"As a striking fact it should be mentioned that the spool circuit having been at first always switched on alone, received a current of 104 mA. As soon as plates and exciter circuit additionally and simultaneously were turned on, as, according to the inventor, the apparatus demands it, the current in the spool circuit comes down to about 27 mA.

"After the present examination, carried through as carefully as [possible], I must surmise that we have to face the exploitation of a new source of energy whose further developments can be of an immense importance. I believe that a further development of the apparatus will prove justified and of great importance."

The results of the tests are compiled in the annexed table.

The figures show very well that the consumption of energy in the external circuit is greater than the energy taken from the batteries. According to the circuit, produced by Captain Coler, which within this short time I could not check in all its parts, the magnet-exciting circuit is fed by a special battery, completely separated from the other two circuits. Consequently, a direct comparison of efficiency and consumption of the apparatus would mean that only the sum of current of the plate circuit and of the spool circuit would count. After the established estimates with my own instrument and on a load of 3 bulbs, there was resulting a current from the two mentioned batteries of 0.215 + 0.070 = 0.285 ampere. At the same time the three bulbs consumed ca. 3.7 ampere, according to the built-in instruments, which is about 0.2 ampere too much as was proved later on by a control of this instrument, so that the real consumption has been about 3.5 ampere at a tension of about 2.3 volt.

The reception of current from the two batteries in this case consequently was 1.7 watt while the consumption of the bulbs amounted to about 8 watt. Especially striking in this connection is the considerably higher current-power in the bulb-circuit being about 12 times bigger than the current coming from the two batteries.

We have also absolutely made sure that from the batteries no other conductors led to the apparatus than those into which my instrument was built-in. The fact that an increase of power from the battery to the terminal clamps of the effective circuit in the plate-system takes place, could, indeed, not be tested on the different parts of the apparatus by a direct measuring of the power itself, because Mr. Coler declared that when switching on an instrument in the interior of the system, probably the "adjustment" would be disturbed.

I have therefore tested the decrease of tension in the single plates on a load of three lamps by means of a millivolt-meter, make of Hartmann & Braun, Nr. 462375, in order to get at least in an indirect way an explanation for the increase of current. This examination showed a remarkable increase of tension-losses with a distinct maximum on the third-last plate of the one row. These estimates too are compiled in the table at the end of this judgment.

Results ~ The result of the investigation showed an astonishing working of the apparatus, which, without further researches cannot be explained or compared with the hitherto known characteristics.


Admiral Byrd 1947 South Pole expedition: Operation Highjump

https://web.archive.org/web/20090319144420/http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/archive/index.php/t-33370.html

http://www.south-pole.com/p0000152.htm

http://www.south-pole.com/p0000150.htm

http://www.germanufochatter.com/Nazi-South-Polar-Base/index.html

https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/tierra_hueca/esp_tierra_hueca_6c.htm

https://web.archive.org/web/20100108140745/http://www.eyepod.org/Nazi-Disc-Photos.html


Beatles update (August 7 - October 8 )

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1082425#msg1082425

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 12, 2018, 12:06:21 PM
EXACT FORMULA FOR ONE OF THE FIVE ELEMENTS MAIN SUBDIVISION POINTS

<N(T)> = T/2π(logT/2πe) + 7/8

Let <N(T)> = n (value of an integer)

n - 7/8 = T/2π(logT/2πe)

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/LambertW-Function.html

The Lambert W function is the inverse of f(W) = WeW.

Main subdivision point =~ 2πe ⋅ eW[(n - 7/8)/e]

Mathematica software for the Lambert W function:

http://functions.wolfram.com/webMathematica/FunctionEvaluation.jsp?name=ProductLog

The value of one of the four main subdivision points will always be extremely close to the figure obtained using the above formula, in fact it can be recognized instantly, once the sacred cubit interval is subdivided using both zeta functions. Then, we can identify the other three subdivision points. Once we have the four subdivision points there is no need to even bother to find the value of the corresponding zeta zero, since now it can be found easily using the algorithm indicated in the previous messages on this subject.

These main partition points are not approximate Gram points, or França-LeClair points: the four main subdivision points are the exact values which lead directly to the corresponding zeta zero to the nth decimal required, using the algorithm outlined before.

As we have seen, the Lehmer points are not located randomly on the critical line.

Example

7005.0629 and 7005.10056, zeta zeros 6709 and 6710

Sacred cubit interval: 63.6363636363...

6999.999
7063.6363

For the first zeta function the values are:

7003.1814
7003.9903
7004.593
7005.0435
7005.17544
7005.379

The calculations for the second zeta function:

7004.541
7005.175
7005.48

Using the above formula, with n = 6708 and 6707:

7004.493
7003.582

7004.541 is one of the principal subdivision points for the zeta zero corresponding to n = 6708 (which is 7004.0437).

7003.1814 is one of the principal subdivision points for the zeta zero corresponding to n = 6707 (which is 7002.6915).

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 15, 2018, 09:47:17 AM
EXACT LEHMER PAIR SEQUENCE FORMULA

(636.3 x 3 - 16.9)(1.361 x 6.666666) = 17166.746

17166.746 - 17143.8 = 22.9
17166.746 - 17143.6 = 22.7

http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/zeta_tables/zeros1

17143.786536184
17143.821843505

22.7 x 6 = 1.362

22.9/36 = 0.636

136.1 x 2.5 = 340.25

340.25/0.6363 = 534.732

340.25 - (169 x 2) = 0.5 x 4.5


(636.3 x 6 - 2x16.9)(1.361 x 6.666666) = 34333.49

2 x 16.9 = 33.8

34333.49 - 34295.37 = 38.12
34333.49 - 34295.03 = 38.46

34295.104944255
34295.371984027

38.12 = 6 x 6.3533333

38.46/22.7 = 1.6943


(636.3 x 9 - 3x16.9)(1.361 x 6.666666) = 51500.23485

3 x 16.9 = 50.7

51448.076349964
51448.729475327
51449.153911623

51500.23485 - 51448.05485 = 52.18

(22.7 + 38.46 + 52.18) x 3 = 340.02


(636.3 x 12 - 4x16.9)(1.361 x 6.666666) = 68666.918

4 x 16.9 = 67.6

68597.636479797
68597.971396943

68666.918 - 69.08 = 68597.838

69.08 - 52.18 = 16.9


(636.3 x 15 - 5x16.9)(1.361 x 6.666666) = 85833.72475

5 x 16.9 = 84.5

85752.427507194
85752.870238027

85833.724 - 81.72 = 85752.00475

22.7 x 3.6 = 81.72

85748.621773488
85748.861163006

85833.72475 - 85.8 = 85747.9248

8.58 = 3 x 2.86


(636.3 x 18 - 6x16.9)(1.361 x 6.6666666) = 103000.4697

6 x 16.9 = 101.4

102907.166732245
102907.475751344

103000.4697 - 97.779 = 102902.6907

2.5423 x 38.46 = 97.777

97.779 - 52.18 = 2 x 22.7


103000.4697 - 102907.5 = 92.9697

92.9697/52.18 = 5.345/3


(636.3 x 21 - 7x16.9)(1.361 x 6.666666) = 120167.2146

7 x 16.9 = 118.3

120165.009100584
120165.181710116

120167.2146 - 120053.7146 = 113.5

113.5 = 22.7 x 5

120055.446373211
120055.565321075


Lehmer pair sequence = (636.3 x 3k - 16.9 x k)(1.361 x 6.666666) - f(16.9)

The terms (1.361 x 6.666666) and f(16.9) might be replaced by a single constant, whose value is yet to be determined:

Lehmer pair sequence = (636.3 x 3k - 16.9 x k) x C

(where C, of course, is related to the sacred cubit constants)


7005.062866175
7005.100564674

(636.3 + 136.1)(1.361 x 6.666666) = 7008.235

7008.235 - 7005 = 3.235

(636.3 x 3 + 136.1)(1.361 x 6.66666) = 18554.96

18539.140716112
18539.436652430

18554.96 - 16.9 = 18538.06

(636.3 x 6 + 136.1)(1.361 x 6.6666666) = 35875.05

35839.415210178
35839.746238617

35875.05 - 35839.5 = 35.549

3.235 x 11 = 35.585

I believe that each Lehmer pair is part of a certain sequence, similar to the ones derived above.


A formula which gives slightly better results for Lehmer pairs, than the França-LeClair points:

2πe ⋅ eW[(n - 1.1444)/e]

1.1444 = 2.861 x 4

In order to precisely locate n, other than the formula above, within the n x 63.63636363 interval, a careful study of the two counterpropagating zeta functions has to be undertaken.

7005.062866175
7005.100564674

For the second zeta function, the zeros to be found in the same place of the interval are:

7057.64086 (7005.9874)
7058.63 (7004.9963)

7004.9963 (6708.55132)

<N>(7057.64086) = 6767.3715
<N>(7058.63) = 6768.477

<N>(7004.493) = 6708
<N>(7005.403) = 6709

<N>(7058.2122) = 6768
<N>(7059.13) = 6769

59.13 + 4.493 = 63.623

58.212 + 5.403 = 63.615

6708.55132 + 6768.477 = 13477.028, very close to a whole integer value

7005.0629 (6708.626)

6767.3715 + 6708.626 = 13475.99975, very close to a whole integer value

That is, there is a very interesting mathematical relationship between the Lehmer pair zeros and the corresponding regular zeros of the other zeta function on the same 63.636363 interval.


17143.7865
17143.8218

17143.7865 (17156.2136)

The corresponding zero of the other zeta function is:

17156.4314 (18874.9906)

<N>(17142.9383) = 18858
<N>(17143.733) = 18859
<N>(17144.527) = 18860

<N>(17155.645) = 18874
<N>(17156.439) = 18875

17144.527 + 17156.439 = 34300.966, very close to a whole integer value

There might also be certain mathematical relationships between the four main subdivision figures for both zeta functions.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 16, 2018, 08:14:52 AM
EXACT LEHMER PAIR SEQUENCE FORMULA II

If Riemann's hypothesis is true, the Earth is flat.

If the de Bruijn-Newman constant equals zero (Λ = 0), the Earth is flat.

If there exists an infinity of Lehmer pairs, the Earth is flat.

Infinite sequence of Lehmer pairs formula

(636.3 x 3n - 16.9 x n)2π/ln2

(n = 1,2,3...)


s = r x θ

r = 68.1 (136.2/2, 22.7 = 1.362 x 16.66666, 38.136 = 1.362 x 28, 51.756 = 1.362 x 38, 68.1 = 1.362 x 50, 81.72 = 1.362 x 60, 98.064 = 1.362 x 72, 118.494 = 1.362 x 87)

θ = 136.12°

sin 136.12° = ln2

136.12° = 2.375742 radians

s = 161.78804

63.6363/16.1773 = 1/0.25422

2π/ln2 = (10s - 1000)/r

10 x 136.12° radians - 1000/r = 2π/ln2

136.12° radians x 3.819072 = 2π/ln2

That is, 2π/ln2 is the arclength corresponding to the 136.12° expressed in radians multiplied by 6 sacred cubits.

The Gizeh pyramid was built using a geometrical design based on three circles each featuring a radius of 60 sacred cubits (38.15 meters).

Let us recall the value of the angle of the Gizeh pyramid: 51.8554°

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1834389#msg1834389

90 - 38.1446 = 51.8554

51.85 x ln2/2π = 2 x 2.86


ln2/68.1 = 0.010178372

1.0178372 = 4 x 0.25445

2.5445/4 = 0.636

2π/0.010178372 = 617.58976

ln2/2π - 2π = -6.172867

2π/ln2 - 2π - 2.377138 = 0.40439625 = 0.63592162

136.2° = 2.37713844 radians

2.377138/68.1 = 0.0349066

1/2.861 = 0.349528

2.544° = 0.0444 radians

0.0444 x 68.1 = (2π/ln2)(1/3)

List of zeta zeros:

http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/zeta_tables/index.html

2π/ln2 is the most important constant of the eta zeta function (alternating series zeta function):

https://arxiv.org/pdf/math/0209393.pdf

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0706.2840.pdf

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 18, 2018, 04:11:24 AM
EXACT LEHMER PAIR SEQUENCE FORMULA III

The spacing of the zeros exhibits the same statistical pattern as the spectra of atomic energy levels.

A prime case of chaos

https://www.ams.org/publicoutreach/math-history/prime-chaos.pdf

Zeta zeros and quantum chaos

http://web.math.ucsb.edu/~jcs/zeta.pdf


Infinite sequence of Lehmer pairs formula (2)

(636.3 x 3k + 136.1)2π/ln2

(k = 1/3, 1, 2, 3...)

k = 1/3
7001.5 (computed value using the formula)
7005.1 (zeta zero, Lehmer pair)

k = 1
18537.3
18539.141

k = 2
35840.9
35839.41

k = 3
53144.64
53145.521

k = 4
70448.286
70447.585

k = 5
87751.93
87753.47

k = 6
105055.57
105056.714

k = 7
122359.2
122358.45

k = 8
139662.86
139662.274

k = 9
156966.5
156969.277

k = 10
174270.154
174275.356

k = 11
191573.8
191573.094

k = 12
208877.4
208880.027

k = 24
416521.2
416520.54

k = 60
1039452.4
1039454.62


Another infinite sequence formula (3):

136.1 x 3n

(n = 1,2,3)

n = 1
408.3
415.0188

n = 60
24498
24495.47
24498.26

n = 90
36747
36750.187

n = 91
37155.3
37152.48

n = 95
38788.5
38790.248

n = 170
69411
69410.08


(https://image.ibb.co/fRZnvf/leh02.jpg)

There can’t be a zero of ζ'(s) between every pair of zeros of ζ(s) because the density of zeros of ζ(s) is log(T/2π)/2π while the density of zeros of ζ'(s) is log(T/4π)/2π. So on average there is a “missing” zero of ζ'(s) in each T interval of width 2π/log 2 ≈ 9.06.

ROOTS OF THE DERIVATIVE OF THE RIEMANN ZETA FUNCTION

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1002.0372.pdf

On Small Distances Between Ordinates of Zeros of ζ(s) and ζ'(s)

http://math.boun.edu.tr/instructors/yildirim/paper/OnSmallDistancesBtwOrdinates.pdf

LEHMER PAIRS AND DERIVATIVES OF HARDY’S Z-FUNCTION

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1612.08627.pdf

The author has calculated that the first two million zeros include 4637 pairs of zeros which satisfy the first assertion, while 1901 pairs actually belong to the set L.


LEHMER PAIRS REVISITED

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1508.05870.pdf

In other words, strong Lehmer pairs tend to arise from a small gap between zeros of ζ(s), and from the zeros of ζ'(s) very near the critical line.

(https://image.ibb.co/eHmLgL/leh01.jpg)

Figure 2 shows the argument of ζ'(s)/ζ(s), interpreted as a color, in a region which includes Lehmer’s example. The Riemann zeros 1/2 + iγ6709 and 1/2 + iγ6710 are now poles, while in between we see a zero of ζ'(s) at 0.50062354 + 7005.08185555i, very close to the critical line, even on the scale of this close pair of Riemann zeros.


7 x 2π/ln2 = 63.453042

63.636363/7 = 9.090909

9.0909 - 2π/ln2 = 0.02618

2.618 = phi2

Therefore, 2π/ln2 fits perfectly as a seven note + two intervals (FA-MI and SI-DO) pattern for the 63.636363 segment.

7 x 0.02618 = 0.18326

1.8332/2 = 0.9166 = 2.7498/3

2.7498 = 1 - 1sc

7 x 1.2727 + 2x0.778 = 2π/ln2

1.778 x 3 = 5.334


http://www.math.mcgill.ca/radziwill/farmer15.pdf

GAPS BETWEEN ZEROS OF ζ(s) AND THE DISTRIBUTION OF ZEROS OF ζ'(s)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 20, 2018, 10:02:45 AM
EXACT LEHMER PAIR SEQUENCE FORMULA IV

Large gaps formula for the zeta function zeros


32 + 25 x n

16 + 25 x n

8 + 24 x n



There will always be large gaps right next to these values of the critical line.

2π/ln2 x 15 = 135.9708043

     14.134725142
     21.022039639
     25.010857580
     30.424876126
     32.935061588
     37.586178159
     40.918719012
     43.327073281
     48.005150881
     49.773832478
     52.970321478
     56.446247697
     59.347044003
     60.831778525
     65.112544048
     67.079810529
     69.546401711
     72.067157674
     75.704690699
     77.144840069
     79.337375020
     82.910380854
     84.735492981
     87.425274613
     88.809111208
     92.491899271
     94.651344041
     95.870634228
     98.831194218
    101.317851006
    103.725538040
    105.446623052
    107.168611184
    111.029535543
    111.874659177
    114.320220915

Large gaps at:

16
24
32
40
48
56
64
72
80
88
96
104
112
120
128

    399.985119876
    401.839228601
    402.861917764
    404.236441800
    405.134387460
    407.581460387
    408.947245502
    410.513869193
    411.972267804
    413.262736070
    415.018809755
    415.455214996
    418.387705790

Large gaps at 400, 408 and 416.

It could be that the very precise location of these large gaps in the values of the critical line is related to the decimal part of 2π/ln2 when multiplied by k (1, 2, 3... to 16):

2π/ln2 x 1 = 9.064720284
2π/ln2 x 2 = 18.129440568
2π/ln2 x 3 = 27.194160852
2π/ln2 x 4 = 36.258881136
2π/ln2 x 5 = 45.32360142
2π/ln2 x 6 = 54.388321704
2π/ln2 x 7 = 63.453041988
2π/ln2 x 8 = 72.517762272
2π/ln2 x 9 = 81.582482556
2π/ln2 x 10 = 90.64720284
2π/ln2 x 11 = 99.711923124
2π/ln2 x 12 = 108.776643408
2π/ln2 x 13 = 117.841363692
2π/ln2 x 14 = 126.906083976
2π/ln2 x 15 = 135.97080426
2π/ln2 x 16 = 145.035524544

(an addition of 1 to the decimal part after the multiplication by 16)

The large gaps are connected to the values of the first derivative of the zeta function, as are the values of the Lehmer pairs.

The value of the large gaps is now known to a precision of 8 units on the critical line.

That is, any Lehmer pair will be located within this 8 unit interval.

2π/ln2/8 = 3.39927/3 = 1.133090036 = 1/0.8825424

3.39927/2.5 = 1.35971

3.39927/1sc = 5.342

Since there is a definite pattern to the large gaps, there must be a similar structure of the Lehmer pairs.

Already, in the two previous messages, three infinite sequences of such Lehmer pairs values have been derived.

The final configuration of the location of the Lehmer pairs/strong Lehmer pairs could be related to the imbedded/nested seven notes/two intervals distribution:

(https://www.endlesssearch.co.uk/images/rayofcreation_x3_shockoctave_x1_h.gif)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 21, 2018, 10:36:00 AM
EXACT LEHMER PAIR SEQUENCE FORMULA V

The correct definition for a Lehmer pair: the distance between two consecutive zeta zeros is less than the average spacing.

This way, one has a chance to discover the overall pattern of these special pairs of zeros.


Global formula for Lehmer pairs/close values of the pairs of zeta zeros


T =~ {n ⋅ 2π/ln2 + n ⋅ 2π/ln2 + π/ln2}/2

T =~ {n ⋅ 2π/ln2 + π/ln2 + (n + 1) ⋅ 2π/ln2 }/2


n > 2

T will always be part of an infinite sequence of Lehmer pairs (which includes also strong Lehmer pairs); special values of T have been determined in the previous messages.

Each 8 unit interval will include a pair of zeros whose distance is less than the average spacing.

First this 8 unit interval is determined.

Then, we find the 2π/ln2 and the π/ln2 intervals which overlap the 8 unit segment.

The average of these values will generate the value of one of the close pairs of zeta zeros/Lehmer pairs.


Examples:

415.018809755
415.455214996

8 unit interval: 408 to 416

2π/ln2 + π/ln2 interval

403.38 to 412.445

π/ln2 interval

407.912 to 416.977

(416.977 + 412.445)/2 = 414.711


7005.062866175
7005.100564674

8 unit interval: 7000 to 7008

2π/ln2 interval

6997.964 to 7007.029

2π/ln2 + π/ln2 interval

7002.496 to 7011.56

(7007.029 + 7002.496)/2 = 7004.763


17143.786536184
17143.821843505

8 unit interval

17136 to 17144

2π/ln2 interval

17141.386 to 17150.451

2π/ln2 + π/ln2 interval

17145.918 to 17154.98

(17145.918 + 17141.386)/2 = 17143.65


35839.415210178
35839.746238617

8 unit interval

35832 to 35840

2π/ln2 interval

35832.8 to 35841.9

2π/ln2 + π/ln2 interval

35837.36 to 35846.42

(35837.36 + 35841.9)/2 = 35839.6


How to generate the 2π/ln2 intervals

9.06472
18.1294
27.194
36.258
45.323...

(we simply multiply 2π/ln2 by n, n = 1,2,3...)

How to generate the 2π/ln2 + π/ln2 intervals

(9.06472 + 18.1294)/2 =  13.5971

13.5971 - 2π/ln2 = 4.532360142

4.53236
13.5971
22.6618
31.726
41.4197...

(we simply shift the 2π/ln2 intervals by a factor of π/ln2)


415.018809755, 7005.062866175 and 17143.786536184 are true Lehmer pairs.

What are the starting points of the sequences which generate these values?

415/2π/ln2 = 45.78

9.06472 x 5 = 45.3236

4.53236 + 9.06472 x 5 = 49.856

The average value is 47.818.

The nearest Lehmer pair, from the very first 63.636363 sacred cubit interval, is:

48.005150881
49.773832478

Therefore, the generating value for the Lehmer pair located at 415.018809755 is 48.00515, the interval where 9.06472 x 5 = 45.3236.

48 = 16 x 3 = 8 x 6


7005.062866175/2π/ln2 = 772.7828

The decimal part of 2π/ln2 x n (n = 1,2,3...16) repeats itself.

2π/ln2 x 16 = 145.0355

772.7828/144 = 5.366

[5.366] = 5, so the interval 2π/ln2 x 5 is related to finding the generating point.

Also, 7005/48 = 145.9375.

This means that the generating value for the Lehmer pair located at 7005.062866175 is again 48.00515, the interval where 9.06472 x 5 = 45.3236.


17143.786536184/2π/ln2 = 1891.265

1891.265/144 = 13.13378

[13.13378] = 13

2π/ln2 x 13 = 117.84

108.77 to 117.84
104.24 to 113.31

(113.31 + 108.77)/2 = 111.04

Therefore, the generating point for the Lehmer pair located at 17143.786536184 is the following Lehmer pair:

111.03
111.87


A strong Lehmer pair will be part of a sequence, or grand cycle, which consists of other cycles of Lehmer pairs.

These cycles are generated by both the 8 unit interval units and the 2π/ln2 x 16 cycles (the decimal part of 2π/ln2 x 16 x k becomes part of an even greater sequence).

The values of n (see first two formulas) which include the Lehmer pairs/strong Lehmer pairs can be deduced by discovering the hidden pattern of the intersection of the corresponding 8 unit intervals and the 2π/ln2, 2π/ln2 + π/ln2 segments.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 23, 2018, 02:58:26 AM
GLOBAL FORMULA FOR STRONG LEHMER PAIRS


2π/ln2 ⋅ 144(n + ε)

144 ⋅ ε = k, where k = 1,2,3...,143

2π/ln2 ⋅ (144n + k)



The previous formulas featured 2π/ln2 multiplied by n; this global formula incorporates the decimal parts as well, which have special values.

This formula can be used to find the strong Lehmer pairs.

1187 pairs:

http://www.slideshare.net/MatthewKehoe1/riemanntex (pg. 64-87)

(https://image.ibb.co/fmOEoy/riem2.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/cU5MUz/leh4.jpg)

1.30664344087942265202071895041619 x 1022
1.30664344087942265202071898265199 x 1022

Examples:

17143.7865

17143.7865/2π/ln2 = 1891.2648

1891.2648/144 = 13.1338

144 x 0.1338 =~ 19

2π/ln2 x (144 x 13 + 19) = 17141.385

The equations derived previously are special cases of this global formula.


169872.853

2π/ln2 x (144 x 130 + 20) = 169872.858


45505.59

2π/ln2 x (144 x 34 + 124) = 45504.8944


45436.65

2π/ln2 x (144 x 34 + 117) = 45441.44


412597.295

2π/ln2 x (144 x 316 + 13) = 412598.86


555136.9163

2π/ln2 x (144 x 425 + 41) = 555132.52
2π/ln2 x (144 x 425 + 42) = 555141.58

Average = 555137.0511


7954022502373.43289015387

2π/ln2 x (144 x 6093543501 + 75) = 7954022502369.544
2π/ln2 x (144 x 6093543501 + 76) = 7954022502378.53

Average = 7954022502374.037


2414113624163.41943

(https://image.ibb.co/hFBOVq/1303.jpg)

2π/ln2 x (144 x 1849442389 + 136) = 2414113624163.446


13066434408794226520207.1895041619

(https://image.ibb.co/gEWCOA/1301.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/dTB7qq/1302.jpg)

Since now T is very large (the average spacing is 0.128), the decimal parts of k also can be used (k = v + 1/2, v+ 1/4, v+ 3/4); in this case 144 x 0.1441 = 20.75).

With 20.75, we get:

2π/ln2 x (144 x 10010140964026289815 + 20.75) = 13,066,434,408,794,226,520,207.14279

(https://image.ibb.co/bXdLRV/131.jpg)


8847150598019.22359827

(https://image.ibb.co/jiJZ3A/1305.jpg)

2π/ln2 x (144 x 6777765214 + 101) = 8847150598015.23188
2π/ln2 x (144 x 6777765214 + 102 = 8847150598024.2966

Average = 8847150598019.764243


2π/ln2 x 144 = 415.496 x π


7005.1

2π/ln2 x (144 x 5 + 53) = 7007.028

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 24, 2018, 02:17:28 AM
HOW TO PROVE THE RIEMANN HYPOTHESIS

If the de Bruijn-Newman constant is equal to zero, Λ = 0, then Riemann's hypothesis (all zeta zeros lie on the 1/2 critical line) is true.

The search for the lower bounds of this constant:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2102664#msg2102664

However, in order to prove that -10-20 < Λ, at least 1030 zeros would have to be examined. The total number of simple arithmetic mathematical operations that have been performed by all digital computers in history is only on the order of 1023.

Not even with improvements in hardware, it cannot be hoped to compute 1030 zeta zeros using existing methods.

http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/doc/debruijn.newman.pdf

An improved bound for the de Bruijn-Newman constant

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1508.05870.pdf

Lehmer pairs revisited

Strong/high quality Lehmer pairs can be used to give lower bounds for Λ.

The existence of infinitely many Lehmer pairs implies that the de Bruijn-Newman constant Λ is equal to 0.

Therefore, a constructive/computer-assisted proof of the Riemann hypothesis would be possible, if further Lehmer pairs can be produced with little computational effort.

2π/ln2 ⋅ 144(n + ε)

144 ⋅ ε = k, where k = 1,2,3...,143

2π/ln2 ⋅ (144n + k)


k can also equal v + 1/2, v + 1/4, v + 3/4, if T is O(1022), since then the average spacing will measure O(0.128).

This infinite sequence of numbers includes ALL of the close pairs of zeta zeros, Lehmer pairs and strong/high-quality Lehmer pairs.

A special case of this formula is:

(636.3 x 3n - 16.9 x n)2π/ln2

(n = 1,2,3...)

144 x 13 + 20 corresponds to 636.3 x 3 - 16.9 x 1

144 x 26 + 40
144 x 39 + 60
144 x 52 + 80
144 x 65 + 100
144 x 78 + 120
144 x 91 + 140
144 x 105 + 16
144 x 118 + 36
144 x 131 + 56 corresponds to 636.3 x 3 x 10 - 16.9 x 10
144 x 182 + 126 corresponds to 636.3 x 3 x 14 - 16.9 x 14
144 x 197 + 12 corresponds to 636.3 x 3 x 15 - 16.9 x 15
144 x 275 +132 (3n = 63)
144 x 289 + 8    (3n = 66)
144 x 302 + 28  (3n = 69)

The Lehmer pairs are located at very precise points on the critical line, and so are the strong Lehmer pairs.

The above infinite sequence of values can be used to find further Lehmer pairs.

I believe that the strong Lehmer pairs have shortcut formulas/special infinite sequences from which they can be generated with little effort.

The (636.3 x 3n - 16.9 x n)2π/ln2 infinite sequence certainly suggests that other similar sequences do exist.

Since now we no longer have to rely on the Riemann-Siegel formula to produce the zeta zeros, the calculation of zeros around the 1050, 10300, 101000 values on the 1/2 critical line become possible using the four subdivisions algorithm, the França-LeClair equation (ϑ(tn) + limδ→0+ arg ζ(1/2 + δ + itn) = (n - 3/2)π), used in conjunction with Backlund's method and Gram points.

That is, further Lehmer pairs can be produced with very little effort, using the two infinite sequences above: further sequences exist, which can capture the strong Lehmer pairs even better.

These Lehmer pairs then can be used to produce lower and lower bounds for the de Bruijn-Newman constant, finally proving that Λ is equal to zero.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 27, 2018, 01:34:11 AM
GLOBAL FORMULA FOR STRONG LEHMER PAIRS II

(https://image.ibb.co/e05CWV/highzeta.jpg)

15202440116027338092/9.0647202836543876525 = 1677099749392219025.627807945

1677099749392219025.627807945/144 = 11646526037445965.455748666

1677099749392219025.627807945 = 144 x 11646526037445965 + 65

1677099749392219025 x 9.0647202836543876525 = 15202440116027338086.30909

1677099749392219026 x 9.0647202836543876525 = 15202440116027338094.53526

Average = 15202440116027338090.422178


The peak values of the Lehmer pairs (strong Lehmer pairs) must be related to sacred units figures.

100sc + 100sc/45 = 63.63636363 + 14.134725 = 100sc (1 + 1/4.5) = 100sc x (1.2222222...) = 100/6 x 1/135.9708°in radians x 2π/ln2 x 1.222222...

100/6 x 1/135.9708°in radians x 1.222222... = 3 x 2.8612

100sc + 100sc/45 = 2π/ln2 x 3 x 2.8612

Therefore, 2.8612 (the displacement factor of the Gizeh pyramid) is the conversion factor between the zeta zeros and the first derivative of the zeta function.


2π/ln2 = 2.66666... x 3.399 = 2.666666... x 5.34sc

2π/ln2 = 5.34 x 8/3 x sc

Having expressed 2π/ln2 in terms of sacred cubits units, now we have much more information and values at our disposal which can be used to understand the precise location of the strong Lehmer pairs.

Also, 534 x 10si = 2π/ln2 x 15, so that 100sc = 2π/ln2 x 15/5340 x 2500

2206356 x 2π/ln2 = 2 x 107 (to seven decimal places)


However, 534 =~ 2 x 174.53 + 4 x 14.134725 + 2 x 63.636363.


45 x 2π/ln2 = 45 (2 x 174.53 + 4 x 14.134725 + 2 x 63.636363)/100 x 8/3 x sc

45 x 1.4134725 = 100sc

45 x 2π/ln2 = 407.9, where 415.0188 and 415.45 is the first strong Lehmer pair (46 x 2π/ln2 = 416.977).

1892 x 1.4134725 = 2674.29, where 2.67 = 5.34/2 and 1892 x 2π/ln2 = 17150.45 (1891 x 2π/ln2 = 17141.38), 17143.7865 and 17143.8218 is another strong Lehmer pair.

773 x 8 x sc = 3935.268 = 1/0.000254112, where 773 x 2π/ln2 = 7007.03, 7005.0628
and 7005.1005 is another strong Lehmer pair.

The precise location of the strong Lehmer pairs must be related to these sacred cubit values (expressing 2π/ln2 in terms of sacred cubits).

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 28, 2018, 11:23:20 AM
GLOBAL FORMULA FOR STRONG LEHMER PAIRS III

The values of the strong Lehmer pairs behave like regular zeta zeros in a way: they exhibit large gaps and double Lehmer pairs (two pairs which are located very close to each other).

To understand the behavior of the regular zeta zeros, a certain interval was used (100 sacred cubits), and we used the five elements subdivision algorithm to capture perfectly the value of each zeta zero.

To infer the pattern of the strong Lehmer pairs, we also need a certain interval to start with.

On this very page, precise formulas for the location of the large gaps, as well as for the close pairs (Lehmer pairs + strong Lehmer pairs) were derived.

The Lehmer pairs (see the definition used earlier) occur each and every 2π/ln2 units or at an average of the n x 2π/ln2 and (n + 1) x 2π/ln2 values.

Even this information can be used with great advantage, together with the five elements subdivision algorithm or with the França-LeClair equation to find the values of each and every Lehmer pair at very high figures on the 1/2 critical line, a feat which could not be accomplished before.

Strong Lehmer pairs tend to arise from a small gap between zeros of ζ(s), and from the zeros of ζ'(s) very near the critical line.


Interval for the strong Lehmer pairs

2π/ln2 x 100 sacred cubits

That is, we treat each 2π/ln2 value as a single unit of measure (a distance of 9.064720284... = one unit).

2π/ln2 x 100 sacred cubits = 576.84583...

Then, we subidivide this interval just like before using the 26.7, 53.4, 80, 136.1, 534 subdivisions, looking for the location of the strong Lehmer pairs.

576.84583
146.657
86.52676
57.6845
28.842

576.84583 - 146.657 = 430.88

430.88
109.371
64.5282

430.88 - 109.371 = 320.817

320.817
81.5645
48.1225

320.817 - 81.5645 = 239.2525

239.2525
60.827

239.2525 - 60.827 = 178.4255

178.4255
45.388
26.71
17.84
8.92

178.4255 - 45.388 = 133.0375

133.0375
33.823
19.955
13.303
6.65

133.0375 - 33.823 = 99.2145

99.2145
25.224

With these values, we obtain very nice approximations for the Lehmer pairs located at 111.03 and 415.45: 416.26 (first zeta function) and 419.37 (second zeta function) and 113.08 (first zeta function).

To capture the values of the higher strong Lehmer pairs, 7005.1 and 17143.78, the interval will be increased to 57684.52413 (2π/ln2 x 10000 sacred cubits).

Using the same subdivision, we get 7048.6 and 16950.5, as first values of entire sequence of approximations.

For the strong Lehmer pairs which have 12 digits, the interval becomes:

57684583623255.194152266 (2π/ln2 x 1 x 1012 sacred cubits)

or an even better approximation,

57684583623255.1941522669588143649472078575

This would be the only way to get approximate values of very large strong Lehmer pairs, and to gain an understanding of their location, which is not random, but has a very precise pattern, based on the 2π/ln2 x 100 sacred cubits interval.

The second five elements subdivision algorithm could also be used in parallel with the first subdivision algorithm.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 21, 2018, 09:30:23 AM
GENERALIZED SAGNAC EFFECT IV

(http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Michelson-Gale_webapp/image002.png)

Point A is located at the detector
Point B is in the bottom right corner
Point C is in the upper right corner
Point D is in the upper left corner

l1 is the upper arm.
l2 is the lower arm.

Here is the most important part of the derivation of the full/global Sagnac effect for an interferometer located away from the center of rotation.

A > B > C > D > A is a continuous counterclockwise path, a negative sign -

A > D > C > B > A is a continuous clockwise path, a positive sign +

The Sagnac phase difference for the clockwise path has a positive sign.

The Sagnac phase difference for the counterclockwise has a negative sign.


Sagnac phase components for the A > D > C > B > A path (clockwise path):

l1/(c - v1)

-l2/(c + v2)

Sagnac phase components for the A > B > C > D > A path (counterclockwise path):

l2/(c - v2)

-l1/(c + v1)


For the single continuous clockwise path we add the components:

l1/(c - v1) - l2/(c + v2)

For the single continuous counterclockwise path we add the components:

l2/(c - v2) - l1/(c + v1)


The net phase difference will be (let us remember that the counterclockwise phase difference has a negative sign attached to it, that is why the substraction of the phase differences becomes an addition):

{l1/(c - v1) - l2/(c + v2)} - (-){l2/(c - v2) - l1/(c + v1)} = {l1/(c - v1) - l2/(c + v2)} + {l2/(c - v2) - l1/(c + v1)}

Rearranging terms:

l1/(c - v1) - l1/(c + v1) + {l2/(c - v2) - l2/(c + v2)} =

2(v1l1 + v2l2)/c2

Exactly the formula obtained by Professor Yeh:

φ = -2(φ2 - φ1) = 4π(R1L1 + R2L2)Ω/λc = 4π(V1L1 + V2L2)/λc

Since Δφ = 2πc/λ x Δt, Δt = 2(R1L1 + R2L2)Ω/c2 = 2(V1L1 + V2L2)/c2

CORRECT SAGNAC FORMULA:

2(V1L1 + V2L2)/c2

Self-pumped phase-conjugate fiber-optic gyro, I. McMichael, P. Yeh, Optics Letters 11(10):686-8 · November 1986 

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a170203.pdf (appendix 5.1)


This is how the correct Sagnac formula is derived: we have single continuous clockwise path, and a single continuous counterclockwise path.

If we desire the Coriolis effect, we simply substract as follows:

dt = l1/(c - v1) - l1/(c + v1) - (l2/(c - v2) - l2/(c + v2))

Of course, by proceeding as in the usual manner for a Sagnac phase shift formula for an interferometer whose center of rotation coincides with its geometrical center, we obtain:

2v1l1/(c2 - v21) - 2v2l2/(c2 - v22)

l = l1 = l2

2l[(v1 - v2)]/c2

2lΩ[(R1 - R2)]/c2

R1 - R2 = h

2lhΩ/c2

By having substracted two different Sagnac phase shifts, valid for the two different segments, we obtain the CORIOLIS EFFECT formula.


However, for the SAGNAC EFFECT, we have a single CONTINUOUS CLOCKWISE PATH, and a single CONTINUOUS COUNTERCLOCKWISE PATH, as the definition of the Sagnac effect entails.

HERE IS THE DEFINITION OF THE SAGNAC EFFECT:

Two pulses of light sent in opposite direction around a closed loop (either circular or a single uniform path), while the interferometer is being rotated.

Loop = a structure, series, or process, the end of which is connected to the beginning.

A single continuous pulse A > B > C > D > A, while the other one, A > D > C > B > A is in the opposite direction, and has the negative sign.


We can see at a glance each and every important detail.


For the Coriolis effect, one has a formula which is proportional to the area; only the phase differences of EACH SIDE are being compared, and not the continuous paths.

For the Sagnac effect, one has a formula which is proportional to the velocity of the light beam; the entire continuous clockwise path is being compared to the other continuous counterclockwise path exactly as required by the definition of the Sagnac effect.

Experimentally, the Michelson-Gale test was a closed loop, but not mathematically. Michelson treated mathematically each of the longer sides/arms of the interferometer as a separate entity: no closed loop was formed at all. Therefore the mathematical description put forth by Michelson has nothing to do with the correct definition of the Sagnac effect (two pulses of light are sent in opposite direction around a closed loop) (either circular or a single uniform path). By treating each side/arm separately, Michelson was describing and analyzing the Coriolis effect, not the Sagnac effect.

Loop = a structure, series, or process, the end of which is connected to the beginning.

Connecting the two sides through a single mathematical description closes the loop; treating each side separately does not. The Sagnac effect requires, by definition, a structure, the end of which is connected to the beginning.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 24, 2018, 05:48:29 AM
GENERALIZED SAGNAC EFFECT V

http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1925ApJ....61..137M&amp;data_type=PDF_HIGH&amp;whole_paper=YES&amp;type=PRINTER&amp;filetype=.pdf

(https://image.ibb.co/h0EPSA/fa.jpg)

The promise made by A. Michelson, "the difference in time required for the two pencils to return to the starting point will be...", never materialized mathematically.

Instead of applying the correct definition of the Sagnac effect, Michelson compared TWO OPEN SEGMENTS/ARMS of the interferometer, and not the TWO LOOPS, as required by the exact meaning of the Sagnac experiment.

As such, his formula captured the Coriolis effect upon the light beams.

Not even the formal derivation of the Sagnac effect formula is not entirely correct.

(https://www.mathpages.com/rr/s2-07/2-07_files/image001.gif)

(https://image.ibb.co/m909uq/fa2.jpg)

This is the correct way to derive the Sagnac formula:

Sagnac phase component for the clockwise path:

2πR(1/(c - v))

Sagnac phase component for the counterclockwise path:

-2πR(1/(c + v))

The continuous clockwise loop has a positive sign +

The continuous counterclockwise loop has a negative sign -

The net phase difference will be (let us remember that the counterclockwise phase difference has a negative sign attached to it):

2πR(1/(c - v)) - (-){-2πR(1/(c + v))} = 2πR(1/(c - v)) - (+)2πR(1/(c + v)) = 2πR(1/(c - v)) - 2πR(1/(c + v)) = 2vL/c2


The definition of the Sagnac effect is applied to a closed loop (either circular or a uniform path).

Loop = a structure, series, or process, the end of which is connected to the beginning.

Thus, from a mathematical point of view, Michelson did not derive the Sagnac effect formula at all, since he compared two open segments, and not two loops.

Using the correct definition, we recover not only the error-free formula, but also the precise velocity addition terms.

(https://image.ibb.co/dbZ7Kd/gsac2.jpg)

Practically, A. Michelson received the Nobel prize (1907) for the wrong formula (published in 1904 and 1887; E.J. Post proved in 1999 that the Michelson-Morley interferometer is actually a Sagnac interferometer).

No other physicist has been able to derive the correct Sagnac formula: for the past 100 years they have been using the wrong formula (the Coriolis effect equation) to describe a very different physical situation.

Here, for the first time, the correct Sagnac formula for an interferometer located away from the center of rotation has been derived in a precise manner.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 09, 2018, 05:01:39 AM
OUMUAMUA INTERSTELLAR PROBE

(https://cdnph.upi.com/svc/sv/i/5011521477714/2018/1/15214791412658/Oumuamua-came-from-a-two-star-system-astronomers-find.jpg)

"The object, nicknamed 'Oumuamua, meaning "a messenger that reaches out from the distant past" in Hawaiian, was discovered in October 2017 by the Pan-STARRS 1 telescope in Hawaii.

Since its discovery, scientists have been at odds to explain its unusual features and precise origins, with researchers first calling it a comet and then an asteroid before finally deeming it the first of its kind: a new class of "interstellar objects."

A new paper by researchers at the Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics raises the possibility that the elongated dark-red object, which is 10 times as long as it is wide and traveling at speeds of 196,000 mph, might have an "artificial origin." "

"The theory is based on the object's "excess acceleration," or its unexpected boost in speed as it traveled through and ultimately out of our solar system in January.

"Considering an artificial origin, one possibility is that 'Oumuamua is a light sail, floating in interstellar space as a debris from an advanced technological equipment," wrote the paper's authors, suggesting that the object could be propelled by solar radiation."

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1810.11490.pdf

COULD SOLAR RADIATION PRESSURE EXPLAIN ‘OUMUAMUA’S PECULIAR ACCELERATION?

Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics

Published in the Astrophysical Journal Letters

"Recently, Micheli et al. (2018) reported that ‘Oumuamua showed deviations from a Keplerian orbit at a high statistical significance."

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/6-strange-facts-about-the-interstellar-visitor-oumuamua/ (a superb analysis by A. Loeb)

The hypothesis that Oumuamua originated as a planetesimal from a binary system is wrong:

https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/476/3/3031/4909830 (section 5)

(See http://www.mpia.de/homes/calj/gdr2_oumuamua/oumuamua_gdr2.pdf

Plausible home stars of the interstellar object ‘Oumuamua found in Gaia DR2)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29950718

Non-gravitational acceleration in the trajectory of 1I/2017 U1 ('Oumuamua)


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1809.06389.pdf

However, a recent measurement by Micheli et al (2018) of a substantial non-gravitational acceleration affecting the orbit of this object has been interpreted as resulting from its cometary activity, which must be rather vigorous. Here we critically re-assess this interpretation by exploring the implications of measured non-gravitational acceleration for the ’Oumuamua’s rotational state. We show that outgassing torques should drive rapid evolution of ’Oumuamua’s spin (on a timescale of a few days), assuming torque asymmetry typical for the Solar System comets. However, given the highly elongated shape of the object, its torque asymmetry is likely higher, implying even faster evolution. This would have resulted in rapid rotational fission of ’Oumuamua during its journey through the Solar System and is clearly incompatible with the relative stability of its rotational state inferred from photometric variability.
Based on these arguments, as well as the lack of direct signs of outgassing, we conclude that the classification of ’Oumuamua as a comet (invoked to explain its claimed anomalous acceleration) is questionable.


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1086205#msg1086205 (Nov. 13, Nov. 30, Dec. 9, 2018, Beatles series continues: the origin of Lady Madonna, We Are The Champions was a Beatles song)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 24, 2018, 12:43:47 AM
STATIONARY EARTH: AYAHUASCA AND CURARE

(http://www.oneism.org/images/INCA_TREE_OF_LIFE.jpg)

"In 1995 a remarkable book was published in Switzerland entitled Le serpent cosmique, l’ADN et les origines du savior (The Cosmic Serpent, DNA and the Origins of Knowledge) by Swiss anthropologist Jeremy Narby. (It was first published in English in 1998.) It presents the results of Narby’s personal study of Amazonian shamans, and reveals the remarkable scope of the information shamans glean during the ecstatic trances they induce by taking natural hallucinogenic substances, primarily one called ayahuasca.

In the mid-1980s Narby was studying for his doctorate among the indigenous people of the Peruvian Amazon, working on an environmental project. Like many before him, he soon became fascinated by the astounding botanical knowledge of these so-called ‘primitive’ people, specifically their medicinal use of certain rare plants. He was impressed by the range of plant-derived medicines used by the tribal shamans - ayahuasqueros - and by their effectiveness, especially after they cured a long-standing back problem which European doctors had proved completely incapable of treating. The more he learned, the more intrigued he became about the ways in which the Amazonian natives had developed or acquired this knowledge. The odds against them coming up with even one of these recipes by chance or even by experimentation are simply overwhelming. There are some 80,000 species of plants in the Amazonian rain forest, so to discover an effective remedy using a mixture of just two of them would theoretically require the testing of every possible combination - about 3,700,000,000. It does not end there: many of their medicines involve several plants, and even then such a calculation does not allow for experimentation with the often extremely complex procedures necessary to extract the active ingredients and produce a potent mixture.

One good example of this mysterious medicinal knowledge is ayahuasca itself, a combination of just two plants. The first comes from the leaves of a shrub and contains a hormone naturally secreted in the human brain, dimethyltryptamine, a powerful hallucinogen only discovered by Western science in 1979. If taken orally, though, it is broken down by an enzyme in the stomach and becomes totally ineffective, so the second component of ayahuasca, extracted from a creeper, contains several substances that protect the dimethyltryptamine from that specific enzyme.

In effect, ayahuasca is a designer drug, made to order. It is as if the exact requirements of the mixture were specified in advance, then the correct ingredients chosen to meet the requirements. But how? How could anyone, even sophisticated Western botanists, have found the perfect ingredients without spending decades - perhaps even centuries - on trial and error? How can the ‘primitive’ Amazonian natives have known the properties of these two plants? After all, the odds against them coming up with this combination by accident are truly astronomical.

As Narby writes:

So here are people without electron microscopes who choose, among some 80,000 Amazonian plant species, the leaves of a bush containing a hallucinogenic brain hormone, which they combine with a vine containing substances that inactivate an enzyme of the digestive tract, which would otherwise block the hallucinogenic effect. And they do this to modify their consciousness. It is as if they knew about the molecular properties of plants and the art of combining them, and when one asks them they know these things, they say their knowledge comes directly from hallucinogenic plants.

Another example given by Narby is that of curare. This powerful nerve poison is another ‘made-to-order’ drug, whose ingredients this time come from several different plants and fit a very precise set of requirements. As Narby points out, the natives needed a substance that, when smeared on the tips of blowpipe darts, would not only kill the animal but also ensure that it would fall to the ground. Tree monkeys, for example, if shot with an unpoisoned arrow, often tighten their grip on the branches with a reflex action and so die out of reach of the hunter. The meat itself would, of course, have to be free from poison and safe to eat. It seemed like a very tall order, but curare fits all these requirements: it is a muscle relaxant (killing by arresting the respiratory muscles); it is only effective when injected into the bloodstream - hence its delivery by blowpipe; and it has no effect when taken orally.

The invention of curare is a truly astounding thing. The most common type requires a complex method of preparation in which several plants are boiled for three days, during which lethal fumes are produced. And the final result needs a specific piece of technology - the blowpipe - to deliver it. How was all this discovered in the first place?

The problem becomes even more baffling when it is realised that forty different types of curare are used across the Amazon rain forest, all with the same properties but each using slightly different ingredients as the same plants do not grow in every region. Therefore, in effect, curare was invented forty times. The Western world only learned of it in the 1940s, when it first began to be used as a muscle relaxant during surgery.

The Amazonians themselves do not claim to have invented curare, but that it was given to them by the spirits, through their shamans. These are just two examples from a vast range of vegetable mixtures used by the peoples of the Amazon, the full extent of which has not yet been catalogued by modern botanists. Realising that it was nonsense to suggest that these complex recipes could have been achieved by experimentation, Narby began to ask local people and shamans how they had acquired this knowledge. They told him that the properties of plants and the recipes for combining them are given directly to the shaman by very powerful spirit entities while he is in ecstatic trance under the influence of hallucinogens such as ayahuasca."

The astral plane is not subject to the law of terrestrial gravitation (dextrorotatory waves); as such, it would disappear in a fraction of second, given the 30km/s speed of the supposed heliocentrical path of the Earth, not to mention the daily rotation around its own axis.

The dangers of accessing the astral plane:

https://www.prosveta.fr/looking-into-the-invisible-intuition-clairvoyance-dreams

Jeremy Narby's Cosmic Serpent:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1343816#msg1343816

Don Juan Matus' dextrorotatory waves:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1825278#msg1825278

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 22, 2019, 02:44:08 AM
LUNAR ECLIPSE ALLAIS EFFECT


(https://media4.s-nbcnews.com/i/newscms/2018_30/2508956/180725-blood-moon-lunar-eclipse-ew-1234p_5e9c5cdf643d056b7df9427eb4bb08b7.jpg)

Dr. Paul Marmet
Assistant professor in the physics department of the University of Ottawa
Senior researcher at the Herzberg Institute of Astrophysics of the National Research Council of Canada
Director of the laboratory for Atomic and Molecular Physics at Laval University in Québec City
Member of the executive committee of the Atomic Energy Control Board of Canada from 1979 to 1984
Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada
Officer of the Order of Canada

https://newtonphysics.on.ca/astronomy/index.html

Enlargement of the Earth's Shadow on the Moon: An Optical Illusion

Dr. Marmet proves that the usual explanation accepted by modern science for the 2% Earth's larger umbra during a lunar eclipse, namely atmospheric absorption, cannot be true.

During a lunar eclipse, it has been observed that the Earth's shadow (official science theory) is 2% larger than what is expected from geometrical considerations and it is believed that the Earth's atmosphere is responsible for the extent of the enlargement, but it is realized that the atmospheric absorption cannot explain light absorption at a height as high as 90 km above the Earth, as required by this hypothesis (as several authors have noted).

http://vixra.org/pdf/1311.0156v1.pdf

Lunar eclipses and the Allais effect

A beautiful exposition of the history of the anomalies observed through the centuries during the lunar eclipse.

"It was also argued that the irradiation of the Moon in the Earth's shadow during the eclipse is caused by the refraction of sunlight in the upper regions of the Earth's atmosphere. However, the shade toward the center is too bright to be accounted for by refraction of visible sunlight.

That is, the pronounced red colour in the inner portions of the umbra during an eclipse of the Moon is caused by refraction of sunlight through the upper regions of the Earth's atmosphere, but the umbral shadow towards the centre is too bright to be accounted for by refraction of visible sunlight."

It has systematically been found that the shadow of the Earth seems to be 2% larger
than what is expected from geometrical predictions.


For his part, in an analysis of 57 eclipses over a period of 150 years, Link (1969) found an enlargement of the shadow of 2.3% on average. Furthermore, schedules inputs and outputs of the crater through the umbra for four lunar eclipses from 1972 to 1982 strongly support the Chauvenet value of 2%.

The increase of the Earth`s umbral shadow during eclipses of the Moon is the
classical value of 2% (the rule of the fiftieth) used in most calculations of lunar eclipses.

J. Meeus, Nouvelles brèves : L’accroissement du diamètre de l’ombre de la Terre lors des éclipses de Lune, Ciel et Terre, Vol. 88, p. 491 (1972)

As the author demonstrates in his paper, the only possible explanation is a variation of the gravitational potential, a lunar eclipse Allais effect.

Just like in the case of the solar Allais effect, this variation of the gravitational potential means that the heavenly body which causes the lunar eclipse cannot be the Earth.

The existence of the Shadow Moon (the same diameter as that of the Sun, Black Sun, Moon, Jupiter, Aurora) was anticipated by the best astronomers of the 19th century.

That many such bodies exist in the firmament is almost a matter of certainty; and that one such as that which eclipses the moon exists at no great distance above the earth's surface, is a matter admitted by many of the leading astronomers of the day. In the report of the council of the Royal Astronomical Society, for June 1850, it is said:

"We may well doubt whether that body which we call the moon is the only satellite of the earth."

In the report of the Academy of Sciences for October 12th, 1846, and again for August, 1847, the director of one of the French observatories gives a number of observations and calculations which have led him to conclude that,

"There is at least one non-luminous body of considerable magnitude which is attached as a satellite to this earth."

Sir John Herschel admits that:

"Invisible moons exist in the firmament."

Sir John Lubbock is of the same opinion, and gives rules and formulæ for calculating their distances, periods.

Lambert in his cosmological letters admits the existence of "dark cosmical bodies of great size."


The subquarks constantly being supplied to form the telluric currents come in two flavors, as already discussed within this thread.

One of the dark bodies which orbit above the Earth emits the laevorotatory subquarks, the antigravitational subquarks, as proven by the Allais effect.

Logically, the invisible moon emits the dextrorotatory subquarks.

http://www.blazelabs.com/f-g-rpress.asp

In fact, cosmic waves have far greater penetrating power than the man-made gamma radiation, and can even pass through a thickness of two metres of lead. The highest frequency possible, that is, the shortest wavelength limit is equal to the dimension of the unit element making up space-time itself, equal to Planck length, radiating at a frequency of 7.4E42Hz.

As you might be thinking already, the radiation pressure exerted by such high frequency radiation, in the top part of the EM spectrum, would be a perfect candidate for the gravity effect, since such radiation would penetrate ANY matter and act all over its constituent particles, not just its surface. The radiation can be visualised as a shower of high energy EM waves imparting impulses of momentum to all bodies in space. It also explains the great difficulty we have to shield anything from such force. The energy of each individual photon is a crucial component of the momentum necessary to create pressure for gravity to be possible. The shadow of incoming high energy EM wave packets can be pictured as the carriers of the gravitational force, the normal role assigned to the theoretical graviton. Hence, gravitons have been theorised due to the lack of knowledge of radiation pressure and radiation shadowing, and that's why they will never be detected. If photons represent the luminance of electromagnetic radiation, then, gravitons represent the shadowing and can be considered as negative energy waves, lack of photons or photon-holes.

This radiation shadowing is being emitted by the heavenly body which does cause the lunar eclipse: read the phrase - that is why they will never be detected.

"Gravitons represent the shadowing and can be considered as negative energy waves, lack of photons or photon-holes".

The Shadow Moon, the source of the dextrorotatory subquarks causes the lunar eclipse.

We know for sure that the Moon does not cause the solar eclipse, here is the Allais effect:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg760382#msg760382

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 24, 2019, 01:42:44 AM
HOW TO PROVE THE RIEMANN HYPOTHESIS II

Two mathematicians from the Lomonosov Moscow State University have used the mollifier function introduced by N. Levinson in a novel way:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1805.07741.pdf

100% OF THE ZEROS OF THE RIEMANN ZETA-FUNCTION ARE ON THE CRITICAL LINE

Earlier, they published another paper in which they showed that at least 47% of the zeros of the Riemann zeta function lie on the critical line (the previous records were Feng (41%), Conrey (40%) and Levinson (34%)).

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.758.4457&rep=rep1&type=pdf

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1403.5786.pdf (the original paper on the novel way of using mollifier functions)

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1207.6583.pdf

Limitations to mollifying ζ(s)

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download;jsessionid=F7C33227D1D6635FFBC27972BA54E5A8?doi=10.1.1.36.9777&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Long mollifiers of the Riemann zeta function

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1604.02740.pdf

THE θ = ∞ CONJECTURE IMPLIES THE RIEMANN HYPOTHESIS

https://rjlipton.wordpress.com/2018/09/26/reading-into-atiyahs-proof/ (on Sir M. Atiyah's use of the Todd function for the Riemann hypothesis)

Mathematicians complain that 99% of the proofs submitted to the Annals are rejected because they make use of the zeta functional equation.

"The reason for this is (as has been known since the work of Davenport and Heilbronn) that there are many examples of zeta-like functions (e.g., linear combinations of L-functions) which enjoy a functional equation and similar analyticity and growth properties to zeta, but which have zeroes off of the critical line. Thus, any proof of RH must somehow use a property of zeta which has no usable analogue for the Davenport-Heilbronn examples."

However, the arguments used in the following papers are very well presented and make a lot of sense.

Riemann's nachlass = manuscripts, lecture notes, calculation sheets and letters left by G.F.B Riemann

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281403728_To_unveil_the_truth_of_the_zeta_function_in_Riemann_Nachlass

The authors assert that not all of the formulas left by Riemann in his notes have been taken into consideration, and that these neglected equations were used by Riemann to actually prove the RH.

There is something else mathematicians have overlooked: the fact that Riemann had proven that all of the zeros lie on the 1/2 line some 160 years ago, using the functional equation. There is no way that he would have embarked to derive the Riemann-Siegel asymptotic formula, had he not been totally sure of the fact that all of the zeros lie on the 1/2 line: all he wanted to do is to verify that actually the first few zeros are situated on the 1/2 line.

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0801/0801.4072.pdf

A Necessary Condition for the Existence of the Nontrivial Zeros of the Riemann Zeta Function

(a paper which shows that B. Riemann must have followed a similar kind of argument, using the newly discovered zeta functional equation, to reach the conclusion that all the nontrivial zeros are all located on the ½ line)


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1704.05834.pdf

On large gaps between zeros of L-functions from branches

Andre LeClair (Cornell University) proves that the normalized gaps between consecutive ordinates tn of the zeros of the Riemann zeta function on the critical line cannot be arbitrarily large.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1126290#msg1126290 (Beatles series, Dec. 24, 2018, Jan. 15, 2019, Jan. 22, 2019 episodes; we will find out how Pink Floyd's best known songs, especially Shine On You Crazy Diamond, are actually modifications of other Beatles songs, also an analysis of RHCP's best songs in the context of Beatles super hits)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 23, 2019, 02:54:51 AM
GENERALIZED SAGNAC EFFECT VI

A second reference which confirms my global/generalized Sagnac effect formula.

https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a206219.pdf

Studies of phase-conjugate optical devices concepts

US OF NAVAL RESEARCH, Physics Division

Dr. P. Yeh
PhD, Caltech, Nonlinear Optics
Principal Scientist of the Optics Department at Rockwell International Science Center
Professor, UCSB
"Engineer of the Year," at Rockwell Science Center
Leonardo da Vinci Award in 1985
Fellow of the Optical Society of America, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers

(https://i.ibb.co/6Y9W45j/yeh5.jpg)

page 152 of the pdf document, section Recent Advances in Photorefractive Nonlinear Optics page 4

The MPPC acts like a normal mirror and Sagnac interferometry is obtained.

(https://i.ibb.co/MsS5Bb5/yeh4.jpg)

Phase-Conjugate Multimode Fiber Gyro

Published in the Journal of Optics Letters, vol. 12, page 1023, 1987

page 69 of the pdf document, page 1 of the article


A second confirmation of the fact that my formula is correct.

Here is the first confirmation:

(https://image.ibb.co/mtGWny/mgrot6.jpg)

Self-pumped phase-conjugate fiber-optic gyro, I. McMichael, P. Yeh, Optics Letters 11(10):686-8 · November 1986 

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a170203.pdf (appendix 5.1)


Exactly the formula obtained by Professor Yeh:

φ = -2(φ2 - φ1) = 4π(R1L1 + R2L2)Ω/λc = 4π(V1L1 + V2L2)/λc

Since Δφ = 2πc/λ x Δt, Δt = 2(R1L1 + R2L2)Ω/c2 = 2(V1L1 + V2L2)/c2

CORRECT SAGNAC FORMULA:

2(V1L1 + V2L2)/c2

The very same formula obtained for a Sagnac interferometer which features two different lengths and two different velocities.

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a170203.pdf

ANNUAL TECHNICAL REPORT PREPARED FOR THE US OF NAVAL RESEARCH.

Page 18 of the pdf document, Section 3.0 Progress:

Our first objective was to demonstrate that the phase-conjugate fiberoptic gyro (PCFOG) described in Section 2.3 is sensitive to rotation. This phase shift plays an important role in the detection of the Sagnac phase shift due to rotation.

Page 38 of the pdf document, page 6 of Appendix 3.1


it does demonstrate the measurement of the Sagnac phase shift Eq. (3)


HERE IS EQUATION (3) OF THE PAPER, PAGE 3 OF APPENDIX 3.1:

φ = -2(φ2 - φ1) = 4π(R1L1 + R2L2)Ω/λc = 4π(V1L1 + V2L2)/λc

Since Δφ = 2πc/λ x Δt, Δt = 2(R1L1 + R2L2)Ω/c2 = 2(V1L1 + V2L2)/c2

CORRECT SAGNAC FORMULA:

2(V1L1 + V2L2)/c2

(https://image.ibb.co/dbZ7Kd/gsac2.jpg)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 08, 2019, 01:53:25 AM
GENERALIZED SAGNAC EFFECT PHASE DIFFERENCE AND FREQUENCY FORMULAS FOR A SQUARE RING LASER GYROSCOPE

(https://i.ibb.co/bXJDkV1/sqrlg.jpg)

First, the Sagnac effect formula for a square interferometer which rotates around its own geometrical center.

Let L = r√2 (r = distance from point O to one of the corners)

Time travel along side AB:

dtab = L/(c - v/√2)

(distance from point O to one of the sides is r/√2, and since v = r x ω, velocity for the light beam traveling along a side is v/√2)

dtcounterclockwise = 8r/(√2c + v)

dtclockwise = 8r/(√2c - v)

Δt = 8rv/c2

Δφ = Δt x c/λ

Δf = Δφ x c/P

(P = perimeter = 4L)


Now, the much more difficult case for the same square ring laser interferometer located away from the center of rotation.

Let us now rotate the square interferometer by 135° in the clockwise direction: point A will be located in the uppermost position (the source of light will be placed at point A as well).

Distance from the center of rotation to point C is k2, while the distance from the center of rotation to point A is k1.

v1 = k1 x ω

v2 = k2 x ω

Proceeding exactly as in the case of the interferometer in the shape of a rectangle, we have two loops, one counterclockwise, one clockwise.

A > B > C > D > A is the clockwise path

A > D > C > B > A is the counterclockwise path

Sagnac phase components for the counterclockwise path (only the vx components of the velocity vector are subject to a different time phase difference in rotation, not the vy components):

L/(c - v1)

-L/(c + v2)

-L/(c + v2)

L/(c - v1)

Sagnac phase components for the clockwise path:

-L/(c + v1)

L/(c - v2)

L/(c - v2)

-L/(c + v1)

For the single continuous counterclockwise path we add the components:

L/(c - v1) - L/(c + v2) - L/(c + v2) + L/(c - v1) = 2L/(c - v1) - 2L/(c + v2)

For the single continuous clockwise path we add the components:

-L/(c + v1) + L/(c - v2) + L/(c - v2) - L/(c + v1) = -2L/(c + v1) + 2L/(c - v2)

The net time phase difference will be (let us remember that the counterclockwise phase difference has a negative sign attached to it, that is why the substraction of the phase differences becomes an addition):

2L/(c - v1) - 2L/(c + v2) -(-)[-2L/(c + v1) + 2L/(c - v2)] = 2L(2v1/c2) + 2L(2v2/c2) = 4L(v1 + v2)/c2

This is the correct global/generalized SAGNAC EFFECT formula for a square shaped ring laser interferometer:

4L(v1 + v2)/c2

For the same interferometer, the CORIOLIS EFFECT formula is:

4Aω/c2


The phase difference for the SAGNAC EFFECT is:

Δφ = Δt x c/λ = [4L(v1 + v2)]/c2 x c/λ = [4L(v1 + v2)]/cλ

The frequency formula for the SAGNAC EFFECT is:

Δf = Δφ x c/P = [4L(v1 + v2)]/λP


There have been some questions regarding the loops of the stationary Sagnac interferometer located away from the center of rotation.

For a stationary interferometer, we simply let v = 0 in the formula:

(https://image.ibb.co/m909uq/fa2.jpg)

So, there will be no time difference, l/c - l/c = 0.

In the same way, we let v1 and v2 = 0 in the generalized Sagnac effect formula:

Δt = (l1 + l2)/(c - v1 - v2) - (l1 + l2)/(c + v1 + v2)

No time difference, (l1 + l2)/c - (l1 + l2)/c = 0.

This much is evident from the derivation of the global/generalized Sagnac effect formula:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2117351#msg2117351

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 11, 2019, 01:59:37 AM
GENERALIZED SAGNAC EFFECT PHASE DIFFERENCE AND FREQUENCY FORMULAS FOR A SQUARE RING LASER GYROSCOPE II

(https://aip.scitation.org/action/showOpenGraphArticleImage?doi=10.1063/1.4977051&id=images/medium/1.4977051.figures.online.f1.jpg)

Gran Sasso, Italy - GINGERino experiment

Latitude: 42.4166°

λHe:Ne = 632 nm

L = 3.6 m

The formula for the square ring laser interferometer located away from the center of rotation derived in the previous message, could have been obtained directly from the global/generalized Sagnac formula, by letting l1 = l2 = 2L:

2(V1L1 + V2L2)/c2

In fact, we can derive the formula for a triangular shaped ring laser gyroscope from the same generalized Sagnac effect equation:

2L(2v2 + v1)/c2

For a triangular shaped interferometer whose center of rotation coincides with the geometrical center (equilateral triangle), all three sides will contribute to the time phase difference. If one of the vertices (A) is located right on the center of rotation, then only the side BC will be a factor in deriving the final Sagnac formula. If the center of rotation is located away from the center of rotation, then all three sides will give rise to Sagnac time phase differences.


Frequency formula for the CORIOLIS EFFECT at Gran Sasso, Italy, ring laser gyroscope:

4Aω/λP = Lω/λ

(A = L2, P = 4L)

Frequency formula for the SAGNAC EFFECT at Gran Sasso, Italy, ring laser gyroscope:

[4L(v1 + v2)]/λP = 2v/λ

(v = Rω, since the sides of the square interferometer measure 3.6 meters in length, v1 practically equals v2)

2v/λ / Lω/λ = 2R/L

At the Gran Sasso latitude, R = 4,710 km = 4,710,000 meters

(actually, here is how to exactly calculate the radius of the hypothetical spherical Earth at a certain latitude:
https://web.archive.org/web/20150919165338/http://www.usenet-replayer.com/faq/comp.infosystems.gis.html )

L = 3.6 meters

2R/L = 2,616,666.666

The SAGNAC EFFECT frequency is larger by a factor of 2,616,666.666 times than the CORIOLIS EFFECT frequency.

As we have seen earlier, for the Michelson-Gale experiment, the SAGNAC EFFECT time phase difference is 21,000 times greater than the CORIOLIS EFFECT phase difference.

The CORIOLIS EFFECT frequency formula is not always written in its full form, which must include the conversion factor from rad/s to Hz:

https://pos.sissa.it/318/181/pdf (the 2π factor is featured in the formula)

https://www.scitepress.org/papers/2015/54380/54380.pdf (the authors do not include the 2π conversion factor)

https://bura.brunel.ac.uk/bitstream/2438/7277/1/FulltextThesis.pdf (it includes the correct derivation for the CORIOLIS EFFECT frequency formula, pg. 39-40  and 60)

The huge error introduced by Albert Michelson in 1925 has not been observed by all of the distinguished physicists who have published works on the SAGNAC EFFECT, including E.J. Post who had no idea in 1967 that he was deriving and describing the CORIOLIS EFFECT formula.

http://www.orgonelab.org/EtherDrift/Post1967.pdf

http://signallake.com/innovation/andersonNov94.pdf

https://phys.org/news/2017-03-deep-earth-rotational-effects.html

https://agenda.infn.it/event/7524/contributions/68390/attachments/49528/58554/Schreiber.pdf

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/47ea/33bdc7d0247772658b1e29c3e9e2a4578d17.pdf

http://inspirehep.net/record/1468904/files/JPCS_718_7_072003.pdf

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 29, 2019, 03:46:43 PM
HOW TO PROVE THE RIEMANN HYPOTHESIS III

(https://i.ibb.co/ZLTTzMv/theorem.jpg)


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1612.08627.pdf

Few mathematicians who study the zeta function remember or have knowledge of the fact that D.H. Lehmer proved the existence of an infinite number of Lehmer pairs:

https://projecteuclid.org/download/pdf_1/euclid.acta/1485892173

Lehmer, D. H. On the roots of the Riemann zeta-function. Acta Math. 95 (1956), 291--298

(https://i.ibb.co/qNCSt3N/lehmer1.jpg)

H.M. Edwards acknowledges this proof in his treatise on the zeta function (Riemann's Zeta Function, section 8.3, pg 179):

(https://i.ibb.co/sFqgznS/lehmer2.jpg)

The Riemann hypothesis means that the de Bruijn-Newman constant is zero.

The existence of infinitely many Lehmer pairs proves that the de Bruijn-Newman constant Λ is 0.

An infinite sequence of such Lehmer pairs is given by the formula:

(636.3 x 3n - 16.9 x n)2π/ln2

(n = 1,2,3...)

n = 1

17150.45078


http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/zeta_tables/zeros1

17143.786536184
17143.821843505

n = 2

34300.90155

34295.104944255
34295.371984027

n = 3

51451.35233

51448.076349964
51448.729475327
51449.153911623

n = 4

68601.80311

68597.636479797
68597.971396943

n = 5

85752.25388

85748.621773488
85748.861163006

n = 6

102902.7047

102907.166732245
102907.475751344

n = 7

120053.1554

120055.446373211
120055.565321075

It can be checked even at much greater heights on the critical line:

http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/zeta_tables/zeros4

However, what is still needed is an understanding of the nature of the strong Lehmer pairs, how they relate to the two counterpropagating zeta functions.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 30, 2019, 01:20:58 AM
NUCLEAR ENERGY FILE II

ORANUR EXPERIMENT, 1951

Friday, January 5, 1951: Wilhelm Reich M.D. puts one milligram of pure radium inside a 20 layer Orgone Energy Accumulator. For five hours the radium remains inside the life energy charging device. During the next seven days the process is repeated for one hour per day; the one milligram of pure radium is placed inside the 20 layer Orgone Accumulator. On Friday, January 12, the radium was removed from the Orgone charging device after only one half hour and the experiment was stopped

It was on the last day of the experiment that the most dramatic effect occurred. The observers were outside the student’s laboratory where the metal lined Orgone Room housing the powerful 20 layer Orgone Energy Accumulator was located. While one experimental milligram of pure radium served as a control and was kept far away in an unused building on Reich’s 280 acre farm; the other milligram of pure radium was placed inside the life energy charging device.

The “normal” background count of “radioactivity” at Reich’s laboratory in Western Maine where a dozen people lived and worked was 30 – 50 counts per minute measured on the big 4096 Tracerlab Autoscaler. The background of radioactivity within an Orgone Accumulator measured with a portable SU-5 Tracerlab Survey Meter, type 6C5, was 40 – 70 cpm. In other words, with no nuclear material present, the concentration of Life Energy within a charging device caused the Geiger Counter to give a higher reading; about 40 % higher.

Once the Oranur Experiment had started; once the concentrated Life Energy had been exposed to the radioactive nuclear material – the background count at Reich’s laboratory climbed to approx. 80 cpm and would not immediately subside even when the nuclear material was removed from the Orgone Accumulator.

The radioactivity of a one milligram unit of radium had been calibrated at 16,000 cpm (8.3 Roentgens per hour). This was done in New York City, away from the highly charged atmosphere of Reich’s setup near Rangeley, Maine. The two units of Radium arrived on Jan. 5, 1951 and immediately they were measured unshielded at one centimeter distance and gave a reading of 254,760 cpm in the highly charged atmosphere near the various Orgone Accumulators. One milligram unit was secured as a control and not exposed further to the charging effect of the Orgone devices. The other milligram was placed inside the 20 layer Orgone Accumulator in the metal lined Orgone Room in the student’s laboratory. While the radium was within the charging device, accurate measurement was not possible because the instrument, the SU-5 Survey Meter would either race right off the scale or go completely dead. Away from the active experiment, the instrument resumed normal operation.

The fateful Friday, January 12 – again the milligram of pure radium is placed inside the Life Energy device and again the observers feel the amplified radiation effects: severe nausea, loss of equilibrium, pressure in the forehead, sensations of fainting, severe headache, hot and cold flashes, severe belching: all these symptoms were observed and experienced by the one dozen or so physicians and technicians present during the 5 month course of the experiment. Additionally each observer was affected by a recurrence of any old or dormant injury or disease condition varying according to each individual’s weakest spot. It was as if the effect of the reaction of the concentrated Life Energy to the nuclear irritant was to attack each living organism in its weakest area.

The last time that the radium was placed inside the 20 layer Accumulator was to prove so dramatic that for fear of possible consequences, the experiment was stopped. The observers (Wilhelm Reich, Dr. Simon Tropp & others) were standing outside in the cold afternoon of January 12. They could see through the large picture windows the atmosphere inside the student’s lab become clouded within minutes after they had placed the unshielded milligram of radium inside the Life Energy charger. The clouded atmosphere was starting to move visibly and was shining blue and purple 1 The men became quite ill from nausea, loss of balance, cramps in the stomach – all this from one milligram of radium over 300 feet distant. Never before had symptoms of radiation sickness been so strong or had they been felt at such a great distance from the physical setup of the experiment.

The experiment was stopped in that the radioactive material was no longer placed inside the Life Energy charging device. The effects from the experiment continued and they intensified. It was quite unbearable to be near any Orgone Accumulator on the premises. It was as if the Oranur effect had spread and affected all of the Life Energy charging devices located at Reich’s extensive laboratory comprising two large and several smaller buildings. All of the Orgone devices exhibited exorbitantly high Geiger counter readings and produced symptoms of radiation sickness in nearby observers. A large batch of 30 experimental mice died from exposure to this Orgone Anti-Nuclear effect even though the mice were never physically close to arty nuclear material. Thorough autopsies on the mice revealed a leukemia-like blood picture.

The reaction seemed to be self-sustaining and was spreading. In response to the severity of the Oranur effect, all of the Orgone Accumulators were physically dismantled and their component parts were separated. The metal lined Orgone Room was dismantled. This measure of turning off the Orgone Accumulators (there is no switch to an Orgone device); this dismantling of the Orgone devices seemed to reduce the background counts of radioactivity from their levels of 80 cpm and above. It was noticed that reassembling even one Orgone charging device would immediately cause the background radiation measurements to approximately double. The experimental radium was secured within its 1/2” lead shield and placed inside a 4” steel and concrete safe located in a small wooden building some distance from the main laboratory.

What had been learned from this experiment? Basically, the presence of a stong concentration of Orgone Energy seems to amplify and magnify the radiation from a nuclear source. The New York Times reported on February 3, 1951 of an Atomic Energy Commission announcement of an increase in background radiation comprising an area of 600 miles in radius with its approximate center located Northern New England. It is likely that Reich’s Oranur Experiment with one milligram of radium had affected an area of 1,130,900 square miles.

References for the New York Times article:

Wilson, Colin. The Quest for Wilhelm Reich. Garden City, NY: Anchor Press/Doubleday. 1981. p. 210

https://www.nytimes.com/1951/02/03/archives/increased-radiation-found-in-east-laid-to-atom-tests-held-harmless.html

What Reich accomplished is to activate the dextrorotatory subquark waves (telluric currents) which greatly increased their density inside the ether box, thereby causing the 1 mg of radium to become a target for these terrestrial gravitational waves. In order to access the laevorotatory waves, the orgone, one needs to use double torsion, cymatics or a high electrical field (Biefeld-Brown effect).

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1830498#msg1830498 (part I)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 01, 2019, 08:27:31 AM
CASIMIR-AHARONOV-BOHM EFFECT

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-88-470-5217-8_14

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1301.4270.pdf

A Gravitational Aharonov-Bohm Effect, and Its Connection to Parametric Oscillators and Gravitational Radiation

A connection is made between the gravitational, vector Aharonov-Bohm effect and the principle of local gauge invariance for nonrelativistic quantum matter interacting with weak gravitational fields. We find that the threshold for parametric oscillation for EM microwave generation is much lower for the separated configuration than the unseparated one, which then leads to an observable dynamical Casimir effect.

https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/pdf/10.1142/S2010194511001085

Casimir-Aharonov-Bohm effect in the cosmic string background

LONG RANGE CASIMIR FORCE PODKLETNOV EFFECT

Dr. Giovanni Modanese

PhD, Theoretical Physics, University of Pisa
Post-doctoral research at MIT
Post-doctoral research at the Max Planck Institute

Author of papers published in the best journals in the world:

Modanese, G., Ultra-light and strong: The massless harmonic oscillator and its singular path integral (2017) International Journal of Geometric Methods in Modern Physics, 14 (1), art. no. 1750010
Modanese, G., Oscillating dipole with fractional quantum source in Aharonov-Bohm electrodynamics (2017) Results in Physics, 7, pp. 480-481.
G. Modanese, Electromagnetic coupling of strongly non-local quantum mechanics, Physica B 524C (2017) pp. 81-84
Modanese, G., Generalized Maxwell equations and charge conservation censorship (2017) Modern Physics Letters B, 31 (6), art. no. 1750052

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1408/1408.1636.pdf

The reality of vacuum fluctuations is demonstrated by the Casimir effect in quantum
electrodynamics, yet vacuum forces are usually very small, and the principles of
thermodynamics limit the use of the Casimir effect for energy extraction from the vacuum [20].

The vacuum fluctuations that appear in our model, however, are of a novel kind, are peculiar of gravity and act on a far larger scale. This is why we think they can lead to macroscopic effect when coupled to macroscopic quantum objects like superconductors.

Podkletnov Effect

One of the best experimental physicists of the 20th century and beyond, Dr. Eugene Podkletnov, performed a series of celebrated experiments which prove the existence of the Casimir force extended for 200 KILOMETERS.


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2031798#msg2031798

Dr. Podkletnov published his paper in the highest rated journal of physics, Physica C.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/092145349290055H

"In 1995, the Max Planck Institute of Physics did a follow up study, and was able to confirm the results."

(http://www.enterprisemission.com/images/anti-g6.jpg)

"Dr. Podkletnov also describes his “force beam generator” experiment in detail, and provides insights into improvements that he’s made over the last decade to increase the force produced by this experimental gravity-beam. The force beam is generated by passing a high-voltage discharge from a Marx-generator through a YBCO emitter suspended in a magnetic field, and Podkletnov has described it as being powerful enough to knock over objects in the lab, as well as capable of being tuned by even punch holes in solid materials.

Podkletnov maintains that a laboratory installation in Russia has already demonstrated the 4in (10cm) wide beam’s ability to repel objects a kilometre away and that it exhibits negligible power loss at distances of up to 200km."


Global Tesla-Casimir-Aharonov-Bohm effect

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1994713#msg1994713 (three consecutive messages)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 06, 2019, 04:30:38 AM
GLOBAL ALGORITHM FOR STRONG LEHMER PAIRS

π/ln2 is the sacred cubit of the Lehmer pairs.

1400/22 is the sacred cubit distance for regular zeta function zeros.

Infinite sequence formula for all Lehmer pairs:

{n ⋅ 2π/ln2 + n ⋅ 2π/ln2 + π/ln2}/2 =  π/ln2 x (4n + 1)/2

{n ⋅ 2π/ln2 + π/ln2 + (n + 1) ⋅ 2π/ln2 }/2 =  π/ln2 x (4n + 3)/2

There are several choices for the optimum interval which can be used for the global subdivision algorithm to find the strong Lehmer pairs:

2π/ln2 x 10 = 90.6472...

2π/ln2 x 15 = 135.9708...

2π/ln2 x 75/2 = 75π/ln2 = 2.5 x 135.9708... = 339.9270106...

2π/ln2 x 100sc =  576.84583...

The best version is 75π/ln2 = 2.5 x 135.9708... = 339.9270106...

The subdivision proportions are as follows:

534 sc = 339.9270106...
160 sc = 101.81818...
135.9708 x sc = 86.52687538...
106.8 sc = 67.985402...
53.4 sc = 33.9927...

1018.1818 = 4 x 254.545454... = 16 x 63.636363...

For the 100sc interval the subdivision proportions were:

534
136.1
80
53.4
26.7

and

534
160
136.1
106.8
53.4

List of strong Lehmer pairs:

https://www.slideshare.net/MatthewKehoe1/riemanntex (pg 64-88)

The first such values are: 415.018809755 and 415.455214996, 7005.062866175 and 7005.100564674, 17143.786536184 and 17143.821843505, 23153.514967223 and 23153.574227077...

http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/zeta_tables/zeros1

All of the zeros of the zeta function are generated by the five elements subdivision algorithm, therefore the location of all of the Lehmer pairs (including the strong Lehmer pairs) must be related to the subdivision values, but on a larger scale.

The same global algorithm successfully employed before to find the zeta zeros on a 100 sc interval, will be used again, featuring the two counterpropagating zeta functions.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2082278#msg2082278


33992.701
10181.818
8652.687
6798.54
3399.27

33992.701 - 10181.818 = 23810.883

23810.883
7132.0626
6060.952
4762.1766
2381.0883

23810.883 - 7132.0626 = 16678.82

16678.82
4995.8
4245.518
3335.764
1667.882

1667.882
499.58
424.5518
333.5764
166.7882


10181.818 + 7132.0626 = 17313.8806
10181.818 + 6060.952 = 16242.77

23810.883 - 6060.952 = 17749.931
23810.883 - 7132.0626 = 16678.82

7132.0626 - 6060.952 = 1071.1106

1071.1106
320.83
272.646
214.222
107.111

16242.77 + 320.83 = 16563.6

17749.931 - 320.83 = 17429.1

1071.1106 - 320.83 = 750.281

750.281
224.73
190.98
150.056
75.28

17429.1 - 224.73 = 17204.37

16563.6 + 224.73 = 16788.33

That is, upper and lower bounds are being obtained for the Lehmer pair located at 17143.786...

We also have a lower bound estimate for the Lehmer pair located at 7005.1..., 6798.54, and an upper bound for the Lehmer pair located at 23153.5..., 23810.883.

The Lehmer phenomenon, a pair of zeros which are extremely close, is related to the close proximity of some of the values of the two subdivisions of the 63.6363... segment.

In the same way, strong Lehmer pairs are related to the close proximity of some of the values of the two subdivisions of the 10n x 339.927106... segment. The same algorithm can be applied for the 339927.106... segment or for the 33992710.6... segment, however the calculations involving the two subdivision fractals will be more involved since now we have to obtain many more significant digits.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 06, 2019, 10:06:20 AM
MAGNETIC CENTER OF THE EARTH MYSTERY

This is the conventional representation of the lines of force of a magnet:

(http://electricalacademia.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/magnetic-field.gif)

However, the precise experimental work performed by Howard Johnson (SPINTRONICS) has revealed that the lines of force of a magnet look like this:

http://freenrg.info/Misc/The_Secret_World_Of_Magnets.pdf

(https://image.ibb.co/mQxM0d/ma1_zpstnoewm3f.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/dzvKmJ/ma2_zps4ijijfcw.jpg)

That is, the most important feature and aspect of a magnet is its CENTER.

The geographical center of the flat earth map:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1952743#msg1952743

It is well known that both poles of magnetic field of the earth exhibit multiple observable and measurable phenomena, which are well documented.

Yet, the center of this magnetic field, which is more important than either of the poles, cannot be detected by any of the scientific equipment used to identify the effects of magnetism.


The heliocentrists cannot state that the center of the magnetic field is located inside  (is generated from) the core of a spherical Earth.

The results published by the SPINTRONICS team prove clearly that there are two flows of magnetic monopoles: South-Center-North AND North-Center-South.

The modern study of the magnetic field/electromagnetism ONLY includes the South to North flow.

Yet, there are TWO continuous streams of different particles.

Whittaker proved that the potential consists of pairs of bidirectional longitudinal scalar waves, and that the same equation governs both gravity and magnetism.

The spherical orbiting Earth has a STATIC gravitational field and a ROTATING magnetic field.

But in reality BOTH have to be rotating.

Modern science assumes that the gravitational field and the magnetic field of the Earth represent two different physical phenomena: one is stationary ( the gravitational field does not rotate along with the supposed rotation of the Earth), the other one (the magnetic field) is rotating with the Earth around its own axis.


In reality BOTH the gravitational and the magnetic streams travel in double torsion fashion, as proven by Whittaker mathematically, and shown to be true experimentally in the Spintronics, The Secret World of Magnets book.


One (the gravitational field) cannot be stationary, while the other (the magnetic field) rotates at a certain rate: the bidirectional waves which comprise this lattice would be decoupled in an instant.

THEY HAVE TO ROTATE TOGETHER. In the case of heliocentrism, one of them HAS TO BE STATIONARY, WHILE THE OTHER ONE ROTATES.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2009680#msg2009680

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 12, 2019, 01:05:19 AM
BLACK HOLES DO NOT EXIST

"The black hole has no foundation in theory whatsoever. Neither Newton's theory nor Einstein's theory predict it. In fact, both theories preclude it, contrary to what the orthodox relativists claim.

The so-called "Schwarzschild" solution is not due to Karl Schwarzschild at all. The experts have either not read Schwarzschild's 1916 memoir or have otherwise ignored it."

http://web.archive.org/web/20090509190300/http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/schwarzschild.pdf

"The so-called "Schwarzschild" solution is due to David Hilbert, itself a corruption of a solution first derived by Johannes Droste in May 1916, whose paper has also been buried or ignored at the convenience of the experts. It appears that the experts have not read Hilbert either."

http://web.archive.org/web/20101121212653/http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com:80/hilbert.pdf

"Hilbert's mistake spawned the black hole and the community of theoretical physicists continues to elaborate on this falsehood, with a hostile shouting down of any and all voices challenging them. Schwarzschild's solution has no black hole, and neither does Droste's solution. Schwarzschild's paper is a piece of flawless mathematical physics. And while you're at it you might as well go here to get a copy of Marcel Brillouin's 1923 paper, in English, in which he gives another valid solution and also simply and dramatically demonstrates that the black hole is nonsense. Brillouin's paper has also been ignored."

http://web.archive.org/web/20090509190247/http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/brillouin.pdf

"It is also commonly held by experts, for example, Hawking and Ellis, Misner, Thorne and Wheeler, S. Chandrasekhar, that the Michell-Laplace dark body is a kind of black hole, or an anticipation of the black hole, and that black holes can be members of binary systems and that black holes can collide. These claims are patently false. A copy of G. C. McVittie's conclusive arguments which invalidate these ridiculous claims."

http://web.archive.org/web/20140729161158/http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/McVittie.pdf

Here are some important original papers that deal with the Black Hole and the Big Bang. They prove that these theories are not consistent with General Relativity and have no basis in theory whatsoever.

http://web.archive.org/web/20081201112349/http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/Schwarzschild2.pdf

Another masterful 1916 paper by Karl Schwarzschild, also suppressed by the relativistists.

http://web.archive.org/web/20090509185307/http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/Droste.pdf

Johannes Droste's 1916 paper (published 1917) in which he derives for the first time the metric obtained later and corrupted by David Hilbert, erroneously attributed to Schwarzschild by the experts. There is no black hole.

http://web.archive.org/web/20090521085517/http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/Weyl-2.pdf (translation from German)

Hermann Weyl's 1917 paper in which he obtains Droste's solution by another method.

http://web.archive.org/web/20101121212615/http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com:80/Abrams1989.pdf

A paper by Leonard S. Abrams which demonstrates the invalidity of the Hilbert solution and the black hole.

http://web.archive.org/web/20140729174644/http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/Abrams1996.pdf

Another paper by Abrams demonstrating the invalidity of the Reissner-Nordstrom black hole.

http://web.archive.org/web/20081201113754/http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/Abrams-LR-hole.pdf

Yet another interesting paper by Abrams in which he also demonstrates the invalidity of the Lake-Roeder black hole (but his arguments are incomplete).

http://web.archive.org/web/20090902090420/http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/Levi-Civita.pdf

A very nice paper by T. Levi-Civita in 1917, one of the inventors of Tensor Calculus, showing that Einstein's pseudo-tensor is nonsense because it leads to the requirement for a first-order, intrinsic, differential invariant, which, as is well known to the pure mathematicians, does not exist! This too has been ignored by the relativists.

http://web.archive.org/web/20090509190344/http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/weyl-1.pdf

An interesting treatment by Hermann Weyl (1944) demonstrating that the standard linearization of Einstein's equations is inadmissible because it leads to the requirement of a tensor, which, except for the trivial case of being zero, does not otherwise exist! Another important paper ignored by the orthodox physicists.

http://web.archive.org/web/20090729082308/http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/index.html

http://web.archive.org/web/20090616212743/http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/Gillessen.html

In this article it has been claimed by the astronomers Stefan Gillessen, Reinhard Genzel, and Frank Eisenhaur of the Max Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics, in Germany, that there is a black hole at Sagittarius A*.

I wrote to the trio of astronomers, challenging them on their claim for a black hole.

http://web.archive.org/web/20101121212639/http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/dialogue.pdf

http://web.archive.org/web/20090715073251/http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/Ricci.html

http://web.archive.org/web/20090509034413/http://www.ptep-online.com/index_files/2008/PP-12-11.PDF

On Certain Conceptual Anomalies in Einstein’s Theory of Relativity

http://web.archive.org/web/20130816081433/http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/Jangjeon-2008.pdf

Concerning Fundamental Mathematical and Physical Defects in the General Theory of
Relativity

http://web.archive.org/web/20110715093309/http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/Chapter-3.pdf

Fundamental Errors in the General Theory of Relativity

Stephen J. Crothers

"A telescope by definition is an optical device. It's for seeing things as they are seen optically with the visible light spectrum. A microscope is an inverted telescope.
A radio telescope is a misnomer. There are no optics and nothing can be seen without inferring radio wave forms into an image. By using the noise from 100^100 radio waveform recordings from 10's of spread out locations, the focus of the noise becomes so strong, that almost anything can be 'imaged' from it. An X, or a Y, or a Z, or a O.

Since the filtering algorithms were designed to filter out a hole, because the simulations were based on this assumption, that a hole is there, then eventually as they operate on the noise, they will create a hole. But in reality, there is no such thing.

The one aspect that is rather suspect about the mainstream models of black holes is that their mass estimates of the objects ares based on luminosity in X-rays without respect to the amount of electrical current present in the environment. That's undoubtedly causing the mainstream to overestimate the amount of mass that is present in such objects. "


http://web.archive.org/web/20090303083616/http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dp5/bang.htm (black holes, fact or fiction?)

http://web.archive.org/web/20090318144723/http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dp5/bol.htm#b2

http://www.holoscience.com/wp/black-holes-tear-logic-apart/

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 16, 2019, 07:10:24 AM
CANNONS OF ANCIENT GREECE


(https://www.pubhist.com/works/06/large/6620.jpg)

Venus Disarms Mars, Rubens, 1610

http://www.getty.edu/art/collection/objects/130326/peter-paul-rubens-and-jan-brueghel-the-elder-the-return-from-war-mars-disarmed-by-venus-flemish-about-1610-1612/

In the official chronology of history, Rubens painted "Venus Disarms Mars" around 1610 AD; the painting features CANNONS, which means that Rubens knew that the "ancient" Greeks had cannons and guns. The artwork was created before the rewriting of history by J. Scaliger.

In the new radical chronology of history, the artwork was created around 1780-1790 AD.

L’âge d’or de la peinture hollandaise et flamande avec Rembrandt et Rubens est à situer autour de 1770.

https://www.dillum.ch/html/1_manifeste_recentisme_historique_2018.htm

The so-called Golden Age of Flemish and Dutch art was around 1770 - not a century earlier.

http://www.dillum.ch/html/manifesto_historical_criticism_ch.pfister_2016.htm

"Gunpowder is a mix of sulfur, charcoal, and potassium nitrate which was (and is) used in various thermal weapons, including but not limited to the fire lance, the cannon, the hand cannon, and the gun.

There’s a rather high probability that the Greco-Romans invented gunpowder and the cannon (i.e., Greek Fire) as well. In all likelihood, guns and gunpowder were developed on the Island of Rhodes by its inhabitants known as the Telchines who were known as excellent metallurgists and metal workers skilled in brass and iron. The Telchines are alleged to have produced the first chemical weapon when they created a mixture of Stygian water and sulfur which subsequently killed both animals and plants.

Biblical Gunpowder

The Bible includes 14 references to brimstone  (i.e., sulfur), a vital ingredient of gunpowder (i.e., Greek Fire). Consequently, a majority of these verses contain cannon-like attributes such as smoke, fire and hailstones.

Greek Fire

The chemical compound Sulfur was known for its use in ancient Greece as well as in “Greek Fire”, an allegedly liquid oil-like fire weapon (i.e., a flamethrower) which was routinely used by the early Greeks in war. In short, the substance known as Greek Fire appears to be an allegorical reference for the Greco-Roman Empire’s top secret weapon which consisted of both gunpowder and cannon. According to modern historical accounts, “Greek Fire recipes continued to be developed over the centuries, and by the High Middle Ages was much more sophisticated than the early versions.

In other words, gunpowder was behind Greek Fire all along. Considering that warring ships were subject to various forms of weather, fluctuating waves and winds, and rapid changes in distance and sea level, the very notion of a highly projectable and highly flammable liquid-like substance which was not subjectable to blowback makes the current definition of Greek Fire theoretically impossible. Because Greek ships were made of wood, cloth and rope, they would have suffered terribly from Greek Fire as it was unpredictable, unstable, and unquenchable, ultimately making its use in maritime battle highly risky and highly unlikely. Based on its given name of “Greek Fire”, it can be deduced that it was in fact invented by the Greco-Roman Empire. Consequently, Greek Fire was also known as "Roman Fire" and was admittedly used by the Roman Empire to great effect in naval battles. This notion of the Roman cannon is reflected in the term “Roman Candle”, a thermal weapon which repeatedly ejects exploding shells.

Greek Fire Cannons

If Greek Fire was in fact a liquid oil-like substance that was projected out through the use of a tubular projector (i.e., a “siphōn") by man-made air pressure as historically alleged, there would be no “loud roar that accompanied its discharge”. The modern term for this loud roar is known as “cannon fire”, as a large blast of fire is projected out of the mouth of a cannon when fired. A cannon-like description is even found in the historical records of the 13th-century when "Greek Fire" was reportedly used by the Saracens against the Crusaders. The account, which is found in the Memoirs of the John, Lord of Joinville, Seneschal of Champagne during the Seventh Crusade, clearly states that “... the tail of fire that trailed behind it was as big as a great spear; and it made such a noise as it came, that it sounded like the thunder of heaven”. It looked like a dragon flying through the air. Such a bright light did it cast, that one could see all over the camp as though it were day, by reason of the great mass of fire, and the brilliance of the light that it shed.” What was witnessed by the Lord of Joinville in respect to Greek Fire bears all the earmarks of a cannon, including the tail of fire, the spear like projection, the thunderous boom, and of course the bright light which was shed once the cannonball exploded. In other words, if it looks like a canon, acts like a cannon, and sounds like a cannon, it’s probably a cannon."

David Chase Taylor

http://www.medieval-life-and-times.info/medieval-weapons/greek-fire.htm

The great wall of China was built very recently:

http://de.geschichte-chronologie.de/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=83:chronological-revolution-part-1&catid=2:2008-11-13-21-58-51&Itemid=90 (glorious Chinese history is a fake section)

http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=27892#27892 (not so ancient china 1)
http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=27945#27945 (not so ancient china 2)
http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=27981#27981 (not so ancient china 3)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 17, 2019, 01:01:10 AM
MAGNETIC CENTER OF THE EARTH II: CONSTANTINOPLE

The magnetic center of the flat earth is located right next to the Garden of Eden.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1952743#msg1952743

Constantinople = Troy = biblical Jerusalem = Babylon:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1641885#msg1641885

Christ was crucified near an important sea/strait/river:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1673763#msg1673763

Gladiators with helmets which feature mobile visors, a XVth century invention (official chronology of history):

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1968535#msg1968535

(http://dillum.ch/html/tiziano_pompeii_comparison.gif)

Abbildung 11: Italienische oder pompejanische Renaissance:
Tizian: Liegende Kurtisane (unten) und liegende Mänade aus
Pompeji (oben)
Abbildung der Mänade aus: Pietro Giovanni Guzzo: Pompei, Ercolano, Stabiae, Oplontis;
Napoli 2003, 75

Figure 11: Italian Renaissance and Pompeian:
Titian: Horizontal courtesan (below) and from lying maenad
Pompeii (top)
Figure out the maenad: Pietro Giovanni Guzzo: Pompei, Ercolano, Stabia, Oplontis;
Napoli 2003, 75

The well-known painting by Titian copied perfectly at Pompeii...

As Titian did not have at his disposal a space-time machine to take him back to the year 79 AD, we can only infer that the authors of both paintings/frescoes were contemporaries, perhaps separated only by a few decades in time.

"The use of Renaissance artists of identical details, same colors decisions, motives, general composition plans, the presence in the Pompeian frescoes of the things that emerged in the 15 to 17 century, the presence in Pompeian paintings of genre painting, which is found only in the epoch of the Renaissance, and the presence of some Christian motifs on some frescoes and mosaics suggest that Pompeian frescoes and the works of artists of the Renaissance come from the same people who have lived in the epoch. "Vitas Narvidas," Pompeian Frescoes and the Renaissance: a comparison, "Electronic Almanac" Art & Fact 1 (5), 2007."


History: Science or Fiction? Chronology 1, A. Fomenko

https://books.google.ro/books?id=YcjFAV4WZ9MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=fomenko+history&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwixoYyC18XhAhXGpIsKHVvIC4QQ6AEIMzAC#v=onepage&q=fomenko%20history&f=false

Page 20: Trojan war at Constantinople and the founding of Rome

Page 41: Jerusalem as a medieval city with a crescent on one of the towers

Pages 42-44: The location of Troy and Babylon

Page 43: Babylon as a medieval city with a crescent on one of the towers

Page 51: Albrecht Durer engraving (Lot fleeing with his daughters) which features a volcanic eruption which destroyed the Biblical cities; obviously the Bible was written only after Pompeii and Herculaneum were destroyed by the eruption of the Vesuvius volcano in the second half of the 18th century

Page 55: Siege of Troy and the foundation of Paris, simultaneous chronological events

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 19, 2019, 12:46:42 AM
ST. OMER'S ILIAD AND ODYSSEY


(https://i.ibb.co/FDzW2kj/troy.jpg)

https://www.jaks.sk/dokumenty/fomenko/06-The%20Issue%20with%20Troy%20-History-Fiction%20or%20Science%20Book%206-.pdf

One of the best works signed A.T. Fomenko.

"Let us begin with the actual legend of the Trojan War and its history. Who was the first to have told this tale? Where and how did it happen? The Scaligerian version tells us the following about the origins of the Iliad and the Odyssey. It is presumed nowadays that the fall of Troy (at the end of the Trojan War, which had lasted for several years) took place in 1225 B.C. ([72], page 243). Homer was the author whose text had allegedly been the first to reach us (see figs. 2.34 and 2.35). However, a closer acquaintance with the Scaligerian version of how Homer’s poems came into being leaves one somewhat confused. couldn’t have written anything on his own – at best, he could have dictated something. The version used to prove his “authorship” of the poems is as follows.

He wrote two gigantic poems. They occupy seven hundred pages of the modern 1967 edition ([180]), no less, the font being rather small. The poet is supposed to have memorized both of them, and started singing the poems to his audience. He must have been at it for many years, since the poems had not been recorded anywhere in his lifetime! We are surprised to learn that “both the Iliad and the Odyssey had first been written down [a few centuries after Homer’s death – A. F.] by a special commission created for this purpose by Pisistratus, the tyrant of Athens who had reigned in 560-527 B.C.” ([180], page 711).

Thus, both of these titanesque poems, adding up to 700 pages of a contemporary book, are supposed to have been recorded for the first time 670 years after the Trojan War. This takes place more than half a millennium later, and also several centuries after Homer’s death. All of the above spawns confusion galore. How could the words sung with such great inspiration have reached the commission of Pisistratus through many centuries in order to get written down for the first time? We’re talking about two immense epic poems. Chanting them aloud by heart must take many hours.
One should also take good care not to make any mistakes. The allegedly veracious
picture of the events that we’re fed can be outlined as follows.

How does one memorize seven hundred pages of Homer’s poems for a lifetime?

The poet chanted his two poems before all kinds of audience many a time. The listeners eventually managed to memorize them. Then the poet died; however, his compatriots remained, and they had learnt the entire volume of these 700 pages by heart and verbatim. These people had carried on with the oral tradition, telling the poems to a new audience. They eventually perished as well, yet their “oral tradition”, as historians are so very keen to call it, continued and became inherited by their children. This is supposed to have lasted for several hundred years. Towns fell and empires collapsed; still the descendants of Homer’s first listeners would keep on chanting two gigantic poems by heart.

Just try to memorize as little as the first hundred pages of the Iliad merely by listening
to them chanted so as to keep them in memory for about two decades. Failing that, try to learn them by heart reading the actual text of the book – something Homer’s descendants didn’t have. You aren’t likely to succeed. Bear in mind that there are seven times more than a hundred pages in the book. We shall be told that “the ancients had a better memory”, which is highly unlikely – the contrary is more probable, since there weren’t any libraries at the time, nor anything resembling a unified educational system.
Let us return to the Scaligerian version of history for the meantime. Pisistratus the tyrant finally hears the magnificent chant which was apparently crooned by the court
singer for several days on end and gives orders to get the poems recorded in writing for
the very first time. This must have taken several singers, since one finds it hard to
imagine that “oral tradition” had only reached one singer in the epoch of Pisistratus. In
this case, their versions of Homer’s poems must have differed from each other
considerably. Or are we being coerced into thinking that all the singers had known the
same version of the text?

This is what Scaligerian history tells us about the fate of Homer’s poems – all of this
with a straight face. We deem it to be extremely unlikely.

Let us trace the further fate of “Homer’s poems recorded in writing”. They are
presumed to have been widely known as late as the III century B.C. ([180], page 711).
Still, there are no copies of either the Iliad or the Odyssey that could be dated to this
period. His poems had allegedly remained lost for many centuries up until the
Renaissance. And yet Homer had been popular enough for his poems to be chanted
aloud in many towns and villages of Greece for many centuries before they got recorded. However, no texts of Homer are seen, let alone read, by anyone in the Middle
 Ages. Homer’s songs have ceased to ring; the location of the unique and priceless copy
of his poems remains unknown.

This is what historians tell us: “In mediaeval Europe Homer’s texts were only known from the quotations and references given by Aristotle and a number of Latin authors; the poetic glory of Homer had been completely outshone by Virgil. It wasn’t until the late XIV – early XV century that… the Italian humanists had made a closer acquaintance of Homer. In the XV century many of them occupied themselves with translating Homer into Latin… in 1448 the first printed Greek copy of Homer was published in Florence.
Many partial Italian translations of Homer’s texts were made in the XVI century.
However, the first complete translation of the Iliad came out as late as 1723 and is
credited to the poet Antonio Maria Salvini” ([180], pages 711-712).

Where could Homer’s dusty text have been stored for nearly two thousand years? If
we are to cast aside the highly implausible theories of oral/vocal/choral tradition that
had allegedly kept Homer’s poems alive for many centuries, it has to be admitted that in
reality both of Homer’s poems had only surfaced as late as the end of the XIV century
A.D. ([881], Volume 2, pages 97-98. There are no veracious accounts of their existence
dating back earlier than the XIV century. Therefore, we can put forth the hypothesis that
they were written around that epoch, possibly in the XIII-XIV century of the new era.
The myth about Homer singing them by a fire in the Copper Age Greece of the VIII
or even XIII century B.C. is nothing but a fancy of Scaligerite historians that originated
in the XVI-XVII century A.D."

Constantinople (Troy/Babylon) was the first great city to be built, after the flood (1730 - 1740 AD); all of the other known cities, Paris, London, Rome, Jerusalem were constructed several decades later in time.

The siege of Troy occurred after the crucifixion/resurrection of Christ on mount Beykoz (outside the walls of Constantinople) and it was led by the descendants of Pelasg and Japhet (the first born son of Noah was called Pelasg and not Shem).

The Iliad and Odyssey could only have been written after the invention of the printing press (~1730 AD).

The aqueduct of the city was used to enter Troy: aqua/equa, aquae-ductio/equae-ductio. “Aqueduct keeper” and “groom” (or “stableman”) are also very similar, as well as “aqualiculus”, which translates as “stomach”, “abdomen”, “belly” etc. Therefore, the aqueduct (water duct) transformed into a horse in the perception of later foreign authors, who had confused one vowel for another. Hence the numerous legends about “a gigantic grey object resembling a horse” a. k. a. the Trojan horse.

(https://i.ibb.co/vZN6gM9/troy2.jpg)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 24, 2019, 01:45:39 AM
STATIC VS. DYNAMICAL MAXWELL EQUATIONS

Professor Arnold Sommerfeld, one of the top rated theoretical physicists of all time, nominated for the Nobel prize 84 times, doctoral supervisor for many Nobel prize winners in physics and chemistry (Heisenberg and Pauli were his students).

https://books.google.ro/books?id=Krc3BQAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=Electrodynamics,+Lectures+on+Theoretical+Physics+sommerfeld&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwizxZCwnejhAhVxlIsKHSEdCz4Q6AEIJzAA#v=onepage&q=Electrodynamics%2C%20Lectures%20on%20Theoretical%20Physics%20sommerfeld&f=false

Electrodynamics: Lectures on Theoretical Physics, Volume 3

“We must form the time derivative of the first Eq. (1). We will here imagine the surface Δσ to remain fixed, which obviously applies to media at rest, to which we shall confine ourselves initially.” (chapter 4, page 18)

The common representation of Maxwell’s equations is valid only for static systems.

However, in the same treatise on electrodynamics, Professor Sommerfeld also states:

“The path taken by Einstein in 1905 in the discovery of the special theory of relativity was steep and difficult. It led through the analysis of the concepts of time and space and some ingenious imaginary experiments. The path that we shall take is wide and effortless. It proceeds from the universal validity of the Maxwell equations and the tremendous accumulation of experimental material on which they are based. It ends almost inadvertently at the Lorentz transformation and all its relativistic consequences.” (chapter 26, page 212)

A discrepancy between the two above mentioned quotes: The first quote states that Maxwell’s equations are limited to static systems, while the second quote assumes that these equations are universally valid, i.e.: they apply also to dynamic systems.

Einstein, 1905:

"The principle of the constancy of the velocity of light is of course contained in Maxwell's equations”

What Einstein is telling the other physicists is that the principle of the constancy of the speed of light is based SOLELY on the Heaviside-Lorentz equations (modified Maxwell equations): a different set of equations will lead of course to a DEEPER understanding of the entire phenomenon.

Here are the Heaviside-Lorentz equations:

(http://www.irregularwebcomic.net/annotations/annot1420a.gif)

Here are the ORIGINAL MAXWELL EQUATIONS:

(https://image.ibb.co/f1Coyy/88.jpg)

http://web.archive.org/web/20071006083222/http://www.wbabin.net/science/tombe4.pdf (also includes the appendix called Maxwell's Minor Errors discussing the wrong minus sign in equation D)

Equations [A], [ B ], [D], [E], [F], and [H], would not normally appear in a modern day set of Maxwell’s equations. A modern textbook would combine equation [A] with equation [C] as per equation (112) in part III of the 1861 paper, and the combination would be referred to as the Maxwell’s displacement current equation. In a modern day textbook, the addition of Maxwell’s displacement current to equation [C] would not be explained in terms of total electric current as per Maxwell’s 1861 derivation, but rather in terms of adding on an extra term to Ampère’s circuital law, in order to retain the solenoidal nature of electric current in a capacitor circuit. Modern day displacement current is divorced from its dielectric origins, and it is explained as a time varying quantity that possesses some of the characteristics of electric current, but that is not actually a real current. Modern day sets of Maxwell’s equations therefore only contain three of the original set, with two of these having been amalgamated into one. Added to these two originals in modern textbooks, are Faraday’s law of electromagnetic induction, and the equation stating that the divergence of B is always zero.

Equation D: E = vXB − ∂Α/dt +gradψ

"To make matters worse, modern physicists link Maxwell’s equations to Einstein’s theories of relativity on the very basis of not realizing that equation (1) is one of Maxwell’s equations. Einstein’s entire basis for postulating the constancy of the speed of light lay with the misinformed view that Maxwell’s equations do not contain a convective term. It is in this respect in particular that Maxwell’s contribution to electromagnetism has been totally distorted."

"If the Lorentz force had still been included as one of Maxwell’s equations, they could have been written in total time derivative format (see Appendix A in ‘The Double Helix Theory of the Magnetic Field’) and Einstein would not have been able to make this claim. A total time derivative electromagnetic wave equation would allow the electromagnetic wave speed to alter from the perspective of a moving observer.
"

http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Mathematical%20Physics/Download/6371 (Appendix A and page 3)


http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Mechanics%20/%20Electrodynamics/Download/206

E = vXB and Maxwell’s Fourth Equation

Dr. F.D. Tombe

When Oliver Heaviside and JW Gibbs reformatted Maxwell’s equations in 1884, they put them into partial time derivative format. Instead of using the Lorentz force, Heaviside and Gibbs chose to use a partial time derivative version of Faraday’s law of electromagnetic induction, and in doing so they lost the convective vXB component of the Lorentz force.

The convective component could be reintroduced to Heaviside’s versions of Maxwell’s equations by a simple Galilean transformation.

http://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Mechanics%20/%20Electrodynamics/Download/5373 (page 3)

http://www.nanotechinnov.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Maxwell-Original-Equations.pdf (page 4-5, 11)


M. Eisenman also derived the original dynamical Maxwell equations and showed that they are invariant under Galilean transformations:


https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/back-to-galilean-transformation-and-newtonian-physics-refuting-thetheory-of-relativity-2090-0902-1000198.php?aid=80761

Chapter 1 deals with the common formulation of Maxwell's equations, pointing out that they are valid for static cases only.

The question now is what happens when the radiator does move with respect to the reference coordinate system, say at the speed u in the positive x direction. We would expect (at least I would) that the electromagnetic wave in the positive x direction will propagate at the speed of c+u while the wave propagating at the opposite direction will do so at the speed of c-u. This obviously means that the speed of propagating electromagnetic waves is not constant.

Here comes in the assumption (or belief, if you want to call it so) that the common formulation of Maxwell's equations is universal, i.e.: they apply to non static problems as well. Now, if you substitute the two waves of the last paragraph (moving at different speeds than the nominal speed of light) the differential equation would not equate. We know why. The reason is the assumption of the universality of the common formulation of Maxwell's equations that forces all electromagnetic waves to propagate at the nominal speed c. I believe that this is the origin of the relativists' claim that the speed of light c is constant in all moving inertial frames (not the Michelson-Morley experiment) , and this discrepancy led to the Lorentz and Minkowski transformations and to Einstein's theory of relativity.

In chapter 2 I add the two missing terms to Maxwell's equations (due to the motion of the radiator with respect to the reference coordinate system).

And lo and behold - the solution is just what we would expect by common sense: an electromagnetic wave in the positive x direction propagating at the speed of c+u and a wave propagating at the opposite direction at the speed of c-u.

This means that velocity vectors are additive, and hence we go back to the Galilean transformation.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2058884#msg2058884 (dynamical Maxwell equations)


Einstein's TGR also introduced another flawed concept: that the local space-time is always flat. TGR is a SUBSET of the original MAXWELL SET OF EQUATIONS.

E.T. Whittaker proved in 1903 and 1904 the following statement:

"When a very strong force such as the electromagnetic force is used for the agent of curvature, the local spacetime may be curved, even though the local region of interest is not near a large collection of mass."

Only the original set of J.C Maxwell's equations can describe the Sagnac effect and the Aharonov-Bohm effect which require a higher topology in order to be properly explained.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1994059#msg1994059 (three consecutive messages)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2044039#msg2044039

Maxwell's original set of equations written in quarternion form:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1919728#msg1919728

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 30, 2019, 04:08:44 AM
GLOBAL ALGORITHM FOR STRONG LEHMER PAIRS II

”Number theory is not pure Mathematics. It is the Physics of the world of Numbers.”

The mass of each and every boson is generated by the Riemann zeta function. Each and every subquark, quark, meson, baryon and proton vibrates in resonance with the distribution of the zeros of the zeta function.

Therefore, to understand the hidden template of the zeta zeros is true quantum physics.

One of the recent attempts to understand the distribution of the zeros of the zeta function:

https://www.scribd.com/document/217732/The-Riemann-Hypothesis

"It is evident that all odd  or  even (whole number) values of k produce an excess of nines=1 and therefore cannot generate a zeta function zero. Further, it is true that all zeros occur from the fractional values of the k’s; when an unscheduled “Excess of Nines =1” occurs, so does a “Lehmer event”. The plotted data briefly passes through an excess of nines =1, wavers, then becomes fractional again, crosses the real axis and produces a zero. These events are cyclic, happening many times along the path to infinity."

The zeros of the factor (https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/ea93175a395872641ee4faa130370582daacf5b2) are distributed as follows: an infinite number of complex simple zeros at (https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/aa700d264a60e31df1f7d93320b0e619388408ff) where n is a nonzero integer. Whenever a zero of the zeta function produces an "unscheduled" excess of nines=1 phenomenon, then the Lehmer event will be generated as well.

However, the author of the paper does not offer any precise equations which can explain the location of the strong Lehmer pairs (the constant 1016 is simply 254 x 4 = 1016, 63.5 x 4 = 254).

(https://image.ibb.co/fctQpz/leh2.jpg)

7005.0629 and 7005.10056, zeta zeros 6709 and 6710

2π/ln2 x 1 = 9.064720284
2π/ln2 x 2 = 18.129440568
2π/ln2 x 3 = 27.194160852
2π/ln2 x 4 = 36.258881136
2π/ln2 x 5 = 45.32360142
2π/ln2 x 6 = 54.388321704
2π/ln2 x 7 = 63.453041988
2π/ln2 x 8 = 72.517762272
2π/ln2 x 9 = 81.582482556
2π/ln2 x 10 = 90.64720284
2π/ln2 x 11 = 99.711923124
2π/ln2 x 12 = 108.776643408
2π/ln2 x 13 = 117.841363692
2π/ln2 x 14 = 126.906083976
2π/ln2 x 15 = 135.97080426
2π/ln2 x 16 = 145.035524544

(an addition of 1 to the decimal part after the multiplication by 16)

772 x 2π/ln2 = 6997.964

773 x 2π/ln2 = 7007.0288

(https://image.ibb.co/kzEC2K/leh3.jpg)

17143.786 and 17143.8218, zeta zeros 18858 and 18859

1891 x 2π/ln2 = 17141.386

1892 x 2π/ln2 = 17150.45


1885 x 2π/ln2 = 17086.9977
1886 x 2π/ln2 = 17096.062

Therefore, a more in-depth analysis is needed to uncover the hidden symmetries at work in the Lehmer pairs event.

16 x 28 = 448

448 x 2π/ln2 = 4060.99469

448 + 16 = 464

464 x 2π/ln2 = 4206.0302

16 x 55 = 880

880 x 2π/ln2 = 7976.954

896 x 2π/ln2 = 8121.989

912 x 2π/ln2 = 8264.025


1808 x 2π/ln2 = 16389.014

1888 x 2π/ln2 = 17114.192

2254 x 2π/ln2 = 20450.0089

Multiplying 2π/ln2 by 32, 64, 96..., by 64, 128, 192..., by 48, 96, 144..., does not produce the produce the needed results.

However, if we multiply the constant 2π/ln2 by 192:

768 x 2π/ln2 = 6961.705

910 x 2π/ln2 = 8702.131


If we multiply the constant 2π/ln2 by 128:

1792 x 2π/ln2 = 16243.9787

1920 x 2π/ln2 = 17404.263

Now, we can see that a strong Lehmer pair will be located between 6961.705 and 8702.131, and between 16243.9787 and 17404.263.

In much the same way, multiplying by 32000, we get:

160000 x 2π/ln2 = 1430355.245

640000 x 2π/ln2 = 5801420.982

672000 x 2π/ln2 = 6091492.031

One or more strong Lehmer pairs must be located between 5801420.982 and 6091492.031.


Strong Lehmer pairs 7954022502373.43289015387 and 7954022502373.43289494012.

640000000000 x 2π/ln2 = 5801420981538.8081

960000000000 x 2π/ln2 = 8702131472308.212

A strong Lehmer pair (or more) must be located between 5801420981538.8081 and 8702131472308.212: 5907264585921.69036356 and 5907264585921.6903535, and 7954022502373.43289015387 and 7954022502373.43289494012.

Now, all we need is an accurate criterion by which to locate these strong Lehmer pairs.


Rotate a model of the Gizeh pyramid clockwise by 90 degrees.

To the right, we have another Gizeh pyramid (the shadow of the first pyramid), which is rotated anticlockwise by 90 degrees, the two pyramid frustums will be facing each other.

Total distance from one subterranean chamber to the other: 534 units.

In the center we have the two apexes of the pyramids forming a merkabah geometrical figure.

Two sothic triangles embed each of the two apexes: the height of the triangle will measure exactly 14.134725 units (the value of the first zero of Riemann's zeta function).

Two other sothic triangles will embed the top portion of the frustums of the two pyramids, again the height of these triangles will measure 14.134725 units.

The distance separating the two sets of triangles, located to the left of the center of the merkabah, will measure exactly 63.6363... units (the sacred cubit distance).

In the same manner the distance separating the two sets of triangles located to the right of the center of the merkabah will also measure 63.6363... units.

75 x π/ln2 = 339.9270107

534.171sc = 339.9270107

534 = (2 x 174.53 - two pyramids measured from the subterranean chamber to the top) + (4 x 14.134725) + (2 x 63.636363)

174.53 = 3.36 + 30 + 27.2 + 16.17 + 29.2 + 63.63636 + 5.24

27.2 distance to the queen chamber roof

27.2 + 16.17 = 43.37 distance to the bottom of the king chamber floor

33.36 height of the subterranean chamber

33.36 = 3.36 + 10.542 + 19.458


75 x π/ln2 = 339.9270107

2000 x π/ln2 = 9064.720284 = 26.666666 x 339.9270107

4000 x π/ln2 = 18129.44057 = 53.333333 x 339.9270107

Other multipliers are: 80, 106.66666, 136.1 (or 135.9708), 160, 213.33333...


7005.0629 and 7005.10056

2000 x π/ln2 = 9064.720284

9064.720284 = 26.666666 x 339.9270107 = 26.66666sc x 534

26.66666sc = 16.968

534 = 174.53 + 14.134725 + 63.636363 + 14.134725 + 14.134725 + 63.636363 + 14.134725 + 174.53

9064.720284 = 16.968 x (174.53 + 14.134725 + 63.636363 + 14.134725 + 14.134725 + 63.636363 + 14.134725 + 174.53)

9064.720284

2961.425 (174.53 x 16.968)
4281.044 (174.53 x 16.968 + 14.134725 x 16.968 + 63.636363 x 16.968)
4760.72 (4281.044 + 2 x 14.134725 x 16.968)
5840.5 (4760.72 + 63.636363 x 16.968)
6080.34 (5840.5 + 14.134725 x 16.968)
7249.03 (6080.34 + 5.24 x 16.968 + 63.636363 x 16.968)

6169.2511 (6080.34 + 5.24 x 16.968)
6974.53 (6169.2511 + 47.459 x 16.968)   
(63.63636 - 16.1773 = 47.459)
7087.0647 (6974.53 + 6.6319 x 16.968)
(16.1773 - 9.5454 = 6.6319)

7009.3 (7087.0647 - 1.68632 x 16.968 - 1.2576 x 16.968 - 0.93895 x 16.968 - 0.7 x 16.968)

2.74985 - 0.7 = 2.04985

2.04985
0.521768
0.307477
0.20498
0.10249

0.20498 x 16.968 = 3.4781

7009.3 - 3.4781 = 7005.822

7009.3 - 0.10249 x 16.968 = 7007.56


9064.72028
2719.416
2307.234
1812.944
906.472

(subdivisions for the first zeta function, 534 - 160 - 136.1 - 53.4 - 26.7)

8158.248
7251.776
6757.3863
6345.3

(subdivisions for the second zeta function, 9064.72028 - 906.472 = 8158.248)

7251.776 - 6757.386 = 494.39

494.39
148.317

346.073
103.822
88.089

6757.386 + 148.317 + 103.822 = 7009.525


17143.786 and 17143.8218

4000 x π/ln2 = 18129.44057

14499.77 (174.53 x 33.94 + 4 x 14.134725 x 33.94 + 2 x 63.636363 x 33.94 + 5.24 x 33.94 + 63.6363 x 33.94)

15490.82 (14499.77 + 29.2 x 33.94)

16962.8 (15490.82 + 43.37 x 33.94)

17140.64 (16962.8 + 5.24 x 33.94)

1891 x 2π/ln2 = 17141.386


400 x π/ln2 = 1812.944

18129.44
16316.496

400 x π/ln2 = 534 x 3.394

16908.85 (16316.496 + 174.53 x 3.394)

16.956.824 (16908.85 + 14.134725 x 3.394)

17172.8 (16908.85 + 63.6363 x 3.394)


40 x π/ln2 = 534 x 0.3394

17041.45
17222.694

1900 x 2π/ln2 = 17222.968

17100.685 (17041.45 + 174.53 x .3394)

17127.081 (17100.685 + 14.134725 x 0.3394 + 63.6363 x 0.3394)

17131.88 (17127.081 + 14.134725 x 0.3394)

1890 x 2π/ln2 = 17132.321

17158.676 (17131.88 + 14.134725 x 0.3394 + 63.636363 x 0.3394)

1893 x 2π/ln2 = 17159.51

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 01, 2019, 10:38:53 AM
UPPER/LOWER BOUNDS FOR THE SIX GATES III: ISLAND OF CALIFORNIA/VERMIAN SEA

A tremendous geological/astronomical upheaval occurred during the 18th century (new radical chronology of history).

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1936055#msg1936055 (part I)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1938384#msg1938384 (part II)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1938393#msg1938393 (part III)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1938396#msg1938396 (part IV)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1635693#msg1635693 (extinction of the mammoths)

Before the occurrence of this cosmic tribulation, California was depicted as an island on over 250 maps prior to 1760 AD.

(https://i.ibb.co/SNTdWWv/cal1.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/zFjKBZQ/cal2.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/BPq6gZd/cal3.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/cQGhhj8/cal4.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/9bP9R04/cal5.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/Hh9t1HP/cal6.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/gJbbV1g/cal7.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/jVv2Vm5/cal8.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/60wKNvm/cal9.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/Jj3ZL6Q/cal10.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/dWcZ5KT/cal11.jpg)

After 1760 AD, California is illustrated as a peninsula on maps:

(https://i.ibb.co/LQnmQW0/cal01.jpg)

The Vermian Sea:

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/75/California_island_Vinckeboons5.jpg/800px-California_island_Vinckeboons5.jpg)

Johannes Vingboons map, 1650

Virtually all modern historians simply state that these maps are in error; however, all of these 250 maps portray North America accurately.

Even the proponents of the new chronology of history are faced with a dilemma, and also declare that these maps were drawn erroneously. However, they are baffled when they examine the revealing details of these maps, which cannot be denied.

Other researchers have said that these maps belong to an ancient advanced civilization which had the scientific tools at its disposal to create them. Yet, these maps obviously were in common use during the first decades of the 18th century and they do not feature anything out of the ordinary which would not belong to that time period (cartography, geography).

In order to explain the monumental discrepancy featured on these maps (California being depicted as an island), historians in the 19th century invented the legend of Eusebio Kino (the priest who walked from New Mexico to California in 1705 AD). However, as has been precisely proven, there was no Gregorian calendar reform in 1582 AD:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg758652#msg758652


Before 1760, the largest country in the world was Tartary (Russian Golden Horde), as illustrated on many maps from that period:

(https://img.raremaps.com/xlarge/57454mp2.jpg)
(https://www.stolenhistory.org/attachments/1754-i-e-carte-de-l%E2%80%99asie-jpg.1431/)

Tartary also included Alaska, most of western Canada and most of the western and central areas of the United States of America.

Before the great upheaval, Siberia had a subtropical climate; after the cosmic cataclysm, Siberia was covered by ice, and the Golden Horde could no longer defend/protect its territories (this is the reason why a large portion of the territory depicting North America is shown as no man's land, since before 1760 AD the Golden Horde would not permit any European explorer to make maps/detailed surveys of their region).

The upheaval was caused by the planets Venus and Typhon (Mercury).

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1938506#msg1938506 (Venus argon 36 and argon 40 age)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1938793#msg1938793 (Venus carbon dioxide age)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1938826#msg1938826 (Venus neon/krypton age)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1939336#msg1939336 (Venus and Earth spin resonance)


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1935048#msg1935048 (the interval of assured reliability for Newton's equations of gravitational motion is at most three hundred years)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 02, 2019, 02:59:16 AM
ISLAND OF CALIFORNIA/VERMIAN SEA II

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-_IynJcLH9PY/VRr-oTu8aMI/AAAAAAAAC7I/0rPi8_FtZmw/s1600/serp.jpg)

https://searchworks.stanford.edu/catalog?f%5Bcollection%5D%5B%5D=zb871zd0767

Glen McLaughlin, California as an Island Collection, 708 items

G. McLaughlin published 249 of these maps in "The Mapping of California As An Island: An Illustrated Checklist ". The entire collection includes over 750 maps.

So, unless there was a colossal stone skipping project (either at the end of the 18th century, or at the beginning of the 19th century) using either ball lightning technology or massive labor for the necessary land mass, historians are going to have to accept the undeniable fact that before 1760 AD California was indeed an island, and that a tremendous geological upheaval pushed the Pacific coast eastward about 200 miles during the same time period.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 03, 2019, 01:55:22 AM
ISLAND OF CALIFORNIA/VERMIAN SEA III

I hold it to be certain and proven that the whole Kingdom of California discovered on this voyage, is the largest island known or which has been discovered up to the present day, and that it is separated from the provinces of New Mexico by the Mediterranean Sea of California, which some call "Mar de Cortes"

Antonio de la Ascension, assistant cosmographer for Vizcaino's voyage

Wagner, Spanish Voyages

An intriguing analysis of Johannes Vingboons' map (1650 AD).

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/75/California_island_Vinckeboons5.jpg/800px-California_island_Vinckeboons5.jpg)

"The Grand Canyon does not appear on any maps of California as an island that I have found, and is certainly not on the map used for this study, the Vingboons map of 1651. In fact, on the Vingboons map, two rivers cross the location of the Grand Canyon.

An even greater problem is that the map also had to predate the uplift of the Nevada-Utah-Wyoming area that followed the end of the latest continental drift event in North America.

The routes of rivers changed. The Rio Grande, shown on the Vingboons map as the Rio de Norte, which used to flow into the Gulf of California, was forced to flow to the Gulf of Mexico. The map places a geologically recent date on continental uplift, the uplift having happened after the map was made, putting it within the historical presence of humans on earth.

In the following series of articles, I analyze the Johannes Vingboons "California as an Island" map area by area. I show that the makers of the original map possessed a detailed knowledge of the geography of western North America. Correlation of features on the map to actual locations demonstrates that the map is very accurate.

The coast of Mexico south of Hermosillo is portrayed close to how it looks today, but with some significant changes due to either an increasing land elevation or a decreasing ocean level (or both) of as much as a few hundred feet. the mountain range on the west side of the Rio del Norte turns out to very accurately map the Wasatch mountains, after one shifts them north three degrees to the correct latitude.

On the sides of the map are latitude marks in degrees. We will find that Vingboons' latitude scale must be shifted in varying amounts because his source maps were in sections pieced together and some sections were not properly placed. But within each area the map is exceptionally accurate, far more accurate than a Spanish explorer in the 1500s could produce.

Besides the obvious fact that California is separated from the mainland, there are a number of other things to note: the Rio Del Norte running prominently south from the lake in Wyoming empties well south of where the Colorado River meets the gulf today, and so is not the Colorado. As we shall see, the path of the central part of the Rio Del Norte matches exactly to the path of the northern part of the Rio Grande, which is also called Rio Del Norte, oddly enough. Also note there is no Grand Canyon or Sierra Nevada range. In fact there are two rivers running through where the Grand Canyon is located. The lack of the Grand Canyon indicates this map was made before the end of the ice age, before the Great Basin area (Utah and Nevada) glaciers broke through their ice dam and carved the canyon in a very short time.

(http://www.californiaasanisland.org/images/California%20as%20an%20island%20-%20Rio%20del%20Norte%20southern%20half.jpg)

Following the river valley up from Hermosillo we find ourselves following a transverse river valley, cutting through the mountain ranges at right angles. This river valley is now home to the Rio Sonora. This is the path Coronado took on his campaign of conquest in 1540, (The Coronado Expedition to Tierra Nueva, Richard Flint, page 77) Why didn't Coronado mention a river flowing all the way from Hermosillo to the Rockies? And if this river is just a creation of Vingboons or someone else of that time period, how is it that it lines up so well with the delta at Hermosillo and traces the path of the Rio Grande through the Rockies?

Notice where the river intersects the present day Rio Grande just south of "Truth or Consequences", New Mexico (northwest of El Paso). From this point north, the alignment between the Rio del Norte and the Rio Grande is undeniable. We can follow the river up into the large ellipse of the San Luis Valley in southern Colorado, where the Rio Grande turns west. We have a map of the northern part of the Rio Grande long before this area was explored by cartographers equipped to make such a map. Where did this information come from?

(http://www.californiaasanisland.org/images/California%20as%20an%20island%20-%20Rio%20del%20Norte%20thru%20Rockies.jpg)

Looking at the entire path of the river, if the Spanish, or other post-Columbus explorers provided the information for Vingboons, why didn't they show the modern path of the Rio Grande, emptying into the Gulf of Mexico? And if they didn't provide the information, then who did? And when? How long ago did the Rockies empty into the Gulf of California?

The Rio del Norte originates from a large lake and drains a large part of the country into the Gulf of California, so we would assume it to be a major river. We would expect to find some evidence of a river delta if we went down the coast of the Gulf looking for it. And indeed, we find at Hermosillo more than we expected. (It was necessary to rotate this part of the Vingboons map by six degrees counterclockwise to align the Vingboons map with the terrain view from Google Earth.)

Hermosillo lies at the top of a delta that extends nearly fifty miles along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico. The delta is comparable in size to the delta of the Mississippi or the Colorado. There is not another delta like it on the Gulf of California coast. The entire delta is being farmed, due to its good quality alluvial soil.

(http://www.californiaasanisland.org/images/california%20as%20an%20island%20-%20Hermosillo.jpg)

This delta was not formed by the present day Sonora River, because I don't believe that the Sonora River drains nearly a large enough area to produce such a delta. The Mississippi river drains a huge area and has no larger of a delta.

Vingboons' coastline of the river at Hermosillo matches up well with the modern banks of the channel in which Hermosillo lies. The bends in the Sonora river match with Vingboons' river also. This information could have been obtained from the Spanish, although, as I have mentioned elsewhere, they would not have given it to him, and they probably didn't have it, as they no details of inland geography show up on any maps of this area that I have found.

Finally, it is obvious that the Vingboons coastline is quite a ways inland of today's coastline. The current elevation of the Vingboons coastline shows that the ocean would have had to have been about 300 feet higher along the delta. The removal of water from the ocean by the current polar ice caps might be have caused this, placing Vingboons's source map before the ice age. Or an upward movement of the tectonic plates could have lifted this entire area as it did all of Nevada, Utah, and Colorado. The Great Basin area of Nevada-Utah-Colorado was uplifted by over 7000 feet, so 300 feet here would not be too hard. The "Gulf of California eastern shore" page looks at the Vingboons coastline south of Hermosillo. We find that it also can be aligned with a line well inland of the present coast corresponding an ocean level about 300 feet higher.

(http://www.californiaasanisland.org/images/california%20as%20an%20island%20-%20wasatch%20mountains.jpg)

Looking on the map to the west of the Rio del Norte, we find a mountain range that, when overlaid on the Wasatch mountains of Utah, fits beautifully. Note the alignment of both the Snake River Valley, and the Great Salt Lake. Note the ends of the range on the map line up exactly with the actual north and south extents of the range. The extension of the mountain range to the west lines up with Matterhorn Peak in the Humbolt National Forest, northwest of the Great Salt Lake.

To line up the map's mountain peaks with the actual latitudes of the Wasatch mountains, it was necessary to shift the map image about three degrees north from Vingboon's coordinates. This need for a shift occurs in other areas of the map and is evidence that Vingboon's source map was made from smaller maps pieced together. It is also evidence that Vingboons was not using maps or observations from contemporary sources, or they would have reported the correct latitude.

What then was the source of information when the first California as an Island map was published in the 1620s, or Vingboon's information in 1650? This area was not explored by western people until the following century, and even then the information was not made public until the 1800s:

"Several expeditions,including those of Father Eusebio Kino, José de Urrútia and Nicolás de Lafora, and Father Silvestre Vélez de Escalante, had explored large parts of the southwest. However, the geography of this region remained virtually unknown outside the Spanish empire, since the maps and accounts of Spanish exploration remained in manuscript and were not published. Not until the beginning of the nineteenth century, when the noted German geographer Alexander von Humboldt visited Mexico City and was given access to the Spanish archives, did this information become more widely available."

Obviously a very good map of the Wasatch range was made by someone well before 1620.

(http://www.californiaasanisland.org/images/california%20as%20an%20island%20-%20Rocky%20Mountains.jpg)

Try as one may, and I have, one cannot align the Rocky Mountain range on Vingboons map with our Rocky mountains. There is just no mountain range to the southeast of the Rockies that sticks out into northern Texas and Oklahoma. Having worked the problem over for hours, I finally sat back to try to look at the problem from a different direction. That's when pieces suddenly came together: There is a ridge at the southern end of the great plateau that runs across northern Arizona and New Mexico. I had not found a corresponding mountain range on Vingboons map, but had put the problem aside. Now I noticed that the west end of this ridge curves down and then runs east. Hmmm... the south end of Vingboon's Rockies curves down and then east. Could it be? Let's try taking the southern half of Vingboons' "Rockies" and shifting them west into Arizona.

(http://www.californiaasanisland.org/images/california%20as%20an%20island%20-%20Rocky%20Mountains%20southern%20half.jpg)

One could not ask for a better fit. We have to raise the section about one degree north, but we have had to do that to other parts of the map already. The person who put together Vingboons' source map simply got a piece in the wrong place. How were they to know? They had never been there. The original mapmakers who had divided up their main map into smaller detailed sections had chosen to split it at a logical break in the mountains at Arizona's northern border.

The eastern shore of the Gulf of California is detailed, on Vingboon's map, with rivers that start in the mountains and run straight southwest to the ocean. Apparently the Spanish names of the rivers were available to Vingboons, because he includes them on his map. As usual, Vingboons seems to be using the Spanish explorer's latitudes of the rivers and towns to place labels on the map.

We can use the rivers as landmarks to make sure we are in the right place. However, the ocean level has lowered or the land has risen several hundred feet since Vingboons' source maps were made, with the result that Vingboons' shoreline is shown well inland of where it is today. It was frustrating trying to match the old map to the new until I understood this.

As reference points, Rio del Norte is lined up with Hermosillo, and the fork in the forked river in the lower left is lined up with the fork in Vingboon's forked river. Shifting the Vingboons map the usual one degree south for this area, we arrive at this view.

(http://www.californiaasanisland.org/images/california%20as%20an%20island%20-%20Hermosillo%20coastline%20south.jpg)

The coastline between Hermosillo and Guaymas runs along a north to south ridgeline.  The coastline turns in to run up into the valley just east of Guaymas, then back south to go around a small hill, then back up the next valley and so on. The match is excellent, it's just that Vingboons' coast matches where the coastline would be if the ocean level were about 300 feet higher. How did he do this from Spanish exploration records? Why would he do this from Spanish exploration record? Obviously he would have no reason to. When was the ocean 300 feet higher? Before the polar caps formed, in the days that Hapgood shows us the mountains under the Antarctica ice cap were mapped, before the ice age, and before the Atlantic Ocean floor cooled and sank.

This exercise can be continued south down the coast but from here we will proceed north toward the most interesting part of the map, the four islands.

(http://www.californiaasanisland.org/images/california%20as%20an%20island%20-%20three%20degree%20gap.jpg)

When we try to follow the coastline south from the Phoenix area, we suddenly discover a big problem: the mouth of the Rio del Norte at Hermosillo is in the wrong place. I eventually discovered that there are three degrees of latitude missing somewhere between these two points. I believe the gap should be placed just south of Phoenix as I have shown on the map here. The coastline I have marked in green is the section that needs to be lowered. I have shown it in red at the bottom of the map where it should be.

But what do we do about the missing three degrees? I don't think it is a coincidence that the amount of shift, three degrees, is the difference between the existing north end of the Gulf of California, and the location of the north end of the Gulf found on some maps from the 1500s. I also don't think it is a coincidence that the location of the top of the gap at the latitude of Phoenix corresponds to the latitude of the north end of the Salton Sea. Polk has a map (page 150) by Domingo del Castillo made in 1541 that shows the top of the Gulf of California at 33.5 degrees latitude. That is the latitude of the north end of the present day Salton Sea. Looking at elevations of this area on Google Earth, it looks like the land needs to be only about 40 feet lower for the Gulf to encroach all the way to the Salton Sea. Check into the USGS map of earthquakes in California and you will find that the fault on the west side of the Imperial Valley is one of the most active in the country. A forty foot change in elevation over time is not out of the question. If Vingboons, or whoever put the maps together, had conflicting maps of this area showing a three degree difference in the location of the north end of the gulf, it could have been the cause of his arranging the maps with the Wasatch mountains three degrees too far south, and the other related errors.

(http://www.californiaasanisland.org/images/california%20as%20an%20island%20-%20four%20islands.jpg)

(http://www.californiaasanisland.org/images/california%20as%20an%20island%20-%20island%20A%20enlargement.jpg)

Now we will venture north from the Gulf of California into what will be the most fascinating areas of the map: the channel separating the island of California from the continent. The locations of the four islands in Vingboons' passage prompted this entire study. My stumbling on their locations was as much divine guidance as perseverance. Once one figures out some reference points, the process of identifying ancient map features within the modern mountain terrain is much easier.

This is a very busy section of Vingboons' map. Let's start with an easy to see reference point, and one of the jewels of the map, the northern island, which I have dubbed Island A. I was happy to find exactly what I was looking for, but I didn't expect such a good fit. For reference, at the southern end of the island is George BM peak. The mountain range extending north from George BM forms the east side of the island. A prominent peak whose name I have yet to find marks the northern tip. The west side of the island is formed by the next range to the west. The valley between the two ranges causes the characteristic dent in the north end of the island.

Other features line up well with the modern landscape. The lake, Lago de Ora, lines up with with the valley containing Lund, Nevada, just southwest of Ely. The second from north island, which I have dubbed island B, lines up with with Burnt Mountain, near the nuclear testing facility. In general identifying exact features on the western shore of the passage is difficult, but here at least, the Weepah Hills, west of Tonapah look like a good fit with the bulge in the coastline. The entire inland passage has suffered a huge upheaval of thousands of feet, so getting even a general fit is gratifying. As has been the case for most of the map, alignment for this section required shifting Vingboon's map about one degree north. The Vingboons map was also rotated two degrees clockwise.

On the coastline between Island B and Lago de Ora (the lake east of island A) is a point of land that matches well with Stairstep Mountain in Humboldt National Forest.

Island C, third from the north, matches very nicely with Mt. Charleston, just west of Las Vegas, NV. Just east of Las Vegas is a point of land that corresponds to Muddy Mountains on the west side of Lake Mead. The north branch of the lake follows what Vingboons labels Rio de Anguch, which drains what is now Nevada desert.

Island D lies at the southern tip of Nevada, and has no distinguishing mountain, so I suppose it was just a flat sort of island that blends in with the terrain now.

Just east of island D is a point of land that matches up with Hualapai Mountain, just southeast of Kingman, AZ. And just off the tip is an island that matches up with a little bump of land that has no name on Google Earth or Google maps, but it is a good match all the same. This point of land is the west side of an inlet that Vingboons names R. del Thicon or Thiron (I have trouble with some of Vingboons letters). This river may have gotten its name from the Rio del Tizon that Hernando de Alarcon sailed up to sometime shortly after 1538 (Polk, page 146) which was probably the Colorado before it enters the Grand Canyon. This river extends north through the pass at the Finger Canyons of Zion National park, just northeast of St. George, UT to the Salt Lake area where it drains an area that is now landlocked. There will be a better view of this in "The North End of the Passage" section. This river also passes right through the middle of the Grand Canyon. This presents a problem, for either the mapmakers missed the Grand Canyon, which is hard to believe, or it wasn't there yet. And if it wasn't there yet, then, as I mentioned earlier, this map predates the end of the ice age, for it was the breaking of the ice dam at the end of the ice age that drained the great lake to the north east and carved the Grand Canyon. To add to the mystery, the other river branching off the inlet, R. de Coral, also crosses the Grand Canyon, giving us a second instance of the same problem."

Donald Mark Kennedy
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 03, 2019, 01:58:09 AM
ISLAND OF CALIFORNIA/VERMIAN SEA IV

(http://www.californiaasanisland.org/images/california%20as%20an%20island%20-%20inland%20east%20coast%20boise%20to%20pheonix.jpg)

"Now let's look at the eastern side of the north end of the inland passage. I have shown the entire east coast from Phoenix at the south end to Boise at the north in order to show that the map scale is consistent throughout the entire east coast of the passage. The islands line up correctly, as does Phoenix at the south end of this map. The background map is from Marble with Mercator projection, which gives very good alignment with Vingboons all the way up the east coast.

The north end of Vingboons' eastern coastline fits nicely into the valley that Boise, Idaho rests in. The little bit of coastline north of Boise follows the base of the mountains. The bump in the coastline just southwest of Boise wraps nicely around the Owyhee mountains in the southwest corner of Idaho. Vingboons' unnamed river northeast of the north most island runs northeast up the valley toward Elko, Nevada. Today a river runs down this valley through Elko. To the north of Boise the Vingboons map trails off into nothingness. However, some other maps of the time, such as the Sanson map of 1657, show a rectangular peninsula pointing west from the end of Vingboons' coastline. I have so far avoided branching off into other maps because this project was so large by itself, but here I will just point out this one feature. The name of the peninsula on the Sanson map is Agubela de Cato. It points generally northwest on Sanson's and most all other maps of the era, but it points more southwest in the Louis Hennepin map of 1697 (or 1698 depending on your source). I think that it matches up well enough with the rectangular plateau northwest of Boise to be more than a coincidence. You can see the plateau in the very upper left corner of the above image.

(http://www.californiaasanisland.org/images/California_island_Vinckeboons%20northern%20coast.jpg)

This section has been rewritten extensively as I now better understand what the map is telling us about the changes to the Pacific coastline over time. Since the map was made, the Pacific coast has been pushed eastward about 200 miles. The area that was pushed eastward extends from Point Concepcion at the south end to the top of the island at the north. This section of the coastline bears no relation to today's coastline.

The oceans were about 300 feet higher at the time the map was made. As the ocean level dropped, the lower levels of the mountains north of this flat coastline were exposed, with Willamette Valley between the two ranges. A great deal of variations in other California as an island maps can be accounted for by changing ocean level during the ice age, as the ocean water was transferred to the land in the form of the great glaciers, and as the Atlantic Ocean floor gradually dropped after the flood. Equally important would have been the uplift of the western states caused by rising magma under Yellowstone.

The salt lakes east of the northeast corner are evidence that there was a lot of salt water left there after the ocean receeded.

South on the Pacific side from the flat island top, we find the section from the top of the map to Point Concepcion that extends 200 miles farther out into the Pacific than it does today. Because the geography of the coastline is so different from the present day, the Vingboons map of the central coast of California offers no points of alignment with modern landmarks. Vingboons adorned this section of the coast with many names of features that could not have had any resemblance to what the early explorers saw, but gave the ancient features the names given by the Spanish to the modern features found by the Spanish at each latitude.

What caused this 200 mile eastward movement of the coastline? While changing ocean level played a small part in the shape of the coast, the biggest cause was plate movement of the Pacific seafloor. Two significant rifts extend across the Pacific, starting at the Hawaiian Islands chain and meeting the continent near Eureka and Point Conception. These rifts do not stop at the Pacific coastline. The northern rift continues to the Atlantic Ocean at New York, and the southern rift continues to the active earthquake zone at the coast of North Carolina. These rifts gradually buckled the continent from east to west, starting during the Flood with the Appalachians. The Rockies were pushed up next, after the flood, then the Wasatch range and the folded ridges of Nevada. Finally, later, after the Flood, and after the Vingboons map was made, the Sierra Nevada and California Coastal ranges were pushed up. The formation of these last two ranges pushed the coastline of the map east by over 200 miles to where it is today.

(http://www.californiaasanisland.org/images/california%20as%20an%20island%20-%20baja.jpg)

The latitude of the southern tip of Baja lines up exactly with the true latitude. This is reasonable given that most of the Spanish activity in the area was inside the Gulf of California, so it was a well known feature. The shape of Vingboons' map, however doesn't really look like Baja California as we know it. Interestingly, though, it does look quite a bit like the Baja continental shelf. For the Spanish to map the continental shelf and send that information back to Europe for Vingboons to put it on his map obviously would never have happened. But due to changing ocean levels the ancient mapmakers saw a much different coastline than we see today. That the Vingboons coastline follows the continental shelf implies that in this area, since the ocean level was higher by 300 feet, the peninsula was even more than 300 feet higher and has since sunk considerably. There may be a geologic connection to the continental shelf off Southern California sinking a couple thousand feet."

Donald Mark Kennedy

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 04, 2019, 01:15:37 AM
ISLAND OF CALIFORNIA/VERMIAN SEA V

(https://cdn.globalauctionplatform.com/3877ffff-aefc-4e37-a83a-a58300d7771a/efcc0e59-2066-4a54-e2f2-3851c6c54e9d/original.jpg)

Map of North America (1719 AD), Herman Moll (England's foremost cartographer of his day, geographer to the King)

“California is undoubtedly an island. Why, I have had in my office mariners who have sailed round it.”

Herman Moll, 1711 AD

(https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1404/2135/products/81020a_2048x2048.jpg?v=1485832735)

Map of California, 1705 AD, Nicholas de Fer (the most well-known mapmaker of France of his day)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 10, 2019, 12:39:52 AM
ISLAND OF CALIFORNIA/VERMIAN SEA VI

The Gizeh pyramid was constructed some 350 years ago, the ultimate proof:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1834389#msg1834389 (four consecutive messages: the use of the arctangent series at Gizeh)

In the new radical chronology of history, the Great Flood occurred some 310 years ago, while the extinction of the mammoth took place some 250 years ago.

In modern times the ivory market of the world still found its main source of supply in the tundras of northeast Siberia. In 1799 the frozen bodies of mammoths were found in these tundras. The corpses were well preserved, and the sledge dogs ate the flesh unharmed. "The flesh is fibrous and marbled with fat" and "looks as fresh as well frozen beef."

Observation of D.F. Hertz in B. Digby, The Mammoth (1926), pg. 9

According to the official chronology of history, the end of the Ice Age could have occurred no earlier than 3500 years ago. It is obvious that the dogs ate unharmed the fibrous flesh (marbled with fat) of the mammoths only because the end of the Ice Age took place a few decades earlier; there is no way that the mammoths' flesh would have been perfectly preserved over a time period of 3500 years.

The siege of Troy (Constantinople) must have happened either simultaneously with the end of the Ice Age, or just a little earlier (not more than 25 years): the authors of the Iliad describe clearly a cosmic/planetary conflagration.

'These excerpts from the Iliad show that some cosmic drama was projected upon the fields of Troy. The commentators were aware that originally Ares was not merely the god of war, and that this quality is a deduced and secondary one. The Greek Ares is the Latin planet Mars; it is so stated in classic literature a multitude of times. In the so-called Homeric poems, too, it is said that Ares is a planet. The Homeric hymn to Ares reads:
"Most mighty Ares ... chieftain of valor, revolving thy fiery circle in ether among the seven wandering stars [planets], where thy flaming steeds ever uplift thee above the third chariot." '

The Odyssey of Homer with the Hymns, 1878, (transl. A. Buckley), p. 399. The translation by H. Evelyn-White (Hesiod volume in the Loeb Classical Library) is: "Who whirl your fiery sphere among the planets in their sevenfold courses through the ether wherein your blazing steeds ever bear you above the third firmament of heaven."
Allen, Holliday, and Sikes: The Homeric Hymns (1936), p. 385, regard the hymn to Ares as post-Homeric.

"We find in Lucian a statement which corroborates the interpretation of the cosmic drama in the Iliad. This author of the second century of the present era writes in his work On Astrology this most significant and most neglected commentary on the Homeric epics:

"All that he [Homer] hath said of Venus and of Mars his passion, is also manifestly composed from no other source than this science [astrology]. Indeed, it is the conjuncture of Venus and Mars that creates the poetry of Homer."

Lucian is unaware that Athene is the goddess of the planet Venus, and yet he knows the real meaning of the cosmic plot of the Homeric epic, which shows that the sources of his instruction in astrology were cognizant of the facts of the celestial drama."

Lucian: Astrology (transl. A. M. Harmon, 1936), Sec. 22.
In the same sentence Lucian identifies Venus with Aphrodite of the Iliad.

All literary works attributed to the Greeks and Romans were invented during the Renaissance (1730 - 1770 AD).


The scientists of the West will not accept the 800 maps which clearly feature California as an island or the maps which depict the largest country in the world (18th century), Tartary. The island of California became a peninsula, and at the same time the subtropical climate of Tartary turned suddenly to a polar weather pattern.

Yet, politically and scientifically, the world is held hostage by two documents which were published exactly in the same century: the Constitution and the Principia (second edition, 1713). If 800 maps which were created and developed within the same century, using accepted scientific principles, cannot be trusted, then certainly a document which can be described from a philosophical/legal/political point of view as weak, should be discarded as well. If the 800 maps are to be simply forgotten and to be put aside, then certainly a simple opinion published by Newton (he had no proofs whatsoever for this statements regarding terrestrial gravity) should be disposed of as well, and start anew. Or even better, scientists should accept the validity of the 800 maps which feature California as an island, and get rid of the two documents which should be replaced with much better versions.



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 11, 2019, 07:36:09 AM
ISLAND OF CALIFORNIA/VERMIAN SEA VII

"What, then, has exterminated so many species and whole genera? The mind, at first, is irresistibly hurried into the belief of some great catastrophe; but thus, to destroy animals, both large and small, in Southern Patagonia in Brazil, on the Cordillera of Peru, in North America up to Behring's Straits, we must shake the entire framework of the globe."

C. Darwin, Journal of Researches into the Natural History and Geology of Countries Visited During the Voyage of the H.M.S. Beagle Round the World, (London, 1834), pp. 169-170

"It is conceivable that other impact events have occurred within or near historical times. I have occasionally mused that one or two such events may be recorded vaguely in our cultural memory, perhaps meandering and evolving through generations of myth and legend, ending up as religious stories of miraculous events. We have no evidence one way or the other; but it is at least conceivable."

E. H. Levy, "Early impacts: Earth emergent from its cosmic environment," Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids, Tom Gehrels ed., (Tucson, Ariz., 1994), p. 6
( E. H. Levy, the co-discoverer of Comet Shoemaker-Levy)

https://nhmu.utah.edu/sites/default/files/092518_nhmu_camel_01.jpg

"Some fossils look rather fresh. Part of a camel skull found near Fillmore, Utah, is a prime example.
 
Back in 1928, while exploring near Meadow Hot Springs, a pair of high school students found an unusual skull at the back of a lava tube. The braincase and piece of jaw didn’t seem to be from a cow, horse, or other familiar animal, and so it eventually came to the attention of University of Utah professor A.L. Mathews. Mathews, in turn, sent the news along to famed paleontologist Alfred Sherwood Romer at the University of Chicago. And what Romer saw in that skull dramatically affected what experts thought of as the timeline of Ice Age life.

Romer quickly identified the skull as that of a camel. But what species? The fact that the skull still looked relatively fresh suggested that the animal had died in the relatively recent past.

There was a possibility that the camel might have been one of the dromedaries that were introduced to the western United States as pack animals during the mid- and late-19th century. But the anatomy was all wrong. The skull, Romer concluded, must have come from an extinct North American species that paleontologists knew as Camelops and had previously been found in places like the La Brea asphalt seeps in Los Angeles, California."


". . . discovery in Utah of the unfossilized skull of an extinct camel, with a bit of dried flesh still clinging to the bone. The relatively fresh condition of the specimen argues that its one-time possessor died only a few centuries or millennia ago; present ideas hold that this particular sort of camel did become extinct a half-million years ago. If this camel really died so long ago, the bone should have been largely or wholly replaced by stone, and there should have been no flesh on it all."

Science Newsletter, Vol. 14, (1928), p. 81

At long last, mainstream science has to acknowledge that the cataclysmic event which put an end to the last Ice Age must have occurred at most only a few centuries ago.


"We are indebted to Dr. Clark Friend for informing us that reindeer which fall nowadays down crevasses in the Greenland ice are subsequently found to be in an unpleasantly putrefied condition. The situation is that, no matter how cold the air temperature surrounding the carcass of the reindeer, the body heat of the dead animal is sufficient to promote bacterial decomposition of the interior.

Yet in spite of the greater body weight of the Siberian mammoths, and of the consequent greater heat capacity of the mammoth, putrefaction did not take place within them. This is certain proof that the mammoths were robbed of their body heat at an extremely rapid rate, much quicker than conduction in [present day temperatures of] cold air will give."

Sir Fred Hoyle

Elizabeth J. Butler, Fred Hoyle, "On the Effect of a Sudden Change in the Albedo of the Earth," Astrophysics and Space Science, Vol. 60, (1979), p. 505: see also, Sir Fred Hoyle, Ice: The Ultimate Human Catastrophe, (New York, 1981), p. 160


What is required is extremely cold temperatures to freeze dry an animal. Jody Dillow pointed out:

"An analysis is presented by the temperature drop necessary at the time of its death to leave the mammoth in the state of preservation in which it was found. By using thermodynamic models of the mammoth, it is demonstrated that the animal must have frozen to death in mid-summer by being suddenly overcome by an outside temperature below -150̊F."

Jody Dillow, "The Catastrophic Deep-Freeze of the Beresovka Mammoth," Creation Research Science Quarterly, Vol. 14, (1977), p. 5

(https://i.ibb.co/HCxs7LR/amm1.jpg)

However, more recent studies have found that the necessary temperature must have been at least -300F.

But this is almost the temperature of outer space.

(https://i.ibb.co/6JqGK6N/amm2.jpg)


"The farther north we penetrate, in greater abundance are found vestiges of elephants, tortoises, crocodiles, and other beasts and reptiles of a tropical climate. These are found in greatest abundance along the banks of rivers flowing from the north, seeming to prove that there is, somewhere beyond the frozen belt not yet penetrated by man, a warm country, with climate and productions similar to those of the tropics. Along the borders of Siberia, the remains of tropical animals are so commonly found as to constitute a considerable source of commerce. In Asiatic Russia there is not a single stream or river on the banks or in the bed of which are not found bones of elephants, or other animals equally strange to that climate. In 1799, a fisherman of Ton-goose, named Schumachoff, discovered a tremendous elephant--perfect as when thousands of years before, death had arrested its breath--encased in a huge block of ice, clear as crystal. This man, like his neighbors, was accustomed, at the end of the fishing season, to employ his time in hunting for elephant tusks along the banks of the Lena River, for the sake of the bounty offered by the government; and while so employed, in the ardor of his pursuit, he passed several miles beyond his companions when suddenly there appeared before his wondering eyes the miraculous sight above alluded to.

For several successive seasons from the time when he first discovered it, did Schumachoff make stealthy journeys to his crystallized monster, never finding courage sufficient to approach it closely, but simply standing at a distance, once more to feast his eyes on the wonder, and to carry away in his thick head enough of terror to guarantee him a nightmare for a whole month of nights. At last he found the imprisoned carcass stranded on a convenient sand-bank, and boldly attacked it, broke the glittering casing, and roughly despoiling the great beast of its splendid tusks, hurried home and sold them for fifty roubles, leaving the well preserved bulk of elephant meat, yet juicy and without taint, to be devoured by wolves and bears or hacked to bits by natives as food for their dogs."

J. W. Bud, "The World's Wonders"

"For some time the flesh of this animal was cut off for dog-meat by people around, and bears, wolves, gluttons, and foxes, fed upon it till the skeleton was nearly cleared of its flesh. About three-fourths of the skin, which was of a reddish-gray color, and covered with reddish wool and black hairs about eight inches long, was saved, and such was its weight, that it required ten men to remove it; the bones of the head, with the tusks, weighed four hundred and sixteen pounds. The skeleton was taken to St. Petersburg, where it may still be seen in the Museum of Natural History. The animal must have been twice the ordinary size of the existing elephant, and it must have weighed at least twenty-thousand pounds."

Dr. H. D. Northrop, "Earth, Sky, and Sea"

"A young Russian engineer, named Benkendorf, in the employ of his government, ascended the Indigirka in a steamer in 1846. The season was unusually warm for Siberia, and the country was flooded with water. The stream, which was greatly swollen, cut new channels in many places, melting the ice and frozen soil. In one of these newly cut channels he discovered a mammoth in an upright position, where it had been overwhelmed, probably thousands of years before. As its head and trunk rose and fell with the surging waters he discovered that it was still fastened in the ice and frozen soil by its hind feet. The monster was secured by throwing ropes and chains over its tusks and head, and after its hind feet were released it was safely landed by the aid of more than fifty men and horses. It proved to be of gigantic size, and the whole body was in a fine state of preservation. In its stomach was found the food that had formed its last repast, which consisted of young shoots of the fir and pine, also young fir cones. On the shoulders and along the back grew stiff hairs about a foot long. The hair was dark brown and coarsely rooted. Under the outer hairs there appeared everywhere a soft, warm and thick wool of a fallow brown color."

"Many of the animals, as the mammoth, rhinoceros, etc., remain undecayed. Even the capillary blood vessels still retain their contents, showing that there was not the slightest decomposition or breaking down of the tissues, but the catastrophe which overwhelmed them was sudden."

http://www.immanuelvelikovsky.com/mammoth.pdf (the best work on the extinction of the mammoths, by Charles Ginenthal)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 12, 2019, 04:30:35 AM
GLOBAL FORMULAS FOR ZETA ZEROS

In the theory of ordinary differential equations, singular perturbations problems are characterized by dynamics operating on multiple scales. It involves finding several different approximate solutions, each of which is valid for part of the range of the independent variable, and then combining these different solutions together to give a single approximate solution that is valid for the whole range of values of the independent variable.

Lehmer pairs and large gaps are the “singular” points/intervals of the distribution of the zeta zeros.

The França-LeClair points first approximation is valid for regular zeta zeros: for both Lehmer pairs and zeta zeros located next to large gaps, a better method/evaluation is needed.

França-LeClair points:

2πe ⋅ eW[(n - 11/8)/e]

11/8 = 1.375

1.375 is a sacred cubit average of 1.361 and 1.4134725.

1.375 - 1.361 = 0.014

1.4134725 - 1.375 = 0.0384725

0.0384725/0.014 = 2.748 = 0.3638963 = 1 - sc

Mathematica software for the Lambert W function:

http://functions.wolfram.com/webMathematica/FunctionEvaluation.jsp?name=ProductLog

The exact formula, ϑ(tn) + limδ→0+ arg ζ(1/2 + δ + itn) = (n - 3/2)π, necessitates the use of higher transcendental functions and complex evaluations of the S(t) term: it is much faster than the Riemann-Siegel asymptotic formula (or any other method involving sums), but it does not reveal the hidden pattern of the distribution of the zeta zeros.

"Riemann's insight followed his discovery of a mathematical looking-glass through which he could gaze at the primes. Alice's world was turned upside down when she stepped through her looking-glass. In contrast, in the strange mathematical world beyond Riemann's glass, the chaos of the primes seemed to be transformed into an ordered pattern as strong as any mathematician could hope for. He conjectured that this order would be maintained however far one stared into the never-ending world beyond the glass. His prediction of an inner harmony on the far side of the mirror would explain why outwardly the primes look so chaotic. The metamorphosis provided by Riemann's mirror, where chaos turns to order, is one which most mathematicians find almost miraculous. The challenge that Riemann left the mathematical world was to prove that the order he thought he could discern was really there."

M. du Sautoy, The Music of the Primes

However, as we have seen already, there is another hidden harmonic structure of the zeta zeros themselves, involving a precise subdivision of the sacred cubit distance according to the following proportions, 26.7, 53.4, 80, 136.1 and 534. It is this fractal algorithm which generates the zeta zeros, which in turn approximate the precise location of the prime numbers.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2082278#msg2082278 (five consecutive messages)

1.375 = 30.3374/100 x π/ln2

2πe ⋅ eW[(n – 1.375)/e]

n = 1000

1419.517764

z1000 = 1419.422481

30/100 x π/ln2
32/100 x π/ln2
34/100 x π/ln2
36/100 x π/ln2
33/100 x π/ln2 = 1.495679

2 x 16.18034 = 32.36068

1.618034 = phi

32.36068/100 x π/ln2 = 1.4667

2πe ⋅ eW[(n – 1.4667)/e]

n = 1000
1419.41146

n = 3
25.078867

n=8
43.69744

The value 1.4667 is very well suited to find at least one of the values of the four main subdivision points obtained from the five elements partition of the 63.636363... interval, using the two counterpropagating zeta functions, (in addition to providing superb estimates of the regular zeta zeros).


However, for Lehmer pairs and zeta zeros located next to a large gap, we need much better estimates.

The best approximations for the consecutive values of  Lehmer pairs, and large gaps are: 1.2727, 0.906472 , 0.72738, and 1.153667 and 1.068, respectively.

1.2727 = 0.6363 x 2
0.906472 = 2π/ln2
286.1 si = 7.2738 (where 286.1 = 450 sacred cubits)
1.153667 = 25.454/100 x π/ln2
26.7 x 4 = 53.4 x 2 = 106.8

The consecutive zeta zeros, with vertical spacing less than the average (L = 2n/ln(T/2n) is the average spacing formula), are located in accordance with this precise formula (these include the Lehmer pairs and strong Lehmer pairs):

T =~ {n ⋅ 2π/ln2 + n ⋅ 2π/ln2 + π/ln2}/2 = π/ln2 x (4n + 1)/2

T =~ {n ⋅ 2π/ln2 + π/ln2 + (n + 1) ⋅ 2π/ln2 }/2 = π/ln2 x (4n + 3)/2

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2110071#msg2110071

Large gaps formula:

32 + 25 x n

16 + 25 x n

8 + 24 x n



17143.786 and 17143.8218, zeta zeros 18859 and 18860

2πe ⋅ eW[(18859 – 1.375)/e] = 17143.335
2πe ⋅ eW[(18860 – 1.375)/e] = 17144.13

2πe ⋅ eW[(18859 – 1.2727)/e] = 17143.4167
2πe ⋅ eW[(18860 – 1.2727)/e] = 17144.211

2πe ⋅ eW[(18859 – 0.906472)/e] = 17143.7075

2πe ⋅ eW[(18859 – 0.72738)/e] = 17143. 84978


7005.0629 and 7005.10056, zeta zeros 6709 and 6710

2πe ⋅ eW[(6709 – 1.375)/e] = 7004.95034
2πe ⋅ eW[(6710 – 1.375)/e] = 7005.846

2πe ⋅ eW[(6709 – 1.2727)/e] = 7005.042
2πe ⋅ eW[(6710 – 1.2727)/e] = 7005.937

http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/zeta_tables/zeros1

40.918719012
43.327073281
48.005150881
49.773832478

2πe ⋅ eW[(8 – 1.375)/e] = 43.994
2πe ⋅ eW[(9 – 1.375)/e] = 47.16513

2πe ⋅ eW[(9 – 1.068)/e] = 48.117

2πe ⋅ eW[(9 – 1.153667)/e] = 47.8525


399.985119876
401.839228601
402.861917764
404.236441800
405.134387460
407.581460387
408.947245502
410.513869193
411.972267804 (zeta zero 210)
413.262736070
415.018809755
415.455214996
418.387705790

2πe ⋅ eW[(210 – 1.375)/e] = 411.85
2πe ⋅ eW[(212 – 1.375)/e] = 414.851
2πe ⋅ eW[(213 – 1.375)/e] = 416.35
2πe ⋅ eW[(214 – 1.375)/e] = 417.84


2πe ⋅ eW[(212 – 1.2727)/e] = 415.0053

2πe ⋅ eW[(212 – 0.960472)/e] = 415.5543


2πe ⋅ eW[(214 – 1.153667)/e] = 418.18

2πe ⋅ eW[(214 – 1.068)/e] = 418.308


n=100000000000718107321

zeta zeros: 15202440116027338092.8183149 and 15202440116027338092.8183868

1.375

15202440116027338092.80324
15202440116027338092.95169

1.2727

15202440116027338092.81844
15202440116027338092.96687

0.906472

15202440116027338092.8728


n=4088664936217

zeta zero: 1034741742903.35376

1.375

1034741742902.9833
1034741742903.226577

1.2727

1034741742903.0081879
1034741742903.2514649

0.72738

1034741742903.14085
1034741742903.384128

0.906472

1034741742903.340559


n=35016977795

zeta zero: 10854395965.14210

1.375

10854395964.617089
10854395964.91249

1.2727

10854395964.6473
10854395964.94271

0.72738

10854395965.1038

0.906472
10854395965.0508948


n=26576

zeta zero (located next to a large gap): 23152.3326

1.375

23152.2447

1.068

23152.47962

1.153667

23152.41407


n=26577 and n= 26578

zeta zeros: 23153.51496 and 23153.57423

1.375

23153.00985
23153.775

1.2727

23153.088
23153.8532

0.72738
23153.50536


(https://image.ibb.co/fRZnvf/leh02.jpg)

(https://image.ibb.co/eHmLgL/leh01.jpg)
Figure 2 shows the argument of ζ'(s)/ζ(s), interpreted as a color, in a region which includes Lehmer’s example. The Riemann zeros 1/2 + iγ6709 and 1/2 + iγ6710 are now poles, while in between we see a zero of ζ'(s) at 0.50062354 + 7005.08185555i, very close to the critical line, even on the scale of this close pair of Riemann zeros.

Computation of the zeros of the first derivative of the zeta function:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1612.08627.pdf (Cauchy integral evaluation)

http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/doc/zeta.derivative.pdf

Lehmer pairs: first approximations using 1.2727, 0.906472 and 0.72738 in the following formulas. The zeros of ζ'(s) next to/closest to these values are then calculated: the zero closest to the ½ line is located right between the Lehmer pair figures, whose value is very well approximated by one of these formulas. The value of the zero of ζ'(s) will be used as a fixed upper bound for both zeta functions approximations.Then, we use the approximation just obtained as a first value for the first zeta function subdivision point; the first value for the second zeta function subdivision point is generated as follows: from the value of the zero of ζ'(s) we substract the figure of the first approximation (using either 1.2727, 0.906472 or 0.72738), then we add this quantity to the zero of ζ'(s) to obtain an approximate value for the consecutive zeta zero which forms the respective Lehmer pair.


Regular zeta zeros/approximation to one of the four main subdivision points formula:

2πe ⋅ eW[(n – 1.4667)/e]


Lehmer pairs global formula:

2πe ⋅ eW[(n – 1.2727)/e]

2πe ⋅ eW[(n – 0.906472)/e]

2πe ⋅ eW[(n – 0.72738)/e]



Zeta zeros located next to large gaps formula:

2πe ⋅ eW[(n – 1.068)/e]

2πe ⋅ eW[(n – 1.153667)/e]


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 05, 2019, 08:14:36 AM
REPORTS OF UFOS GO MAINSTREAM



https://www.foxnews.com/science/christopher-mellon-official-ufo-sightings-real

https://www.foxnews.com/science/navy-pilots-spotted-ufos-flying-at-hypersonic-speeds-report

"On May 26, 2019, the New York Times published a story about five US Navy pilots reporting UFO sightings in 2014 and 2015 off the coast of Florida. The story cites their descriptions of unknown craft that could fly at hypersonic speeds and hover over the ocean. Their reports were handed off to the Pentagon’s Advanced Aerial Threat Identification Program (AATIP).

The five Navy pilots were interviewed by the New York Times reporters about the UFO sightings that occurred while they were conducting training maneuvers off the aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt before deployment to the Middle East. The Times reporters said that due to the 2014 and 2015 sightings, that the Navy upgraded its classified guidance for how pilots are to report UFOs, which now are officially referred to as Unexplained Aerial Phenomena (UAP).

In the Times story, the pilots made clear that no known piloted aircraft could perform the UFO’s complex aerial maneuvers:

What was strange, the pilots said, was that the video showed objects accelerating to hypersonic speed, making sudden stops and instantaneous turns — something beyond the physical limits of a human crew."


However, these instantaneous turns and sudden stops, at hypersonic speeds, mean that the Earth is stationary.

As I have said from the very start, UFOs use either the implosion of the atom/mercury gyro technology or the Biefeld-Brown effect to create a ball lightning shield around them.

The UFO will be shielded from terrestrial gravity.

Given the supposed 29 km/s orbital speed of the Earth, a UFO would disappear instantly from view.

"Over the past few years, observers have watched the craft perform acrobatic maneuvers of an astonishing nature. Apparently most of the saucers do not depend on any propulsion familiar to our science. The lack of any known propulsion system capable of such effects has led many persons to speculate that the owners of the saucers have been able to master the physics of gravitation. The propulsion system used must in some way apply what is popularly called anti-gravity.

But a further, though closely related, enigma is the typical saucer motion. For not only has gravity been conquered, but inertia seems to have been conquered also.

Many reports - some of them apparently authentic - tell of UFOs suddenly appearing in the sky from nowhere and then disappearing, seemingly in an instant. The saucers must be capable of truly extraordinary acceleration. Typical of saucer reports, as they appear in the local presses throughout the world, is the object seen cruising along at a few hundred miles per hour and then, suddenly, seen to dash away at what must be thousands of miles per hour.

In addition to these extraordinary linear accelerations the saucers seem to outwit inertia in other respects. At very high speeds they appear to make perfect right right angle turns and even reversals of direction, without disastrous results to their structure or their crew.

Still another good trick they seem able to move through the atmosphere at rates of speed and at levels of air density which clearly are incompatible with any publicly known technology. As an object moves through the air the friction of the molecules striking its surface causes the material to heat. In our very fast jet interceptors cooling systems are necessary. We all know how meteors entering the earth's atmosphere, and nose cones of missiles re-entering the earth's atmosphere, heat to such a point that in many cases they disintegrate or burn up completely. Yet moving at comparable speeds in a denser atmosphere and do not seem to show these effects.

At stake, in all these maneuvers, is our understanding of the stubborn laws of inertia which govern our world. Newton first formulated these clearly in his double principle that an object at rest tends to remain at rest unless a force is applied, and if a force is applied it tends to take motion in the direction of the applied force and proportionally to it. These Newtonian laws of inertia still are the basis of much of our scientific world view. But combining them with the known molecular binding forces of matter, which are equally fixed in the order of nature - at least so we think - makes the saucer's behavior very difficult to explain.

When the flying saucers accelerate from 0 speed to many thousands of miles an hour in a few seconds, why isn't their internal machinery torn apart and any crew members squashed?

Anyone who has taken a curve at too high a speed knows the persistent tendency of his vehicle to continue along the original line of motion against the force of his tires and steering mechanism.

Similarly when a flying saucer makes a sudden turn, traveling many thousand miles an hour, why don't the molecules or crystals of its metallic structure literally tear apart - from the great strain imposed by the laws of inertia?

And finally, as the saucers rush through the atmosphere why don't the molecules of the atmosphere, striking against the saucer cause heat through friction and eventually burn the object up?

If the saucers are real solid vehicles we must revise our ideas of nature in one of two respects. Either we must conclude that our knowledge of the rules which hold atoms and molecules together is incomplete, or we must revolutionize our concept of inertia. If both alternatives were beyond the reach of modern science there would be no reason to prefer one over the other.

But how, you ask, does this help us explain how flying saucers fly? If the owners of the saucers have been able to devise a revolutionary means of anti-gravity, say an electro-magnetic screen which they put around their craft, this will mean that as the earth's gravity is overcome the gravity-inertia of all the rest of the universe will be overcome also. If the gravitons or ultra particles or fields which account for the gravitation of the earth are screened out the gravitational effect of the rest of the universe will be screened out also. Thus the saucers, with their anti-gravity screen, will be able to fly above the earth and they will be able to ignore the laws of inertia. They will be literally floating in a little cup or envelope where neither gravity nor inertia play any role.

This explains how the saucers can accelerate from zero to thousands of miles an hour and decelerate at the same rate, how they can engage in the dramatic maneuvers reported. Once a force, of whatever kind, impels them in a direction different from their line of movement, there is no tendency for their atoms and molecules to continue moving in their former direction, Thus, there is no strain upon the structure of the ship and the molecular binding forces of its material are not torn apart. Again, its occupants, if they can live in such an inertialess world, are not crushed in the slightest or even disturbed by the gyrations of the superstructure around them. Presumably they could sit quietly reading a book without knowing that their craft actually was doing the most remarkable acrobatics.

The concept of a gravity-inertia screen may also explain why the saucers do not burn up as they speed through the atmosphere. Consider a molecule or atom of gas as bumping along against other atoms in the atmosphere, subject to the laws of inertia as everything else is, but not causing very much damage or disturbance because it has little mass; a saucer rushes by and the molecule finds itself within the gravity-inertia screen. Suddenly this little air molecule is entirely free: It no longer carries kinetic punch; it can bump into anything without causing the slightest friction. In other words, it enters the screen like a bullet and strikes the saucer like a feather.

However, as the saucer rushes on, this molecule of air pops out the back of the screen in a very agitated state. It is now again in the inertial world and starts bumping into other highly agitated molecules. Its tiny little punch is magnified as a result of the friction which was not possible and this causes a release of energy - the luminosity seen about the saucers, especially at night."

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 10, 2019, 06:07:06 AM
BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT III

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2031282#msg2031282 (part II)

Biefeld-Brown effect in mineral oil

Since the time of the first test the apparatus and the methods used have been greatly improved and simplified. Cellular "gravitators" have taken the place of the large balls of lead. Rotating frames supporting two and four gravitators have made possible acceleration measurements. Molecular gravitators made of solid blocks of massive dielectric have given still greater efficiency. Rotors and pendulums operating under oil have eliminated atmospheric considerations as to pressure, temperature and humidity.

The disturbing effects of ionization, electron emission and pure electro-statics have likewise been carefully analyzed and eliminated. Finally after many years of tedious work and with refinement of methods we succeeded in observing the gravitational variations produced by the moon and sun and much smaller variations produced by the different planets.

Let us take, for example, the case of a gravitator totally immersed in oil but suspended so as to act as a pendulum and swing along the line of its elements.

(https://i84.servimg.com/u/f84/17/91/23/29/00fig210.gif)

When the direct current with high voltage (75-300 kilovolts) is applied the gravitator swings up the arc until its propulsive force balances the force of the earth's gravity resolved to that point, then it stops, but it does not remain there. The pendulum then gradually returns to the vertical or starting position even while the potential is maintained. The pendulum swings only to one side of the vertical. Less than five seconds is required for the test pendulum to reach the maximum amplitude of the swing but from thirty to eighty seconds are required for it to return to zero.

(T.T. Brown, How I Control Gravitation)


(http://jnaudin.free.fr/images/ttboil2.jpg)

Experiment performed at the JLNaudin Labs, it includes the video of the test:

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/ttbekp.htm

"This experiment confirms that the Biefeld-Brown Effect works in different medium than air such as mineral oil."

Presentation made at the International Academy of Astronautics on the Biefeld-Brown effect, by Dr. Takaaki Musha (Honda R&D Institute):

http://jnaudin.free.fr/lifters/musha/Musha-Presen.pdf
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 11, 2019, 06:06:15 AM
EXACT FORMULA FOR THE BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT

(https://i.ibb.co/BCDmvh8/iv.jpg)

From the very start, Einstein's TGR was shown to be incomplete.

http://web.archive.org/web/20090902090420/http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/Levi-Civita.pdf

A very nice paper by T. Levi-Civita in 1917, one of the inventors of Tensor Calculus, showing that Einstein's pseudo-tensor is nonsense because it leads to the requirement for a first-order, intrinsic, differential invariant, which, as is well known to the pure mathematicians, does not exist! This too has been ignored by the relativists.

H. Weyl added a new vector field, which is actually the potential of electrovacuum.

http://www.weylmann.com/weylklein.pdf

(https://i.ibb.co/vX3sLWK/weyl.jpg)

And the electrovacuum is actually the ether:

https://paradox-paradigm.nl/preface/the-electric-field-and-the-ether/

With the addition of the Weyl vector potential theory, the formula for the Biefeld-Brown effect can now be derived:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0507082.pdf

Weyl electrovacuum solutions and gauge invariance
Dr. B.V. Ivanov

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0502047.pdf

On the gravitational field induced by static electromagnetic sources
Dr. B.V Ivanov

https://web.archive.org/web/20130531154026/http://www.ovaltech.ca/pdfss/Possibility_of_Strong_Coupling_Between_Electricity_and_Gravitation.pdf

https://web.archive.org/web/20130531153911/http://www.ovaltech.ca/pdfss/Einsteins_Unified_Field_theory_%26_Biefeld-Brown_Effect.pdf

Another derivation by Dr. Takaaki Musha from the Honda R&D Institute.


https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0506068.pdf

Is empty spacetime a physical thing?


A formidable account of the errors committed by H. Minkowski in deriving a flawed concept of space-time by having ignored B. Riemann's original comments:

https://www.academia.edu/12035946/The_Einstein_unified_field_theory_completed_A_direct_challenge_to_the_basic_assumptions_theories_and_direction_of_modern_and_post-modern_physics_1st_Edition_

"Einstein and others have already interpreted, or better yet misinterpreted, the notion of space-time curvature as an internally closed three-dimensional space coupled to a fourth dimension of time, as is the case if curvature is intrinsic to the space-time continuum. This interpretation does not ‘necessarily’ represent the true physical situation, but rather a Machian positivistic interpretation of one possibility. There are no changes in the mathematics or the physics if the curvature in Einstein’s theory is interpreted as extrinsic within a higher embedding dimension. In other words, they either did not take Riemann’s statement that seriously or they did not understand what he meant by it.

Einstein adopted the geometrical structure of a double polar Riemannian sphere to model gravity as four-dimensional space-time curvature, but it is really space alone that is curved in the higher dimension. However, Einstein’s positivistic leanings got the better of him when he interpreted the curvature as an intrinsic property of the four-dimensional space-time continuum. On the other hand, the Riemannian geometry that he used was only a metrical or extension-geometry and could not directly account for the individual points in space or the physics that depends on the geometry of the individual dimensionless points."

https://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0602112.pdf

Unified field theories and Einstein


https://epdf.pub/topological-foundations-of-electromagnetism.html (word search Weyl)

Dr. Terence W. Barrett


http://www.aquarius-technologies.de/download/footnote25.pdf

(Maxwell's original equations, Einstein's omissions and errors, G potential from E/M, scalar electromagnetics)


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1920865#msg1920865 (Kaluza-Klein theory/particle, Kozyrev theories of time and gravity, three consecutive messages)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 13, 2019, 01:50:51 AM
EXACT FORMULA FOR THE BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT II

(https://i.ibb.co/bK2KH02/puh1.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/mb8nGhj/puh2.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/JRQ7Q7X/puh3.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/YpJdNZJ/puh4.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/cvzrHNf/puh5.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/NjXXzYK/puh6.jpg)

The formula for the maximum weight loss of a capacitor subjected to the Biefeld-Brown effect requires even higher mathematical physics than Weyl fields electrovacuum solutions.

The electrodynamic Hamiltonian of a particle in ZPF (zero point energy field/ether) was obtained for the first time in 1994, and was published in the Physical Review A:

https://journals.aps.org/pra/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevA.49.678

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9069/0be66e03f535dd3b47aeb76ea36bfc3d1909.pdf

Inertia as a zero-point-field Lorentz force
Bernhard Haisch, Alfonso Rueda, and H. E. Puthoff
Phys. Rev. A 49, 678

Once this equation is obtained, the formula for the maximum weight loss of a capacitor subjected to the Biefeld-Brown effect can now be derived:

http://jnaudin.free.fr/lifters/musha/Musha.pdf

There will be daily/seasonal variations of the ZPF due to the variability of the ether drift at each latitude (results obtained by Dayton Miller, Maurice Allais and Townsend Brown).

https://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/9807023.pdf

Advances in the Proposed Electromagnetic Zero-Point Field Theory of Inertia
Bernhard Haisch, Alfonso Rueda, and H. E. Puthoff


gBiefeld-Brown formula

(https://i.ibb.co/M1SJzmC/iv2.jpg)


FBiefeld-Brown formula

(https://i.ibb.co/9TBrSBD/iv3.jpg)

This is the reason why the experiments performed by R.L. Talley, J. Campbell and BlazeLabs in vacuum were not conclusive, since they either used a voltage which was too low, or a material whose dielectric constant was too low.

Once the correct voltage and the electrically insulating material with a high dielectric constant are used, the Biefeld-Brown effect can be registered in vacuum:

https://web.archive.org/web/20130522083121/http://projetmontgolfier.info/uploads/Section_3__Final_Report.pdf

Supercapacitors:

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1403/1403.6862.pdf

Then the dielectric constant can be 10^8.

Applying high voltage to supercapacitors (with solid dielectrics):

https://www.sandia.gov/ess-ssl/EESAT/2009_papers/Proposal%20to%20Build%20Supercapacitors%20Using%20Solid%20Dielectrics.pdf

https://technology.nasa.gov/patent/MFS-TOPS-77

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5512908/

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 15, 2019, 07:29:39 AM
EXACT FORMULA FOR THE BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT III

The Biefeld-Brown tests performed in vacuum necessitate the application of a higher voltage than that utilized in the experiments carried out in ambient air.

This is because the value of G, which is a quantum function and a vacuum repulsion reaction, will be modified by the addition of the ether field which will encompass the capacitor to form an invisible ball lightning sphere around it.

That is, the following formulas hold true in ambient air/mineral oil; in vacuum, G becomes a variable:

(https://i.ibb.co/M1SJzmC/iv2.jpg)

In vacuum, √G < 2.58 x 10-4.

Here is the correct quantum formula for G:

G = 1/δzptp2

δzp = ether/zero point field mass-density equivalent

tp = Planck time

The proof uses a formula derived by B. Haisch and A. Rueda in 2000:

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/d793/dfa59bfd779d12a09a7559dcfa9e712978c0.pdf

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1251/fea14a765b9c9289f8cf0206208bf49e0d8a.pdf

https://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/9909043.pdf

Ether density increases = less gravity = lower G constant

This is the main reason why the scientists who carried out the Biefeld-Brown effect in ambient air (Campbell, Talley, Blazelabs) found out that for the same voltage they recorded no torsion in full vacuum. Only T.T. Brown understood this concept, as it was spelled out in his Structure Of Space article.

The gravitational "constant" becomes a variable in the presence of a strong ether field.

http://www.space-mixing-theory.com/article2.pdf

Exploratory Research on the Phenomenon of the Movement of High Voltage Capacitors
D.R. Buehler

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1502.06915.pdf

On the Anomalous Weight Losses of High Voltage Symmetrical Capacitors
E.B. Porcelli and V.S. Filho

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/2dacap.htm

Test of Nasa patent for thrust using a two dimensional asymmetrical capacitor module

http://jnaudin.online.fr/html/elpex10.htm

http://jnaudin.online.fr/elecpexp/elecpexp.html

Electrostatic pendulum experiment

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1913909#msg1913909 (Biefeld-Brown experiments in vacuum)


https://web.archive.org/web/20140602175747/http://projetmontgolfier.info/uploads/Section_2F__Annexe_4.pdf (annex 4.3 describes the positive results obtained in vacuum (vide) using plexiglass and 80 Kv)

Page 100 (pg 11 of the pdf document)

(https://i.ibb.co/WcHbDSW/ann43.jpg)

Essais sous vide (vacuum tests)

Le système commence à entrer à rotation vers 80 Kv et en forcant la tension l'on peut parvenir a des rotations de l'ordre de 1 tour/seconde.

The system begins to rotate at 80 Kv and by forcing the tension one can achieve rotations of the order of 1 turn/second.


https://web.archive.org/web/20140602175742/http://projetmontgolfier.info/uploads/Section_2E__Annexes_3.4-3.6.pdf

Essais sous vide (vacuum tests)

On obtient des rotations entretenues a des vitesses de l'ordre des 1 tour/seconde.

We obtain rotations maintained at speeds of the order of 1 turn/second.

(https://i.ibb.co/8jxBkPC/ann43a.jpg)

(https://i.ibb.co/Mgmj583/brvac.jpg)

The fact that G cannot be a constant was proven by Roland Eotvos (Eotvos gravitational effect).

In view of the results published by Roland Eotvos, Dr. E. Fischbach (Purdue University) has proposed the following modification to the law of universal gravitation:

(http://image.ibb.co/e9fPSc/eot.jpg)

http://mek.oszk.hu/02000/02054/html/onehund.html

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 17, 2019, 02:07:38 AM
ACOUSTIC LEVITATION

(https://3c1703fe8d.site.internapcdn.net/newman/csz/news/800/2018/theworldsmos.jpg)

https://phys.org/news/2018-01-world-powerful-acoustic-tractor-pave.html

The new approach, published in Physical Review Letters today, uses rapidly fluctuating acoustic vortices, which are similar to tornadoes of sound, made of a twister-like structure with loud sound surrounding a silent core.

The Bristol researchers discovered that the rate of rotation can be finely controlled by rapidly changing the twisting direction of the vortices, this stabilises the tractor beam. They were then able to increase the size of the silent core allowing it to hold larger objects. Working with ultrasonic waves at a pitch of 40kHz, a similar pitch to that which only bats can hear, the researchers held a two-centimetre polystyrene sphere in the tractor beam. This sphere measures over two acoustic wavelengths in size and is the largest yet trapped in a tractor beam. The research suggests that, in the future much larger objects could be levitated in this way.

https://research-information.bristol.ac.uk/files/143244680/Virtual_Vortices.pdf

Acoustic Virtual Vortices with Tunable Orbital Angular Momentum for Trapping of Mie
Particles. Physical Review Letters, 120(4)
Marzo, A., Caleap, M., & Drinkwater, B. W.

We demonstrate stable trapping inside acoustic vortices by generating sequences of short-pulsed vortices of equal helicity but opposite chirality. This produces a “virtual vortex” with an orbital angular momentum that can be tuned independently of the trapping force. We use this method to adjust the rotational speed of particles inside a vortex beam and, for the first time, create three-dimensional acoustics traps for particles of wavelength order (i.e., Mie particles).

Additionally, a virtual vortex of large aperture (i.e., high helicity) is shown to steadily trap particles with diameters larger than the wavelength—a result which surpasses the classical Rayleigh scattering limit that has previously restricted stable acoustic particle trapping.

Bruce Drinkwater, Professor of Ultrasonics, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Bristol

https://twitter.com/sonic_bruce/status/669560944234774528 (calculations for power required to levitate a Mini-Cooper, some 100W/kg)


The use of double torsion vortices has permitted, for the first time, the levitation of small objects (spheres) whose diameter is larger than the wavelength. Up until now, only particles whose radius was less than the wavelength could be levitated, the theoretical derivation having been obtained using the Gor'kov approximation.

https://www.abdi-ecommerce10.com/asa/images/product/medium/0-97440-6759.pdf (table of contents)

Nonlinear Acoustics
Mark F. Hamilton and David T. Blackstock

The authors of the paper, published in the Physical Review Letters, must understand that it is these double torsion vortices which create an invisible ball lightning sphere around the object itself; thus, the gravitational "constant" becomes a variable, since the density of ether has increased.

They must also infer that the Tibetan monks who levitated a four-ton block of stone were positioned at a distance of 63.5 meters away from the polished slab of rock with a bowl like cavity in the centre.

That is, they produced NO ACOUSTIC RADIATION PRESSURE on the stone at all (only 0.04 watts were created, not enough to lift a sheet of paper).

Therefore, there exists a more advanced field of nonlinear acoustics in which very heavy objects can be levitated without actually using acoustic radiation pressure.

The frequencies used by the monks activated not only the Lehmer pairs of the bosons of the atoms themselves, but also the extra bosons observed in the Occult Chemistry:

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr01.htm

The seven bubbles no longer fit exactly under one another, as it were, if one looks along or through the wire endwise; in 100 "spirillae of the lowest order" there ought to be just 700 bubbles; so there are in the seven thinner, coloured wires, but in the three thicker wires there are 704. So the increase is at present 1 in 175. And the same curious little increase holds good in the relation of the different orders of spirillae, In the thinner wires exactly 7 spirillae of one order make 1 of the next higher order, so that 700 "b"s make exactly 100 "a"s and so on; but in the thicker wires 704 "b"s go to 100 '"a"s. and the same curious proportion all through.

The extra bosons (bubbles of light) form a latent lateral octave which can be activated through double torsion, a high electrical field, or sound, so that the antigravitational effect can be put to use.


Matter has a sound aspect, and when a vibration is caused it generates an acoustical wave which travels through the air working with it concurrently and resulting in oscillations of particles in the air and this causes the intermolecular space of the air to rise in vibrations and causes the atoms to eventually work into the first state of the ether.



https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/19df/7194e03b6d4bf1f5e2cb623e69a08fc4eb74.pdf

Acoustic levitation of an object larger than the acoustic wavelength
Andrade, Marco A. B.; Okina, Fabio T. A.; Bernassau, Anne; Adamowski, Julio

https://www.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01438774/document

Acoustical and optical radiation pressures and the development of single beam acoustical tweezers
Jean-Louis Thomas, Régis Marchiano, Diego Baresch

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1805.01634.pdf

The acoustic radiation force: a gravitation-like field
Pierre-Yves Gires, Jerome Duplat, Aurelien Drezet & Cedric Poulain

https://asa.scitation.org/doi/pdf/10.1121/1.5087130

Acoustical boundary hologram for macroscopic rigid-body levitation
Seki Inoue, Shinichi Mogami, Tomohiro Ichiyama, Akihito Noda, Yasutoshi Makino, and Hiroyuki Shinoda

https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2018/01/ultrasonic-sound-tornadoes-levitate-objects-in-a-soundless-void.html

(https://brucedrinkwater.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/image2.jpg?w=1024&h=683)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1569140#msg1569140

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1830644#msg1830644 (implosion of the atom)

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1106.6348v1.pdf

Tibetan Singing Bowls
Denis Terwagne and John W.M. Bush

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.529.9838&rep=rep1&type=pdf

The Dynamics of Tibetan Singing Bowls
Octávio Inácio & Luís L. Henrique

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/0f2b/d1ffcb850792de7266a7628b318bafb573b1.pdf

Theory of Acoustic Levitation
Victor D. Lupi

http://mafija.fmf.uni-lj.si/seminar/files/2014_2015/Acoustic_levitation.pdf

Acoustic levitation
S. Hrka

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Nicolas_Perez2/publication/322143783_Review_of_Progress_in_Acoustic_Levitation/links/5b99cc2b92851c4ba8181049/Review-of-Progress-in-Acoustic-Levitation.pdf?origin=publication_detail

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318862626_Dynamics_of_levitated_objects_in_acoustic_vortex_fields

http://www.hapis.k.u-tokyo.ac.jp/public/hiroyuki_shinoda/research/pdf/WHC2015/WHC15_inoue.pdf

Active Touch Perception
Produced by Airborne Ultrasonic Haptic Hologram
Seki Inoue, Yasutoshi Makino and Hiroyuki Shinoda

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 27, 2019, 01:47:13 AM
ELECTROGRAVITY: THE ETHER OF H. WEYL'S GAUGE THEORY

“Wider expanses and greater depths are now exposed to the searching eye of knowledge, regions of which we had not even a presentiment. It has brought us much nearer to grasping the plan that underlies all physical happening”

H. Weyl

“And now I want to ask you something more: They tell me that you and Einstein are the only two real sure-enough high-brows and the only ones who can really understand each other. I won’t ask you if this is straight stuff for I know you are too modest to admit it. But I want to know this -- Do you ever run across a fellow that even you can’t understand?”

“Yes,” says he.

“This will make a great reading for the boys down at the office,” says I. “Do you mind releasing to me who he is?”

“Weyl,” says he.

(an interview that Paul Dirac gave in America back in April, 1929)


“Later the quantum-theory introduced the Schrodinger-Dirac potential ψ of the electron-positron field; it carried with it an experimentally based principle of gauge-invariance which guaranteed the conservation of charge, and connected the ψ with the electromagnetic potentials Aµ in the same way that my speculative theory had connected the gravitational potentials gµν with the Aµ, and measured the Aµ in known atomic, rather than unknown cosmological units."

H. Weyl, Selecta, 1955


The connection between Whittaker and Weyl expansions (sections 2.10 and 4):

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1401/1401.4557.pdf

The relations established for the Weyl non-Abelian gauge field and the Cartan torsion make it possible to consider, from a new point of view, the problem of physical interpretation of the torsion in the framework of the gauge principle.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/9806086.pdf

Weyl’s theory of gauge invariance implies the conservation of electric charge in much the same way as general coordinate invariance leads to the conservation of energy and momentum.

Weyl’s gauge theory explained by C.N. Yang in a historical context:

http://www.tgeorgiev.net/Yang_AboutWeyl.pdf

C.N. Yang explains that Einstein’s original objection was not valid. The leading idea of Weyl’s theory is that the fundamental laws of physics should be invariant under position-dependent scale transformations. Weyl, in his original theory, postulated local-scale symmetry. That is, he postulated that one could change the size of objects independently at every point in space-time—and still get the same behaviour! To make that outrageous idea viable, he had to introduce a ‘gauge’ connection field. The gauge connection field tells us how much we must adjust our scale of length, or re-gauge our rulers, as we move from one point to another. Weyl made the remarkable discovery, that this gauge connection field, in order to do its job of implementing local-scale symmetry, must satisfy the Maxwell equations. Dazzled by that apparent miracle, Weyl proposed to identify his ideal mathematical connection field with the real physical electromagnetic field. In the new theory, the local symmetry transformations are no longer space-time dependent changes in the scale of length of space–time, but rather rotations in the new dimension, whose coordinate is dual to electric charge. (Note that multiplication by a phase faithfully implements rotations of a circle.) After that modification gauge symmetry leads to a satisfactory theory of electromagnetism.

Hermann Weyl in 1918 first conceived the idea that electrodynamics might be unified with gravitation by analyzing a “twisting” of vectors under parallel transport to measure the geometric curvature of a gauge space. While gravitation operates via the curvature of a physical, noncompact configuration space ℜ4 first pioneered by Minkowski based on Einstein’s 1905 development of Lorentz invariance into Special Relativity, Weyl’s theory operates along the circle of an abstract phase space using a non-observable local phase expixθ(x) for Abelian theory.

The connection between the vector potential theory of J.C. Maxwell and H Weyl’s gauge theory explained by C.N. Yang:

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=6078096

It was Weyl who emphasized the role of gauge invariance as a symmetry principle from which electromagnetism can be derived. It took several decades until the importance of this symmetry principle — in its generalized form to non-Abelian gauge groups developed by Yang, Mills, and others — became also fruitful for a description of the weak and strong interactions. The mathematics of the non-Abelian generalization of Weyl’s 1929 paper would have been an easy task for a mathematician of his rank, but at the time there was no motivation for this from the physics side.

Invariance under scale transformations was thus the pivoting point of Weyl’s theory. This led Weyl to field equations that cannot be transformedinto Einstein’s equations in the limit φi(x) = 0.

It is highly improbable that Einstein’s equations for the gravitational field are strictly valid. First and foremost, it is improbable because the gravitational constant is out of place among other natural constants, so that the gravitational radii of the charge and the mass of the electron have values of quite different orders of magnitude than, for example, the radius of the electron itself (they are smaller than the latter—the first by 1020 and the second by 1040). (Weyl, Gravitation und Elekrizität, 1918, p. 476)

Weyl’s new geometry was much richer than the Riemannian geometry in both its mathematical and philosophical content. Mathematically, the new geometry introduced new quantities into space that had no analogy in other geometries. Philosophically, these new quantities, unaccounted for by Riemannian geometry and thus unaccounted for in General Relativity, were used by Weyl to represent electromagnetic phenomena. Every point in space, represented by a vector having both magnitude and direction, could be displaced to another point in the same space yielding electromagnetism. When only the direction of the vector was taken into account, ignoring the vector’s magnitude, there remained a parallel displacement of the kind described by Levi-Civita, which accounted for gravity. The difference with Weyl’s geometry lay in the fact that it was no longer necessary for a vector’s magnitude or length to remain constant while being displaced between points in space.


Table of contents of Weyl's seminal paper (1929):

“ Introduction. Relationship of General Relativity to the quantum-theoretical field equations of the spinning electron: mass, gauge-invariance, distant-parallelism. Expected modifications of the Dirac theory. -I. Two-component theory: the wave function ψ has only two components. -§1. Connection between the transformation of the ψ and the transformation of a normal tetrad in four-dimensional space. Asymmetry of past and future, of left and right. -§2. In General Relativity the metric at a given point is determined by a normal tetrad. Components of vectors relative to the tetrad and coordinates. Covariant differentiation of ψ. -§3. Generally invariant form of the Dirac action, characteristic for the wave-field of matter. -§4. The differential conservation law of energy and momentum and the symmetry of the energy-momentum tensor as a consequence of the double-invariance (1) with respect to coordinate transformations (2) with respect to rotation of the tetrad. Momentum and moment of momentum for matter. -§5. Einstein’s classical theory of gravitation in the new analytic formulation. Gravitational energy. -§6. The electromagnetic field. From the arbitrariness of the gauge-factor in ψ appears the necessity of introducing the electromagnetic potential. Gauge invariance and charge conservation. The space-integral of charge. The introduction of mass. Discussion and rejection of another possibility in which electromagnetism appears, not as an accompanying phenomenon of matter, but of gravitation.”

Subquark lattice theory (epola: electron/positron lattice):

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260666540_Justifying_the_Vacuum_as_an_Electron-Positron_Aggregation_and_Experimental_Falsification

https://simhonytribute.webs.com/epoladiscovery.htm

http://the-eye.eu/public/freenrg.info/Physics/Menahem_Simhony_EPOLA/Mass_Energy_Equivalence.htm

The “lattice” is a actually the network of dynamic subquark waves (both laevorotatory and dextrorotatory) which propagate in double torsion fashion:

http://www.cartesio-episteme.net/ep8/electron_positron_sea.pdf

Dynamic vacuum, Dirac sea, conformal Weyl gravity:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1604.07753.pdf

http://bourabai.kz/winter/planck013.htm

http://bourabai.kz/winter/planck014.htm

It is known that the metric component g44 acts like a gravitational potential used in Newtonian mechanics. For a static system (where gravity and electromagnetism balance each other out), it is almost expected that there should be a functional relationship between the gravitational potential and the electric potential φ. Weyl’s classical paper in 1917 examined a static electric field in curved spacetime with axial symmetry. He found that, if there exists a functional relationship between g44 and, φ it must be in the form of:

g44 (φ)= φ2 + C1φ + C0

Any field with this relation is known as a Weyl-type field.

Weyl's derivation of the electrogravitational equations for static systems (Biefeld-Brown effect):

http://www.jp-petit.org/papers/cosmo/1917-Weyl-en.pdf

http://www.jp-petit.org/papers/cosmo/1917-Weyl-de.pdf


http://www.weylmann.com/wheeler.shtml

(https://i.ibb.co/8Y04G22/weyl2.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/B6ymv1X/weyl3.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/Yp6N58v/weyl4.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/Z2nJJgT/weyl5.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/FWvkvsv/weyl6.jpg)

For similar reasons also Hermann Weyl, in the 1919 German edition of his treatise on relativity Raum–Zeit–Materie suggested that, because the coefficients  of  the  fundamental  metrical  tensor  determine  which  world-points  interact  with  another  or  constitute  a  Wirkungszusammenhang,  the  term  “gravitational  field”  should  be  replaced  by  “ether.”

In  Einstein’s  opinion,  Newton’s  real  and  active  space  should  be  called  the  ether  of  mechanics. We  are  going  to  call  this  physical  reality,  which  enters  into  Newton’s  law of motion alongside the observable ponderable bodies, the, “ether of mechanics.” Having  introduced  the  new  concept  of  ether  in  1916,  Einstein  admitted the reality of physical space. He had thus come a long way away from  the  epistemological  views  of  Mach  and  other  positivists  who  considered space (especially “absolute space”) to be a metaphysical addition that  should  be  removed  from  physics.

It  does  remain  allowed,  as  before,  to  imagine  a  space  filling  medium  and  to  assume  the  electromagnetic  fields  (and  matter  as  well)  are  its  states. A. Einstein, Morgan Manuscript, section 13


Kozyrev time theory:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2032605#msg2032605

(https://i.ibb.co/wKGgDv0/vd1.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/Jp943xx/vd2.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/8d7V1F5/vd3.jpg)

(https://i.ibb.co/8gZHQsT/lena1.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/Wgd1bGW/lena2.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/QHhvb0k/lena3.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/DwJW4Yz/lena4.jpg)

(https://i.ibb.co/vZKp9TD/spf1.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/6RZRNS7/spf2.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/NSfQQJ7/spf3.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/1RdLmcW/spf4.jpg)

Minkowski spacetime does not apply to a homogeneously accelerating medium

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211379716000024

These indicate that the Minkowski metric—the starting ‘edict’ of many general relativity textbooks—should not be adopted as an absolute principle in either special or general relativity theory.

https://scienceblog.com/14696/the-minkowski-diagram-and-the-misrepresentation-of-spacetime/

Minkowski space-time: a glorious non-entity

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/3374/ab9d86a153f67cc2bf4fa1eb174720cdec45.pdf

In Minkowski space-time, the spatio-temporal coordinates of different observers are related by Lorentz transformations rather than Galilean transformations. Any laws for systems in Minkowski spacetime must accordingly be Lorentz invariant.

http://www.mathem.pub.ro/proc/bsgp-10/K10-KOSTRO.PDF

Albert Einstein’s New Ether And His General Relativity

https://phys.org/news/2011-04-scientists-spacetime-dimension.html


Planck's second quantum theorem and zero point energy:

https://web.archive.org/web/20190222061217/https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/34a3/c4118bfa21884103ea81788bd6c5a248ee27.pdf


Quantum mechanics assumes that beyond the Planck length scale (parabindu particle) there is another universe:

http://aflb.ensmp.fr/AFLB-381/aflb381m775.pdf (one dimensional Teichmuller space)

Kaluza-Weyl spaces:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/9512034.pdf

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0107023.pdf


Derivation of the Maxwell’s Equations Based on a Continuum Mechanical Model of Vacuum

https://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0609027.pdf


Shipov-Einstein torsion equations:

http://shipov.com/files/Ideas1.pdf

http://shipov-vacuum.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Vacuum1.pdf

http://shipov-vacuum.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Vacuum2.pdf

http://shipov-vacuum.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Vacuum3.pdf

https://web.archive.org/web/20160821165324/http://shipov-vacuum.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/vacuum4.pdf


On spinor representations in Weyl gauge theory:

https://www.osti.gov/etdeweb/servlets/purl/524105

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 04, 2019, 08:05:59 AM
ELECTROGRAVITY II: EXACT FORMULA FOR FLAT EARTH TERRESTRIAL GRAVITY

F = -τ2δ2V1V2/R2

where V1 and V2 are the ether volumes forced out by masses М1 and М2, accordingly, R is the distance between the masses, δ = µ0 = 1.25664⋅10-6, m kg⋅s-2а-2, τ is some factor of proportionality reflecting the uncertainty of the volume Vi value in a general case and the distinction of the ether density δ from the density of physical bodies. F is an electrogravitational formula.

The mass M1 that forces out the volume V1 of the ether medium creates the ether pressure gradient at the distance R. In its turn the mass M2 that is at a distance of R from the mass M1 forces out the ether volume V2. The pressure gradient from the mass M1 falls off at the place of M2 location proportionally to 1/(R)2. The same fall occurs from the mass M2 at the place of M1 location.

“This implies an important conclusion: bodies of different volumes that are in the same gradient medium acquire the same acceleration.

Note that if we keep watch on the fall of bodies of different masses and volumes in the Earth’s gravitation field under conditions when the effect of the air resistance is minimized (or excluded), the bodies acquire the same acceleration. Galileo was the first to establish this fact. The most vivid experiment corroborating the fact of equal acceleration for bodies of different masses is a fall of a lead pellet and bird feather in the deaerated glass tube. Imagine we start dividing one of the falling bodies into some parts and watching on the fall of these parts in the vacuum. Quite apparently, both large and small parts will fall down with the same acceleration in the Earth’s gravitation field. If we continue this division down to atoms we can obtain the same result. Hence it follows that the gravitation field is applied to every element that has a mass and constitutes a physical body. This field will equally accelerate large and small bodies only if it is gradient and acts on every elementary particle of the bodies. But a gradient gravitation field can act on bodies if there is a medium in which the bodies are immersed. Such a medium is the ether medium. The ether medium has a gradient effect not on the outer sheath of a body (a bird feather or lead pellet), but directly on the nuclei and electrons constituting the bodies. That is why bodies of different densities acquire equal acceleration.

Equal acceleration of the bodies of different volumes and masses in the gravitation field also indicates such an interesting fact that it does not matter what external volume the body has and what its density is. Only the ether medium volume that is forced out by the total amount of elementary particles (atomic nuclei, electrons etc.) matters. If gravitation forces acted on the outer sheath of the bodies then the bodies of a lower density would accelerate in the gravitation field faster than those of a higher density.

The examples discussed above allow clarifying the action mechanism of the gravitation force of physical bodies on each other. Newton was the first to presume that there is a certain relation between the gravitation mechanism and Archimedean principle. The medium exerting pressure on a gravitating body is the ether.”

As a matter of fact, Newton was pressed from all sides to provide an explanation for terrestrial gravity, that is why the second edition of the Principia, in the official chronology of history, includes the essay on the CAUSE of gravity.

“In attractions, I briefly demonstrate the thing after this manner. Suppose an obstacle is interposed to hinder the meeting of any two bodies A, B, attracting one the other: then if either body, as A, is more attracted towards the other body B, than that other body B is towards the first body A, the obstacle will be more strongly urged by the pressure of the body A than by the pressure of the body B, and therefore will not remain in equilibrium: but the stronger pressure will prevail, and will make the system of the two bodies, together with the obstacle, to move directly towards the parts on which B lies; and in free spaces, to go forwards in infinitum with a motion continually accelerated; which is absurd and contrary to the first law.”

the obstacle will be more strongly urged by the pressure of the body A

Newton's clear description again:

the obstacle will be more strongly urged by the pressure of the body A than by the pressure of the body B, and therefore will not remain in equilibrium: but the stronger pressure will prevail

ATTRACTION = PRESSURE EXERTED FROM OUTSIDE PUSHING TWO OBJECTS TOGETHER

On The Gravitational Force
Dr. F. Gorbatsevich

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fweb.archive.org%2Fweb%2F20130317183619%2Fhttp%3A%2F%2Fbourabai.kz%2Fgorbatz%2Fgravitation.htm

https://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Gravity/Download/5263

The Ether And The Universe
Dr. F. Gorbatsevich

https://web.archive.org/web/20150424214535/http://bourabai.narod.ru/gorbatz/ether-e.pdf

Density of Ethereal Medium
Dr. F. Gorbatsevich

http://bourabai.kz/gorbatz/ether-e06.htm

Euler Pressure Gravity

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2032696#msg2032696

http://www.orgonelab.org/newtonletter.htm (I. Newton letter to R. Boyle)

4. When two bodies moving towards one another come near together, I suppose the aether between them to grow rarer than before, and the spaces of its graduated rarity to extend further from the superficies of the bodies towards one another; and this, by reason that the aether cannot move and play up and down so freely in the strait passage between the bodies, as it could before they came so near together.

5. Now, from the fourth supposition it follows, that when two bodies approaching one another come so near together as to make the aether between them begin to rarefy, they will begin to have a reluctance from being brought nearer together, and an endeavour to recede from one another; which reluctance and endeavour will increase as they come nearer together, because thereby they cause the interjacent aether to rarefy more and more. But at length, when they come so near together that the excess of pressure of the external aether which surrounds the bodies, above that of the rarefied aether, which is between them, is so great as to overcome the reluctance which the bodies have from being brought together; then will that excess of pressure drive them with violence together, and make them adhere strongly to one another, as was said in the second supposition.


By contrast, here is the Newtonian gravitational force equation:

F = -GM1M2/R2

As we have seen earlier, the gravitational constant G is actually a quantum function:

G = 1/δzptp2

δzp = ether/zero point field mass-density equivalent

tp = Planck time


When and where did things start to go wrong?

Newton, or whoever wrote the Principia (new radical chronology of history), assumed that the Earth is rotating around its own axis and at the same time is orbiting the Sun. Then, without any proof of this hypothesis, he proceeded to modify the gravitational force equation:

F = GMM2/R2, where now M = mass of the Earth

That is, he assumed that the same equation will now apply to describe the gravitational interaction of the Earth with an object on its surface. But this is very wrong, since there was no proof whatsoever that the Earth is rotating around its axis, thus being a sphere.

Then, he further used the same gravitational equation, with Mi designating the masses of planets, stars.

That is why nothing works out properly in the heliocentrical system of the universe:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1936995#msg1936995

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1774581#msg1774581

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2037796#msg2037796

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2080817#msg2080817

Now comes the most important consequence.

The Einstein field equations, the weak-field approximation, are flat earth equations.

From Newton’s Universal Gravitation to
Einstein’s Geometric Theory of Gravity

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1309.4789.pdf

In this paper Einstein’s gravitational field equation is obtained from a step-by-step generalization of Newtonian gravitation. We first show that Newton’s law of universal gravitation leads directly to Poisson’s equation that relates the Laplacian of the gravitational potential to the mass density. Then we use the principle of stationary proper time under nonrelativistic assumptions and compare it with the classical Lagrangian of a particle in a gravitational potential. We find a linear relationship between the 00-component of the metric tensor and the Newtonian gravitational potential.

Einstein aether gravity:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0801.1547.pdf

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0410001.pdf

Ether/zero point energy Navier-Stokes and Schrodinger equations:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1501.06763.pdf

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 06, 2019, 02:43:44 AM
KHARUK-PASTON-SHEYKIN-OBUKHOV-PONOMAREV-KRECHET UFT: UNIFICATION OF THE GRAVITATIONAL AND ELECTROMAGNETIC POTENTIALS

(https://i.ibb.co/rHw4frP/bich2.jpg)

In 1918, H. Weyl introduced the physical concept of gauge at points within an affinely connected space corresponding to a non-Riemannian geometry to unify electromagnetism and gravitation. The Riemannian metric was used to explain gravity, while the new non-Riemannian geometries in the points of space were used to express the electromagnetic field.

Einstein immediately objected and argued that certain vectors can be treated as clocks marking the histories of atoms, whose spectral lines never change with time. Pauli used a different kind of a counterargument to Weyl's theory: the discovery of an “absolute length” in the Dirac theory of the electron (its “Compton wave length”).

However, Weyl responded to both objections.

https://www.scribd.com/document/316926632/Weyl-Reichenbach-and-the-Epistemology-of-Geometry (the best work on Weyl's response to Einstein's objections)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2182319#msg2182319 (Nobel prize winner C.N. Yang explains that Einstein's objection was not valid)

Weyl even addressed the Compton wavelength argument in 1949:

(https://i.ibb.co/gtxrsmZ/weyl13.jpg)

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1703.06355.pdf

Weyl relativity: A novel approach to Weyl’s ideas

Weyl did not press the matter further and was thus prevented from investigating additionally the unification of gravitation and electromagnetism in a single unified field theory.

The next attempt at UFT was the Reissner-Nordstrom metric:

https://archive.org/details/philtrans04375412

Weyl already included the Reissner-Nordstrom metric in his transverse gravitational concept:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1608.00285.pdf

He even introduced the concept of the gravitational potential in his transverse gravity equations:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1610.05441.pdf

The concept of the gravitational potential was introduced by O. Heaviside:

(https://i.ibb.co/3r0YsMR/bich.jpg)


The Einstein unified field theory completed
A direct challenge to the basic assumptions, theories and direction of modern and post-modern physics

Dr. James Beichler

https://www.academia.edu/12035946/The_Einstein_unified_field_theory_completed_A_direct_challenge_to_the_basic_assumptions_theories_and_direction_of_modern_and_post-modern_physics_1st_Edition_ (pages 21 24 26 28 29 30 33 34 38 42 43 44* 45 48* 51 52* 53 68* 70 72* 73** 77-78 84*)

Einstein's TGR addresses ONLY the F=mg component of Newton's equation, and NOT the gravitational potential.


Finishing Einstein Point by Point: The unification of quantum and relativity

Dr. James Beichler

https://www.academia.edu/16201568/Finishing_Einstein_Point_by_Point_The_unification_of_quantum_and_relativity
 
"For his part, Einstein envisioned the four dimensional space-time continuum of our world as a unified field out of which both gravity and electromagnetism emerged. He further hoped that the quantum would emerge as an over-restriction of field conditions. His worldview was that of a purely three dimensional brain logical external world. He seemed unable to completely break loose from his positivistic semi-Newtonian beliefs and perspective. However, from the perspective of the non-Newtonian fourth spatial dimension (or a five-dimensional space-time), the four dimensional expanse of space is filled with a single field of potential that is the precursor to everything that exists in three dimensional space – gravity, electricity, magnetism, matter, quantum, life, mind and even consciousness. These physical ‘things’ are just different aspects of field interactions (single field density patterns or complexes) modified by the physical constants that describe the physical nature of the single field."


G. 't Hooft discovered that "by using light rays alone, one cannot detect the scalar component of the energy-momentum tensor":

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1410.6675.pdf


In 1978, the highest form of unification theory of gravitation and electromagnetism was achieved; however, the paper was published in an obscure scientific journal in the USSR and did not receive the attention of the scientific community:

Yu. N. Obukhov, V. G. Krechet, V. N. Ponomarev, Gravitaciya i teoriya otnositelnosti
[Gravitation and theory of relativity, in Russian], 14-15 (1978), 121–127

In 1982, a modified version of the theory was presented:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00756267

In a classic treatise, the theory was published again in 2017:

Gauge Approach and Quantization Methods in Gravity Theory

http://www.ibrae.ac.ru/docs/publictions/kniga_Ponomarev_Obukhov_Barvinsky_web.pdf (see pg. 74)


These results were further improved by N. V. Kharuk, S. A. Paston and A. A. Sheykin:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1709.02284.pdf

Classical electromagnetic potential as a part of gravitational connection: ideas and history


https://www.epj-conferences.org/articles/epjconf/pdf/2017/27/epjconf_qfthep2017_05011.pdf

Description of gravity in the model with independent nonsymmetric connection


https://www.epj-conferences.org/articles/epjconf/pdf/2018/26/epjconf_quarks2018_07007.pdf

Modifying the theory of gravity by changing independent
variables


Using Weyl's concept of transverse gravity, the concepts of dark matter/dark flow (dark energy = dark flow) can be described in the UFT:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0705.3921.pdf

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/9608035.pdf

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/cb96/2dc8aa198d68f859b219f74d199c3a58cab1.pdf


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1404.7689.pdf

The Scalar Einstein-aether theory

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1001.4823.pdf

Extended Horava gravity and Einstein-aether theory

http://inspirehep.net/record/1198992/files/arXiv%3A1211.1557.pdf

Scalar torsion and a new symmetry of general relativity


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1302.0900.pdf

Weyl Teleparallel theory


There are two further questions that need to be addressed:

1. Can gravitation and electromagnetism be described by a single kind of particle (gravitons and photons with different directions of spin)?

2. Is there actually a bounded dynamic solution to Einstein's TGR?

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 08, 2019, 12:57:54 AM
TESLA SOUND WAVES IN ETHER

“When Dr. Heinrich Hertz undertook his experiments from 1887 to 1889 his object was to demonstrate a theory postulating a medium filling all space, called the ether, which was structureless, of inconceivable tenuity and yet solid and possessed of rigidity incomparably greater than that of the hardest steel.  He obtained certain results and the whole world acclaimed them as an experimental verification of that cherished theory.  But in reality what he observed tended to prove just its fallacy.

“I had maintained for many years before that such a medium as supposed could not exist, and that we must rather accept the view that all space is filled with a gaseous substance.  On repeating the Hertz experiments with much improved and very powerful apparatus, I satisfied myself that what he had observed was nothing else but effects of longitudinal waves in a gaseous medium, that is to say, waves, propagated by alternate compression and expansion.  He had observed waves in the ether much of the nature of sound waves in the air.

“Up to 1896, however, I did not succeed in obtaining a positive experimental proof of the existence of such a medium.  But in that year I brought out a new form of vacuum tube capable of being charged to any desired potential, and operated it with effective pressures of about 4,000,000 volts.  I produced cathodic and other rays of transcending intensity.  The effects, according to my view, were due to minute particles of matter carrying enormous electrical charges, which, for want of a better name, I designated as matter not further decomposable.  Subsequently those particles were called electrons.

“One of the first striking observations made with my tubes was that a purplish glow for several feet around the end of the tube was formed, and I readily ascertained that it was due to the escape of the charges of the particles as soon as they passed out into the air; for it was only in a nearly perfect vacuum that these charges could be confined to them.  The coronal discharge proved that there must be a medium besides air in the space, composed of particles immeasurably smaller than those of air, as otherwise such a discharge would not be possible.  On further investigation I found that this gas was so light that a volume equal to that of the earth would weigh only about one-twentieth of a pound.

"The velocity of any sound wave depends on a certain ratio between elasticity and density, and for this ether or universal gas the ratio is 800,000,000,000 times greater than for air.  This means that the velocity of the sound waves propagated through the ether is about 300,000 times greater than that of the sound waves in air, which travel at approximately 1,085 feet a second.  Consequently the speed in ether is 900,000 x 1,085 feet, or 186,000 miles, and that is the speed of light.

"As the waves of this kind are all the more penetrative the shorter they are, I have for years urged the wireless experts to use such waves in order to get good results, but it took a long time before they settled upon this practice.

"Although the world is still skeptical as to the feasibility of my undertaking, I note that some advanced experts, at least, share my views, and I hope that before long wireless power transmission will be as common as transmission by wires.”

Nikola Tesla

“Nikola Tesla Tells of New Radio Theories.” New York Herald Tribune, September 22, 1929.

http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1929-09-22.htm


“It is ironic that Einstein's most creative work, the general theory of relativity, should boil down to conceptualizing space as a medium when his original premise [in special relativity] was that no such medium existed [..] The word 'ether' has extremely negative connotations in theoretical physics because of its past association with opposition to relativity. This is unfortunate because, stripped of these connotations, it rather nicely captures the way most physicists actually think about the vacuum.

Relativity actually says nothing about the existence or nonexistence of matter pervading the universe, only that any such matter must have relativistic symmetry. [..] It turns out that such matter exists. About the time relativity was becoming accepted, studies of radioactivity began showing that the empty vacuum of space had spectroscopic structure similar to that of ordinary quantum solids and fluids. Subsequent studies with large particle accelerators have now led us to understand that space is more like a piece of window glass than ideal Newtonian emptiness. It is filled with 'stuff' that is normally transparent but can be made visible by hitting it sufficiently hard to knock out a part. The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by experiment, is a relativistic ether. But we do not call it this because it is taboo”

Robert B. Laughlin, Nobel Laureate in Physics, Stanford University

"Physical knowledge has advanced much since 1905, notably by the arrival of quantum mechanics, and the situation [about the scientific plausibility of Aether] has again changed. If one examines the question in the light of present-day knowledge, one finds that the Aether is no longer ruled out by relativity, and good reasons can now be advanced for postulating an Aether ... We have now the velocity at all points of space-time, playing a fundamental part in electrodynamics. It is natural to regard it as the velocity of some real physical thing. Thus with the new theory of electrodynamics [vacuum filled with virtual particles] we are rather forced to have an Aether"

Paul Dirac


In the original, authentic version theory presented by J.C. Maxwell in the form of quarternion numbers, in addition to the transversal-vectorial Hertzian waves described by the vector part of the quarternion, the existence of the scalar waves (electromagnetic potential) was established described by the scalar part of the quaternion.

The metric of Einstein's TGR captures ONLY  the vectorial part of the gravitational force, while the gravitational potential remains untapped.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 10, 2019, 01:44:36 AM
GRAVITATIONAL AHARONOV-BOHM EFFECT II

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234168732_A_Gravitational_Aharonov-Bohm_Effect_and_Its_Connection_to_Parametric_Oscillators_and_Gravitational_Radiation


https://www.academia.edu/30592072/Loop_variables_gravitational_Aharonov-Bohm_effect_and_gravitomagnetism


"Dr. J.D. Franson calculated that, treating light as a quantum object, the change in a photon's velocity depends not on the strength of the gravitational field, but on the gravitational potential itself. However, this leads to a violation of Einstein's equivalence principle – that gravity and acceleration are indistinguishable – because, in a gravitational field, the gravitational potential is created along with mass, whereas in a frame of reference accelerating in free fall, it is not."

Apparent correction to the speed of light in a gravitational potential
J D Franson

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1367-2630/16/6/065008/meta

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1111/1111.6986.pdf

https://physics.umbc.edu/people/faculty/franson/


"Later the quantum-theory introduced the Schrodinger-Dirac potential ψ of the electron-positron field; it carried with it an experimentally-based principle of gauge-invariance which guaranteed the conservation of charge, and connected the ψ with the electromagnetic potentials Aµ in the same way that my speculative theory had connected the gravitational potentials gµν with the Aµ, and measured the Aµ in known atomic, rather than unknown cosmological units."

Hermann Weyl


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1101.5333.pdf

Conformally flat spacetimes and Weyl frames

We discuss the concepts of Weyl and Riemann frames in the context of metric theories of gravity and state the fact that they are completely equivalent as far as geodesic motion is concerned. We apply this result to conformally flat spacetimes and show that a new picture arises when a Riemannian spacetime is taken by means of geometrical gauge transformations into a Minkowskian flat spacetime. We find out that in the Weyl frame gravity is described by a scalar field. We give some examples of how conformally flat spacetime configurations look when viewed from the standpoint of a Weyl frame. We show that in the non-relativistic and weak field regime the Weyl scalar field may be identified with the Newtonian gravitational potential.


"Einstein thought that his theory is valid to calculate the remaining perihelion of Mercury. However, A. Gullstrand, the chairman (1922-1929) of the Nobel Prize Committee for Physics, pointed out that Einstein's calculation cannot be derived from the approach of a many-body problem. The perihelion of Mercury is actually a many-body problem, but Einstein had not shown that his calculation could be derived from such a step. Hence, it is also questionable whether the Einstein equation has a bounded dynamic solution."


The fact that a charged capacitor can exhibit a repulsive force is absent from the current four-dimensional theory.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 11, 2019, 12:57:03 AM
CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE THEORETICAL PREDICTION AND ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS OF GR EFFECTS

General Relativity Problem of Mercury’s Perihelion Advance Revisited

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1008.1811.pdf

There is a firm consensus among astronomy and physics communities, mass media as well, that the perihelion advance test is the accomplished task. We think, however, that physical reality is more complicated, and the above precision numbers for physicists must seem to be to a great extent fictitious.

Now we state that the Mercury’s relativistic effect has never been directly observed and even not evaluated from circumstantial astronomical evidence. The matter is that the GR theory, at least as it given in literature, does not provide a clue about distinguishing between the classical drag along with the equinoxes precession, on the one hand, and relativistic effect, on the other hand.

Thus, the claimed formula for the perihelion advance 3rg/r0 is a result of inappropriate mathematical assumption in the equation solution, therefore, the prediction is not valid.

As it seen, both earlier and this evaluation has nothing to do with the above discussed GR framework. Einstein, when working on the perihelion advance problem in 1915, had to be aware of the space-time symmetries, from which the equations of motion (18) and the trajectory for both the particle and the photon were deduced (19), (26). However, his derivation of the light deflection in 1916 was made in the ad hoc approach, outside the above GR framework. The effect about 1.7′′ of deflection was confirmed in a series of observations of total eclipses of the Sun’s, but this confirmation was made against the logic of GR physical foundations rather than in accordance with that. This circumstance remained largely unnoticed (or thought excusable?) in the GR history.

The GR description of the perihelion advance is given in such a form that the effect cannot be discriminated from the huge fluctuating background of classically induced precession. Consequently, astronomers had to identify the effect as a difference of big fluctuating numbers in observed and calculated ephemerides values. As emphasized, they tried “to fit” theoretical ephemerides to the exactly predicted number. This methodology and the corresponding results cannot be termed an observational test.
Rigor of the effect prediction is in a serious doubt. The Einstein’s “approximate” solution, when put back into the original equation, does not fit the equation to the precision better than the effect value. The GR-term, which is thought to be the cause of both the perihelion advance effect and the light bending effect, has no physical sense, as shown by Fock and in our work. The Fock’s work also shows that the equation of light propagation in a vicinity of massive object must have the linear (potential) term instead of the GR-term.

Overall, we conclude that the claimed confirmation of the GR prediction of the relativistic perihelion advance is neither theoretically nor empirically substantiated.


Dr. C.Y. Lo
PhD Mathematics, Queen's University
PhD Physics, MIT

In Newtonian gravity, the two-body problem has a well-defined compact analytic solution. However, in general relativity, the problem is recognized that it cannot be solved analytically. However, many believed that the two-body problem could be solved in the perturbation approach. Their confidence is based on that the linearized Einstein equation has a bounded dynamic solution.

For the dynamic case when gravitational waves are involved, it has been proven in 1995 that the Einstein equation does not have any bounded dynamic solution. This has far reaching consequences.

Thus, Einstein is wrong in claiming his calculation of the perihelion of Mercury is valid, but Gullstrand, Chairman (1922-1929) of the Nobel Prize Committee for Physics is right who suspected that Einstein‘s calculation is invalid because it cannot be derived from the approach of a solution for many-body problems.

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b505/e829279c6b69556fb37f9e8d90efec2881cf.pdf?_ga=2.108983489.2136939065.1565472133-1824092360.1565472133

Comments on Errors of “A simplified two-body problem in general relativity” by S Hod And Rectification of General Relativity


How Einstein modified his formula relating to Mercury's orbit in order to fit the results:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg769750#msg769750


TGR applies only to the radial component of Newton's equation: F = mg. It cannot capture the gravitational potential term.

Moreover, it cannot be applied to the planetary system, or to calculations pertaining to other galaxies: one has to first prove that the Earth does revolve around its own axis and that it does orbit the Sun. Without these proofs, applying TGR to the aforementioned situations is meaningless.

Dark flow defies TGR on a grand cosmic scale:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1936995#msg1936995


"Maxwell showed in one of his papers that mass can be expressed as length3/time2 ( L3/T2), and if we do that then G loses most of its mystery. G loses all its dimensions."

Article 5 [chapter 1] of Maxwell's Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism

The first physicist to notice this fact was M. Mathis in 2007.

Question: how could Newton possibly have known that mass can be expressed as L3/T2 in order to mask the fact that G is actually dimensionless?

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 11, 2019, 04:11:15 AM
GERTSENSHTEIN-ZEL'DOVICH EFFECT: GRAVITON-PHOTON CONVERSION

The transformation of an electromagnetic wave into a gravitational wave when the electromagnetic wave propagates through a constant transverse magnetic field.

Inverse GZ effect: the birth of an electromagnetic field under the action of metric perturbation (equivalent of GW action) in the strong magnetic field.

The generated EM wave is a second-order effect (proportional to the square of the amplitude of the GW).



Wave resonance of light and gravitational waves

http://www.jetp.ac.ru/cgi-bin/dn/e_014_01_0084.pdf


Electromagnetic and gravitational waves in a stationary magnetic field

http://jetp.ac.ru/cgi-bin/dn/e_038_04_0652.pdf


Gravitational Hertz experiment with electromagnetic radiation in a strong magnetic field

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1504/1504.06548.pdf


“Since it has definite energy, the gravitational wave is itself is the source of some additional gravitational field (static g-field). Like the energy producing it, this field is a second-order effect in the hik. But in the case of high-frequency gravitational waves the effect is significantly strengthened: the fact that the pseudotensor tik is quadratic in the derivatives of the hik introduces the large factor λ-2. In such a case we may say that the wave itself produces the background field (static g-field) on which it propagates. This [static g] field is conveniently treated by carrying out the averaging described above over regions of four-space with dimensions large compared to λ. Such an averaging smooths out the short-wave “ripple” and leaves the slowly varying background metric (static g-field).”

Landau, L. D. and Lifshitz, E. M. (1975), The Classical Theory of Fields


Field Equations in the Complex Quaternion Spaces

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1504.06182.pdf


Light passing through a strong magnetic field will produce a gravitational wave via wave resonance.

But this is exactly the physical description of the double torsion subquark waves:

(http://www.selfhealgo.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/DOUBLE_HELIX_PHASE_CONJUGATED_WAVE_1-300x165.jpg)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2000525#msg2000525 (electrogravitational field of a stationary Earth)

There is a flow of bosons through POSITRON WAVES (LAEVOROTATORY SUBQUARKS), and also a current of bosons through  ELECTRON WAVES (DEXTROROTATORY SUBQUARKS).

The electrogravitational field has magnetic waves AND ALSO gravitational waves.

This is the missing part of the unified field theory.

E.T. Whittaker proved mathematically the existence of the electrogravitational potential, the bidirectional longitudinal waves.

They travel/propagate in double torsion fashion.

No physicist to date has observed this crucial fact: the magnetic wave and the gravitational wave form a single structure, the electrogravitational field. The gravitational potential consists of bosons which flow through dextrorotatory subquarks (electrons), and the electromagnetic potential is made up of bosons which propagate through laevorotatory subquarks (positrons).

(https://i.ibb.co/C83PjcW/leed.jpg)

This is how the Gertsenshtein-Zel'dovich effect is being generated.


However, there is a crucial difference between the two cases being considered here: FE and RE.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2009680#msg2009680

RE version:

The magnetic field does rotate along with the Earth.

But not its gravitational field: the orbiting Earth rotates through its gravitational field.

Modern science assumes that the gravitational field and the magnetic field of the Earth represent two different physical phenomena: one is stationary ( the gravitational field does not rotate along with the supposed rotation of the Earth), the other one (the magnetic field) is rotating with the Earth around its own axis.

FE version:

BOTH GW and EW propagate in double torsion fashion, one is the dextrorotatory wave, and the other one is the laevorotatory wave.


The graviton is the dextrorotatory subquark.

The antigraviton is the laevorotatory subquark.

These subquarks consist of some 14 billion bosons which travel, as well, in double torsion fashion, the longitudinal sound waves discovered by Tesla.

A boson = photon = neutrino = Kaluza-Klein particle


https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1b42/edd83745a7e36b7b3c0fcec7bc2b4bcd7609.pdf?_ga=2.232273180.2056670500.1565448278-1308616368.1565448278

Identifying a Kaluza Klein Treatment of a Graviton Permitting a Deceleration Parameter
q(z) as an Alternative to Standard DE


The Kaluza-Klein particle is the boson:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1920865#msg1920865

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1921372#msg1921372


Particle production in a gravitational wave background

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1610.02973.pdf

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 12, 2019, 12:44:16 AM
LI EFFECT: GRAVITON-PHOTON CONVERSION II

"EM photons having the same frequency and direction as the GWs and suitable phase matching as the GWs, interact directly with GWs in a magnetic field and produce “detection” EM photons that signal the presence of relic HFGWs (high frequency gravitational waves).

The number of EM photons is proportional to the amplitude of the relic HFGWs, A ≈ 10-30, not the square, so that it would be necessary to accumulate such EM photons for only about 1000 seconds in order to achieve relic HFGW detection.

It utilizes a synchro-resonance EM beam  to create a very significant EM signal that propagates not in the direction of the synchro-resonance EM beam and the GW proportional to the amplitude of the GW squared, but perpendicular to both the magnetic field and the GW/EM beam directions.

It is a first-order perturbative photon flux (PPF), proportional to A, not A2."


Perturbative Photon Fluxes Generated by High-Frequency Gravitational Waves and Their Physical Effects

http://www.drrobertbaker.com/docs/Li-Baker%206-22-08.pdf (it includes the peer review data)


Signal Photon Flux and Background Noise in a Coupling Electromagnetic Detecting System for High Frequency Gravitational Waves

http://www.gravwave.com/docs/Li,%20et%20al.%20PRD%2009-9-09%20.pdf


A New Theoretical Technique for the Measurement of High-Frequency Relic Gravitational Waves

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/253763726_A_New_Theoretical_Technique_for_the_Measurement_of_High-Frequency_Relic_Gravitational_Waves

http://www.gravwave.com/docs/J.%20of%20Mod.%20Phys%202011.pdf


Searching for high-frequency gravitational waves by ground high field magnetic resonant sweepings

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1703.06251.pdf


Ultra-High-Intensity Lasers for Gravitational Wave Generation and Detection

http://www.drrobertbaker.com/docs/AIP;%20HFGW%20Laser%20Generator.pdf


Why LIGO can’t detect HFGWs

http://www.gravwave.com/docs/Why%20LIGO%20can't%20detect%20HFGWs.pdf


Tesla used gravitational waves (telluric waves) to send signals/information without any cables/wires ("true wireless").

The Value Estimation of an HFGW Frequency Time Standard for Telecommunications Network Optimization

http://www.gravwave.com/docs/AIP;%20HFGW%20Telecommunications.pdf


The Utilization of High-Frequency Gravitational Waves for Global Communications

http://www.iiisci.org/Journal/CV$/sci/pdfs/HDM219WH.pdf


High-Frequency Gravitational Wave Induced Nuclear Fusion

http://www.gravwave.com/docs/AIP;%20HFGW%20Nuclear%20Fusion.pdf


http://www.gravwave.com/index_2.html

http://www.gravwave.com/chi_joint_project.htm


GASER: Gravitational-wave Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0410/0410022.pdf


Can the Gertsenshtein-Zel'dovich effect be used for propulsion, as an alternative to the Biefeld-Brown effect? The answer is yes.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 12, 2019, 05:47:22 AM
HIGH FREQUENCY GRAVITATIONAL WAVES PROPULSION: GRAVITON-PHOTON CONVERSION III

The Gertsenshtein-Zel'dovich effect can be used to create electron-positron pairs torsion fields (dextrorotatory subquarks-laevorotatory subquarks) out of the ether wave lattice. This torsion field will then act as a shield against the normal flow/propagation of ether waves (gravitational and electromagnetic), forming an invisible ball lightning sphere around the spacecraft.

https://patents.google.com/patent/US10144532B2/en

Craft using an inertial mass reduction device

https://patents.google.com/patent/US20180229864A1/en

High Frequency Gravitational Wave Generator

Dr. Salvatore Cezar Pais
Naval Air War Center Aircraft Division

Both patents are very well written and documented (rivalising with the best patents published by N. Tesla or by T. Townsend Brown).

https://www.inderscienceonline.com/doi/abs/10.1504/IJSPACESE.2015.075910

https://www.sae.org/publications/technical-papers/content/2017-01-2040/


http://www.drrobertbaker.com/docs/Aerospace%20HFGW%20Applications.pdf

http://vixra.org/pdf/1311.0132v3.pdf (Gravitational Wave Generator via Tokamak Physics)

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/86df/b1dcfc60351afdc698cf18c5bd0cc0a622fb.pdf?_ga=2.83449744.769033772.1565527538-1873684905.1565527538 (Gravitational Wave (GW) Radiation Pattern at the Focus of a High-Frequency GW (HFGW) Generator and Aerospace Applications)

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1801.02443.pdf (HFGW/laser plasma interaction)

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1307.6148.pdf (Electromagnetic and gravitational radiation from the coherent oscillation of electron-positron pairs and fields)

The nuclear fusion tokamak uses a similar design to create/produce electron-positron pairs from the ether wave structure which permeates all of space.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1831695#msg1831695

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1832699#msg1832699

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 13, 2019, 12:42:11 AM
SUPERLUMINAL LORENTZ TRANSFORMATIONS

“The textbooks say nothing can travel faster than light, not even light itself. New experiments show that is no longer true, raising questions about the maximum speed at which we can send information.”

J. Marangos, Faster than a speeding photon

Therefore, when physicists are faced with clear and definite experiments which prove that light can reach superluminal speeds, they have to resort to alternative explanations: superluminal Lorentz transformations (since they have no knowledge of the original set of J.C. Maxwell equations which are invariant under Galilean transformations):

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2168036#msg2168036


Informational field and superluminal communication

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0306/0306073.pdf

On the basis of theoretical research on the superluminal communication problem, one can conclude that there are no basic restrictions that would prohibit him from producing the pulses of electromagnetic field with group velocity exceeding that of light in vacuum. On the other hand, it is evident from experimental research that by now the light barrier has been surmounted and the signal velocity achievable is limited only by the potentialities of experimental equipment.

The basis for the mechanism of superluminal communication considered in this work is the AharonovBohm effect indicative of the field of electromagnetic potentials as a real physical field, which directly influences the behaviour of electron waves.


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225456810_Is_Minkowski_Space-Time_Compatible_with_Quantum_Mechanics

The concept of Minkowski space-time is just an approximation which should be avoided in rigorous theoretical constructions.


Tunneling Times and Superluminality: a Tutorial

https://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9811019.pdf

Experiments have shown that individual photons penetrate an optical tunnel barrier with an effective group velocity considerably greater than the vacuum speed of light. The experiments were conducted with a two-photon parametric down-conversion light source, which produced correlated, but random, emissions of photon pairs.


On the theoretical possibility of the electromagnetic scalar potential wave spreading with an arbitrary velocity in vacuum

http://cds.cern.ch/record/548235/files/0204062.pdf


On localized “X-shaped” Superluminal solutions to Maxwell equations

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.591.1319&rep=rep1&type=pdf


Superluminal waves and objects: an overview of the relevant experiments

http://inspirehep.net/record/844904/files/jpconf9_196_012020.pdf


Revisiting the Superluminal Lorentz Transformations and Their Group-Theoretical Properties

http://dinamico2.unibg.it/recami/erasmo%20docs/SomeOld/RevisitingSLTsLNC1982.pdf


Electrodynamics with the scalar field

http://swissenschaft.ch/tesla/content/T_Library/L_Theory/EM%20Field%20Research/ElectrodynamicsWithTheScalarField03.pdf


The introduction of Superluminal Lorentz transformations: A revisitation

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00738808

https://www.academia.edu/22015087/The_introduction_of_Superluminal_Lorentz_transformations_A_revisitation


Revisiting Barry Cox and James Hill's theory of superluminal motion: a possible solution to the problem of spinless tachyon localization

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rspa.2014.0541

However, a clever analysis of Einstein's theory soon revealed that the theory rested upon a subtle assumption concerning clock synchronization, as explained in a book by Jammer. In his doctoral thesis at Stanford University, CA, USA (1959), Frank Robert Tangherlini created a theory which adopts a synchronization procedure different from SR, later re-examined by other authors. In spite of its deep significance, Tangherlini's theory is not widely known; even Jammer in his thorough essay ignored it.

The main consequence of Tangherlini's theory is the existence of a PRF which sets unambiguously the past and future of any inertial observer, forbidding any exchange of cause and effect. That is why kinematic objections to tachyons vanish in Tangherlini's theory, which I will subsequently call privileged relativity (PR).

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 13, 2019, 03:57:04 AM
GERTSENSHTEIN-ZEL'DOVICH EFFECT: GRAVITON-PHOTON CONVERSION IV

The Gravity of Photons and the Necessary Rectification of Einstein Equation

http://www.ptep-online.com/2006/PP-04-08.PDF

It is pointed out that Special Relativity together with the principle of causality implies that the gravity of an electromagnetic wave is an accompanying gravitational wave propagating with the same speed. Since a gravitational wave carries energymomentum, this accompanying wave would make the energy-stress tensor of the light to be different from the electromagnetic energy-stress tensor, and thus can produce a geodesic equation for the photons. Moreover, it is found that the appropriate Einstein equation must additionally have the photonic energy-stress tensor with the antigravity coupling in the source term. This would correct that, in disagreement with the calculations for the bending of light, existing solutions of gravity for an electromagnetic wave, is unbounded. This rectification is confirmed by calculating the gravity of electromagnetic plane-waves. The gravity of an electromagnetic wave is indeed an accompanying gravitational wave.


Einstein’s Equivalence Principle and Invalidity of Thorne’s Theory for LIGO

http://www.ptep-online.com/2006/PP-05-02.PDF

The theoretical foundation of LIGO’s design is based on the equation of motion derived
by Thorne. His formula, motivated by Einstein’s theory of measurement, shows that
the gravitational wave-induced displacement of a mass with respect to an object is
proportional to the distance from the object. On the other hand, based on the observed
bending of light and Einstein’s equivalence principle, it is concluded that such induced
displacement has nothing to do with the distance from another object. It is shown that
the derivation of Thorne’s formula has invalid assumptions that make it inapplicable
to LIGO. This is a good counter example for those who claimed that Einstein’s equivalence principle is not important or even irrelevant.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 13, 2019, 06:36:45 AM
INVALIDATION OF THE LINEARIZED/WEAK FIELD APPROXIMATION USED IN GENERAL RELATIVITY: A BOUNDED DYNAMIC SOLUTION REQUIRES THE PRESENCE OF AN ANTIGRAVITATIONAL COUPLING TERM

The Necessary Existence of Gravitational Waves and the Repulsive Gravitation

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/d92d/7f8b7771e0e3c4df0a25b712d7de2274ed59.pdf


Incompleteness of General Relativity, Einstein's Errors, and Related Experiments

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/fc3d/acc6c279bbee452fd190067f1a50e0825414.pdf

General relativity is incomplete since it does not include the gravitational radiation reaction force and the interaction of gravitation with charged particles.  Moreover, there is no bounded dynamic solution for the Einstein equation. Note that the Einstein equation with an electromagnetic wave source has no valid solution unless a photonic energy-stress tensor with an anti-gravitational coupling is added. Thus, the photonic energy includes gravitational energy.

Historically, Einstein's confidence on his theory was based on that he obtained the remaining of the perihelion of Mercury from his equation. However, since the calculation of perihelion of Mercury is based on a perturbation approach to get the influence of other planets, Einstein must show that the perturbation approach is valid. Nevertheless, Gullstrand suspected that the Einstein equation does not have such a solution. Thus, Einstein was awarded a Nobel Prize for his photo-electric effects instead of general relativity as many theorists expected.


Errors of the Wheeler School, the Distortions to General Relativity and the Damage to Education in MIT Open Courses in Physics

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/432f/4c2f76f6ea7235981e9a0131973e9d0aabe2.pdf


https://www.scribd.com/document/159984022/On-the-Question-of-Dynamic-Solution-in-General-Relativity

The reason, as shown, is that bounded dynamic solutions actually do not exist. For the dynamic case, the non-linear Einstein equation and its linearization also cannot have compatible solutions.

The existence of a dynamic solution requires an additional gravitational energy-momentum tensor with an antigravity coupling.

The issue of dynamic solutions in general relativity existed from the beginning of this theory until currently. The question started with the calculation of the perihelion of Mercury. In 1915 Einstein obtained the expected value of the remaining perihelion with his theory, and thus was confident of its correctness. The subsequent confirmation of the bending of light, further boosted his confidence. However, unexpectedly the base of his confidence was questioned by Gullstrand, the Chairman of the Nobel Prize for Physics. The perihelion of Mercury is actually a many-body problem, but Einstein had not shown that his calculation could be derived from such a necessary step. Thus, Mathematician D. Hilbert, who approved Einstein's initial calculation, did not come to its defense.


The Errors in the Fields Medals, 1982 to S. T. Yau and 1990 to E. Witten

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/e43d/4ca7c2c872d6cbe924ff0de77596670c7bc7.pdf


The Repulsive Gravitation and Errors of Einstein

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6057/f99c6fcb7ffdb7584749aeb345b97a7e8a79.pdf


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/253111937_Compatibility_with_Einstein's_Notion_of_Weak_Gravity_Einstein's_Equivalence_Principle_and_the_Absence_of_Dynamic_Solutions_for_the_1915_Einstein_Equation


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328719305_The_Weight_Reduction_of_Charged_Capacitors_Charge-Mass_Interaction_and_Einstein's_Unification


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/307855795_On_the_Test_of_Newton's_Inverse_Square_Law_and_Unification_of_Gravitation_and_Electromagnetism_--_the_questionable_accurate_gravitational_constant_of_J_Luo_--


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234454208_Einstein's_Radiation_Formula_and_Modifications_to_the_Einstein_Equation


THE NECESSITY OF UNIFYING GRAVITATION AND ELECTROMAGNETISM, MASS-CHARGE REPULSIVE EFFECTS, AND THE FIVE DIMENSIONAL THEORY

https://web.archive.org/web/20170809101844/http://www.cqfyl.com/20080220.pdf


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/289230809_The_Question_of_Validity_of_the_Dynamic_Solutions''_Constructed_by_Christodoulou_and_Klainerman


The Question of Space-Time Singularities in General Relativity and Einstein's Errors

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f37e/0331ac59feb7e5101f98da743f419a2b1d90.pdf
 

The American Physical Society and Errors in Gravitation

https://globaljournals.org/GJSFR_Volume17/3-The-American-Physical-Society.pdf


Comments on “Unification of Gravity and Electromagnetism by Mohammed A. El-Lakany” & Einstein’s Unification

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/2530/bb8b8a98bba6feabeec908051bbb03e1d404.pdf


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/252591908_Radiation_reaction_force_and_unification_of_electromagnetic_and_gravitational_fields


The non-locality of the gravitational wave reflects that the Einstein equation misses a term, the energy-momentum tensor with the anti-gravity coupling.  This missing term is
also the reason that the Einstein equation does not have any dynamic solution.

Dr. C.Y. Lo
PhD Mathematics, Queen's University
PhD Physics, MIT



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 14, 2019, 01:16:44 AM
SUPERLUMINAL SPEED OF THE ANTIGRAVITATIONAL TORSION FIELD

The speed of gravity revisited

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/9910/9910050.pdf

Using the Heaviside-Lorentz equations as a guide, the authors prove that the speed of gravity cannot be superluminal.

Even O. Heaviside proved as much in 1893:

http://sergf.ru/Heavisid.htm

However, this fact causes a huge problem for physicists since there is multiple astrophysical data which proves that the speed of gravity must be superluminal:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1943468#msg1943468 (four consecutive messages)

The reduction in weight of a capacitor (Biefeld-Brown effect), or of a granite block subjected to acoustic levitation, occurs only when the electron-positron pairs will form an invisibile superluminal tornado/torsion field around the object itself, that is when the antigravitational effect start to appear.

We have to go back to Planck's third quantum theory to infer the existence of the ether lattice (zero point energy).

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/226789463_Physics_of_the_Zero-Point_Field_Implications_for_Inertia_Gravitation_and_Mass

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/13386630_Gravity_as_a_zero-point-fluctuation_force

In a letter of 1915 to Heike Kamerlingh Onnes in Leiden Planck wrote: “I have almost completed an improved formulation of the quantum hypothesis applied to thermal radiation. I am more convinced than ever that zero-point energy is an indispensable element. Indeed, I believe I have the strongest evidence for it."

Preludes to dark energy: Zero-point energy and vacuum speculations

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1111/1111.4623.pdf

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271856987_The_ether_theory_as_implying_that_electromagnetism_is_the_Newtonian_approximation_of_general_relativity

http://www.calphysics.org/articles/zpf_apj.pdf


Reviewing the Zero Point Energy

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/34a3/c4118bfa21884103ea81788bd6c5a248ee27.pdf


Ball lightning (the electron-positron torsion field) cannot be explained using either the most sophisticated forms of GR or the Heaviside-Lorentz equations.

Ball lightning travels independently of the atmosphere. It can pass through windows, a 2-ft thick wall, or airplane fuselages with ease.

A Conjecture Concerning Ball Lightning

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1609/1609.04238.pdf

A ball lightning is a port connecting our overt space to a covert space with similar but not identical properties.

P.A. Sturrock, Stanford University

http://lib.iszf.irk.ru/The%20Atmosphere%20and%20Ionosphere.%20Dynamics,%20Processes&%20Monitoring%20(Bychkov%20V.L.,%20et%20al.%20-%202010)/chapter6.pdf


Ball lightning acts as a portal between the invisible ether lattice and the atmosphere. Since the speed of gravity is thought to be the same as that of light (based on the Heaviside-Lorentz equations), it follows from the Biefeld-Brown experiments and the acoustic levitation of granite blocks that the speed of the antigravitational torsion field must be superluminal.

What, then, causes this superluminal speed of the electron-positron (D-subquarks and L-subquarks) torsion field?

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 15, 2019, 01:48:17 AM
SUPERLUMINAL RIEMANN ZETA FUNCTION SOUND WAVES: STRONG NUCLEAR FORCE

Quantum physics cannot explain the strong nuclear force at all (the Yukawa pion exchange proposal).

http://physicsdetective.com/the-nuclear-disaster/

http://physicsdetective.com/the-nuclear-force/

http://thestrongforce.canalblog.com/

What binding force, then, holds the atomic nuclei together?

Ether physicists cannot explain the etheric strong nuclear force either, ever since it was first described in the Occult Chemistry classic treatise.

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr01.htm

"A sphere-wall is a temporary effect, caused by one or more Anu in rotation. Just as a stream of air under pressure will make a hole on the surface of water, by pushing back that water, so is it with the groups. As they revolve, the force of their motion drives back the circumambient medium. That medium thus driven back by the atom element as it moves round its axis is the space around it which is filled with millions of loose Anu.

Two Anu, positive and negative, brought near to each other, attract each other, and then commence to revolve round each other, forming a relatively stable duality; such a molecule is neutral. Combinations of three or more Anu are positive, negative or neutral, according to the internal molecular arrangement; the neutral are relatively stable, the positive and negative are continually in search of their respective opposites, with a view to establishing a relatively permanent union.

Speaking generally, positive groups are marked by the points of Anu being turned outward and negative groups by the points being turned inward towards each other and the centre of the group.

The groups show all kinds of possible combinations; the combinations spin, turn head over heels, and gyrate in endless ways. Each aggregation is surrounded with an apparent cell-wall, a circle or oval, due to the pressure on the surrounding matter caused by its whirling motion. The surrounding fields strike on each other and the groups and rebound, dart hither and thither, for reasons we have not distinguished."

(http://physicsdetective.com/wp-content/uploads/particlebox2.gif)

The distribution of the zeros of the Riemann zeta function is related to the model of the energy levels in a heavy nucleus.

https://www.ias.edu/ideas/2013/primes-random-matrices

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1505.07481.pdf

Riemann zeta function model of the boson:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2006301#msg2006301

These Riemann zeta function sound waves rotate at the speed of light in normal matter, and achieve superluminal speeds manifested in certain phenomena: biochirality (plants, animals, humans; antigravitational effects) and ball lightning.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1885655#msg1885655

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1774536#msg1774536

The boson strings inside a subquark are kept in rotation by the same kind of mechanism, as are the various kinds of subquark geometries (quarks, mesons, baryons) and the ether drift field itself which rotates above the Earth.

The invisible Riemann zeta function sound waves are the strong nuclear force.

Ball lightning is due to scalar electromagnetic interferometry which can produce a controlled pattern of electromagnetic energy at a distance.

The energy sphere created by the Whittaker scalar waves will attract the telluric currents (longitudinal subquark waves) which will be diverted from their usual path to eventually form a self-sustaining oscillation in the form of a ball lightning object.

Whittaker scalar waves superpotentials and ball lightning:

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1308/1308.3932.pdf

Superluminal Whittaker waves:

https://www.hrastovic-inzenjering.hr/primjena-energije/energetski-clanci/alternativne-tehnologije/item/1110-nikola-tesla-death-ray.html (Soviet scalar weapon section)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 16, 2019, 01:51:16 AM
KALUZA-WEYL SPACE/AETHER DRAINHOLE PARTICLES

Dr. H.G. Ellis introduced the concept of the ETHER DRAINHOLE for the first time in 1969 (see also the wikipedia pages for the "Ellis drainhole" and the "Ellis wormhole").

Ether flow through a drainhole: A particle model in general relativity
Journal of Mathematical Physics. 14: 104–118

http://euclid.colorado.edu/~ellis/RelativityPapers/EtFlThDrPaMoGeRe.pdf

Since the derivation of the field equations was very rigorous, the reviewers had no choice but to accept the publication, in a mainstream journal, of the concept of an ether drainhole.

Dr. H.G. Ellis peer-reviewed papers:

http://euclid.colorado.edu/~ellis/


Dr. Ellis also merged Weyl's affine connection with Kaluza's five-dimensional theory:

SPACE-TIME--TIME: FIVE-DIMENSIONAL KALUZA–WEYL SPACE

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0107023.pdf

The result is a natural hybrid of the Kaluza and the Weyl geometries that retains and enhances the most useful characters of its parents while attenuating to benign and useful form those that have caused difficulty. Most notably, it retains both Kaluza’s extra dimension and Weyl’s association of metrical with electromagnetic gauge changes. Also, it converts the objectionable nonintegrability of length transference in the Weyl geometry to integrability without sacrificing the principle that length, because it is a comparative measure, depends on selection of a scale at each point, that is, on choice of a gauge. In the process it lends to the fifth dimension an essential significance that the Kaluza geometry fails to provide. This significance arises from a geometrical construction that compels interpretation of the fifth dimension as a secondary temporal dimension, in contrast to its more usual interpretation as a spatial dimension whose unobservability has to be excused.

The coordinate transformations that generate the electromagnetic and the metrical gauge transformations, being coordinate transformations, do not alter the metric of spacetime--time. This is a principal advantage that the space-time--time geometry has over the Weyl geometry. Weyl, working without the aid of a fifth dimension, impressed his infinitude of conformally related space-time metrics onto one four-dimensional manifold. That is very much like drawing all the maps of the world on a single sheet of paper, a practice that would conserve paper but confound navigators. In effect, the space-time--time geometry economizes on paper but avoids the confusion of maps on maps, by drawing a selection of the maps on individual sheets, then stacking the sheets so that each of the remaining maps can be generated on command by slicing through the stack in a particular way. The Kaluza–Klein geometry does much the same, but the cylinder condition restricts its stack to multiple copies of a single map, with no new maps producible by slicing.


Einstein’s Real “Biggest Blunder”

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1205.5552.pdf

What has gone unrecognized for almost a century is that already in 1916 Einstein had made a real blunder by failing to distinguish between the entirely different concepts of active gravitational mass and passive gravitational mass. That he confused the two becomes clear upon a careful reading of §16 of his paper Die Grundlage der allgemeinen Relativitatstheorie, in which he sought to extend his tensorial field equations for empty space to the case in which space is permeated by a continuous distribution of gravitating matter.


COSMOLOGY WITHOUT EINSTEIN’S ASSUMPTION THAT INERTIAL MASS PRODUCES GRAVITY

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0701012.pdf

Giving up Einstein’s assumption, implicit in his 1916 field equations, that inertial mass, even in its appearance as energy, is equivalent to active gravitational mass and therefore is a source of gravity allows revising the field equations to a form in which a positive cosmological constant is seen to (mis)represent a uniform negative net mass density of gravitationally attractive and gravitationally repulsive matter. Field equations with both positive and negative active gravitational mass densities of both primordial and continuously created matter incorporated, along with two scalar fields to ‘relax the constraints’ on the space-time geometry, yield cosmological solutions.


SPACE-TIME--TIME

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0205029.pdf


Quantum effects from a purely geometrical relativity theory

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/24/1/026/pdf


Cosmic acceleration, inflation, dark matter, and dark ‘energy’ in one neat package

http://euclid.colorado.edu/~ellis/RelativityPapers/CoAcInDaMaDaEnOnNePa.prd.alt.pdf

In creating his gravitational field equations Einstein unjustifiedly assumed that inertial mass, even in its equivalent form as energy, is a source of gravity. Denying this assumption allows modifying the field equations to a form in which a positive cosmological constant appears as a uniform density of gravitationally repulsive matter. Field equations with both positive and negative active gravitational mass densities incorporated along with a scalar field coupled to geometry with nostandard polarity yield cosmological solutions.


Cosmic inflation, deceleration, acceleration, dark matter, and dark ‘energy’ in one coherent package

http://euclid.colorado.edu/~ellis/RelativityPapers/CoInDeAcDaMaDaEnOnCoPa.rev2011.pdf


What Causes the Electron to Weigh?

http://library.uc.edu.kh/userfiles/pdf/42.What%20is%20the%20electron.pdf (pgs 136-161 of the pdf document, pgs 129-154 of the treatise)


Three Logical Proofs: The Five-Dimensional Reality of Space-Time

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/ee33/5fbf33ba621e189fc5452ba4438f85fdabfa.pdf


http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr01.htm

In this ultimate state of physical matter two types of units, or Anu, have been observed; they are alike in everything save the direction of their whorls and of the force which pours through them. In the one case force pours in from the "outside," from fourth-dimensional space, the Astral plane, and passing through the Anu, pours into the physical world. In the second, it pours in from the physical world, and out through the Anu into the "outside" again, i.e., vanishes from the physical world. The one is like a spring, from which water bubbles out; the other is like a hole, into which water disappears.

(http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/fig003.gif)

The dextrorotatory subquark (gravitational) and the laevorotatory subquark (electromagnetic).


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2037796#msg2037796 (the sealed plastic bottle brought down from an altitude of 4,300 m to sea-level: an exemplification of the aether drainhole theory which causes the plastic bottle to implode)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 20, 2019, 09:51:45 AM
INVALIDATION OF THE LINEARIZED/WEAK FIELD APPROXIMATION USED IN GENERAL RELATIVITY: A BOUNDED DYNAMIC SOLUTION REQUIRES THE PRESENCE OF AN ANTIGRAVITATIONAL COUPLING TERM II

(https://i.ibb.co/jr3NfxY/lo1.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/cFhTb0H/lo2.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/jMWkfk8/lo3.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/L8Ymt5C/lo4.jpg)

(https://i.ibb.co/x19Q5px/lo5.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/Vq0hFMN/lo6.jpg)

(https://i.ibb.co/58xm65z/lo7.jpg)

(https://i.ibb.co/mb5g5Xy/lo8.jpg)

On the question of a dynamic solution in general relativity

https://www.tsijournals.com/articles/magnetoacoustic-resonance-modes-in-coler-type-apparatus.pdf


Linearization of the Einstein Equation and The 1993 Press Release of the Nobel Prize in Physics

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/28d8/db055f7258cd6151cde8964ca573e27e287b.pdf


The Gravitational Wave and Einstein Equation

https://cirworld.com/index.php/jap/article/view/354


https://www.scribd.com/document/122817396/Errors-of-Wald-on-General-Relativity

Dr. C.Y. Lo


A paper by T. Levi-Civita in 1917, one of the inventors of Tensor Calculus, showing that Einstein's pseudo-tensor is nonsense because it leads to the requirement for a first-order, intrinsic, differential invariant, which, as is well known to the pure mathematicians, does not exist:

http://web.archive.org/web/20090902090420/http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/Levi-Civita.pdf


The anti-gravitational coupling term for the Biefeld-Brown effect was derived for the first time by H. Weyl in 1917:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2177793#msg2177793

http://www.jp-petit.org/papers/cosmo/1917-Weyl-en.pdf


KHARUK-PASTON-SHEYKIN-OBUKHOV-PONOMAREV-KRECHET UFT: UNIFICATION OF THE GRAVITATIONAL AND ELECTROMAGNETIC POTENTIALS

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2192962#msg2192962



https://www.academia.edu/16201568/Finishing_Einstein_Point_by_Point_The_unification_of_quantum_and_relativity
 
"For his part, Einstein envisioned the four dimensional space-time continuum of our world as a unified field out of which both gravity and electromagnetism emerged. He further hoped that the quantum would emerge as an over-restriction of field conditions. His worldview was that of a purely three dimensional brain logical external world. He seemed unable to completely break loose from his positivistic semi-Newtonian beliefs and perspective. However, from the perspective of the non-Newtonian fourth spatial dimension (or a five-dimensional space-time), the four dimensional expanse of space is filled with a single field of potential that is the precursor to everything that exists in three dimensional space – gravity, electricity, magnetism, matter, quantum, life, mind and even consciousness. These physical ‘things’ are just different aspects of field interactions (single field density patterns or complexes) modified by the physical constants that describe the physical nature of the single field."








Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 12, 2019, 06:41:41 AM
PROJEKT KRONOS II: ANTI-TIME RESEARCH

Time has a rate of flow.

Time = terrestrial gravity = the effect of the dextrorotatory subquarks on matter

Anti-time = antigravitational force

The greatest expert on the flow of time was Dr. Nikolai Kozyrev:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1922302#msg1922302

In order to REVERSE the effects of time, matter needs to be subjected to anti-time, that is, to double torsion physics.

That is why the Kronos Projekt was awarded the priority classification "Kriegsentscheidend"  the highest known category of secrecy and funding priority known in the Third Reich, everything else (including the UFOs projects) was secondary.


Mainstream science has begun, recently, the study of reversing the effects of time, in the context of spacetime relativity:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0701084.pdf


Russian research on the reversal of time:

http://www.free-energy-devices.com/Issue12.pdf


A.D. Sakharov's memorable article on the relationship between vacuum quantum fluctuations and the theory of gravitation:

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.732.841&rep=rep1&type=pdf


The reversal of time flow currently anticipated is on the order of fractions of a second.

But that is not what the Vril Society of Germany was after.

They wanted to reverse the flow of time for a single subject by hours, days, weeks, months and even years, using double torsion technology.



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 29, 2019, 03:42:47 AM
GENERALIZED SAGNAC EFFECT VII

https://web.infn.it/GINGER/administrator/components/com_jresearch/files/publications/sagnac_AJP.pdf

The Sagnac effect and pure geometry

American Journal of Physics 83, 427 (2015)

Dr. A. Tartaglia and Dr. M.L. Ruggiero are two of the best known experts in ring laser interferometry and relativity in rotation frames in the world.


They present TWO FORMULAS for the Sagnac effect: amazingly and paradoxically these distinguished authors do not seem to infer the consequences of the two derivations.


The first formula, derived using differential geometry (page 3 of the pdf document), is this:

Δt = 4Aω/c2

A = area enclosed by the path of the light beams


Then, the authors derive A SECOND FORMULA for the Sagnac effect, which DOES NOT feature an area:

(https://image.ibb.co/cPs5vd/sagnac3.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/m86n8y/sagnac4.jpg)

This formula does not include the area at all, and is proportional to the VELOCITY of the light beams (and thus is proportional to the RADIUS of rotation).


Two different formulas, featuring two different physical descriptions.

This means that the formulas must be describing TWO DIFFERENT PHYSICAL PHENOMENA.


The first formula, which displays the AREA of the interferometer, is actually the CORIOLIS EFFECT formula:

https://www.ias.ac.in/article/fulltext/pram/087/05/0071

Spinning Earth and its Coriolis effect on the circuital light beams

The final formula is this:

dt = 4ωA/c2


If the second formula is actually the true SAGNAC EFFECT formula, which does not and cannot feature the area, then we have a most interesting situation.

For the Michelson-Gale experiment of 1925, Albert Michelson derived a formula which does exhibits the AREA:

4ΩAsinΦ/c2

(Φ is the latitude)


Now, we have to ask a question which has escaped the attention of the best physicists in the world for the past 100 years:

What is the corresponding formula for the Michelson-Gale interferometer which does not display an area and which is proportional to the velocity of the light beams?

Obviously, we now have to deal with two velocities for each side of the interferometer, v1 and v2, not to mention the two different lengths of each side.


Tartaglia and Ruggiero derived TWO formulas for the same phenomenon, but which obviously carry two very different physical and mathematical characteristics: one is proportional to the area of the interferometer, the other one is not.


Here, then, is the correct derivation of the SECOND FORMULA, which does not feature an area, for the Michelson-Gale interferometer:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2117351#msg2117351

Δt =  2(V1L1 + V2L2)/c2


(https://image.ibb.co/dbZ7Kd/gsac2.jpg)


A generalization of the second formula derived by Tartaglia and Ruggiero (2vl/c2).


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 01, 2019, 02:41:15 AM
ELECTROGRAVITY III

Using Hermann Weyl's electrovacuum solutions, Professor S.D. Majumdar found the relationship between gravitational and electrostatic forces (Biefeld-Brown effect).

https://journals.aps.org/pr/abstract/10.1103/PhysRev.72.390

(https://i.ibb.co/VVz4TBV/maj.jpg)

The Weyl-Majumdar-Papapetrou-Ivanov solution is the exact formula for the Biefeld-Brown effect:

(https://i.ibb.co/5YW8CPH/bie1.jpg)

(https://i.ibb.co/M8576CJ/bie2.jpg)

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0507082.pdf

Weyl electrovacuum solutions and gauge invariance
Dr. B.V. Ivanov

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0502047.pdf

On the gravitational field induced by static electromagnetic sources
Dr. B.V Ivanov

Nipher electrogravitational experiments:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1852840#msg1852840

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 02, 2019, 10:26:42 PM
GENERALIZED SAGNAC EFFECT VIII: STOKES' THEOREM

(https://www.phys.uconn.edu/~mallett/main/images/mallett_ring_laser.jpg)

According to Stokes' rule an integration of angular velocity Ω over an area A is substituted by an integration of tangential component of translational velocity v along the closed line of length L limiting the given area:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2023979#msg2023979

(https://i.ibb.co/FB8ysCD/stokes.jpg)

(https://i.ibb.co/cbvB7f6/stokes2.jpg)

For each interferometer there will ALWAYS be two formulas: one is proportional to the area (CORIOLIS EFFECT), the other one is proportional to the velocity (SAGNAC EFFECT).

(http://image.ibb.co/j7Q3hc/kel12.jpg)

In the case where the interferometer will be located away from the center of rotation (MGX/RLGs), there will be a factor of proportionality: R/L, where R = radius of the Earth.

(https://i.ibb.co/Byy1jQn/corsag4.jpg)

This factor of proportionality was proven, for the first time, for the LISA Space Antenna:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1985230#msg1985230

(https://image.ibb.co/iMSdB7/lisa3.jpg)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 03, 2019, 03:45:55 AM
GENERALIZED SAGNAC EFFECT IX: FOC/FOG TURNS FORMULA

In most debates, it is the contention of some physicists that for a circular coil with N turns, there will be a term featuring the area in the SAGNAC EFFECT formula; then N would be multiplied by the circumference of the circular coil and by the radius, even though there is no area at all, just a segment light path.

However, this is completely wrong.

The N turns term is multiplied by the velocity and the length of the fiber coil.

Professor R. Wang, world's foremost expert in FOC/FOG, explains:

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0609/0609235.pdf

(https://i.ibb.co/6FR2NM3/cosag.jpg)

(https://i.ibb.co/nDpvsfM/cosag2.jpg)

This is the correct expression for the SAGNAC EFFECT formula for FOC/FOG interferometers:

Δt = 2VL/c2

L = N x l

V = R x Ω

R is not multiplied by (N x l) at all: the velocity (V = R x Ω) is multiplied by L (L = N x l).


Professor Ruyong Wang has proven the Sagnac effect applies to uniform/translational/linear motion:

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0609/0609222.pdf

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0609/0609202.pdf

http://web.stcloudstate.edu/ruwang/ION58PROCEEDINGS.pdf

SAGNAC EFFECT WITHOUT AN AREA OR A LOOP

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0609/0609202.pdf

(https://image.ibb.co/g629jS/lis5.jpg)

This experiment shows us two important points. First, it confirms the phase reversal of a PCM and demonstrates the Sagnac effect in an arc segment AB, not a closed path. Second, it gives us important implications: The result, φ = 4πRΩL/cλ, can be re-written as φ = 4πvL/cλ where v is the speed of the moving arc segment AB (where R is the radius of the circular motion, Ω is the rotational rate).

If we increase the radius of the circular motion as shown in Fig. 6, the arc segment AB will approach a linear segment AB, the circular motion will approach the linear motion, the phase-conjugate Sagnac experiment will approach the phase-conjugate first-order experiment as shown in Fig. 4, and the phase shift is always φ = 4πvL/cλ.


That is why in Professor Yeh's final formula for the SAGNAC EFFECT, one multiplies the radius by the angular velocity to obtain the velocity; and this term is multiplied by the length:

(https://i.ibb.co/MsS5Bb5/yeh4.jpg)

φ = -2(φ2 - φ1) = 4π(R1L1 + R2L2)Ω/λc = 4π(V1L1 + V2L2)/λc

Since Δφ = 2πc/λ x Δt, Δt = 2(R1L1 + R2L2)Ω/c2 = 2(V1L1 + V2L2)/c2

CORRECT SAGNAC FORMULA:

2(V1L1 + V2L2)/c2


My formula is identical to (coincides with) Professor Yeh's equation:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2117351#msg2117351

2(V1L1 + V2L2)/c2

Let V1 = R1 x Ω

Let V2 = R2 x Ω

2(R1ΩL1 + R2ΩL2)/c2

=

2(R1L1 + R2L2)Ω/c2


Now, since the factor of proportionality for the interferometer which is located away from the center of rotation is R/L, we can infer immediately the form of the SAGNAC EFFECT formula which does feature the velocity and is related directly to the CORIOLIS EFFECT formula by Stokes' theorem (we ignore the latitude).

(https://i.ibb.co/Byy1jQn/corsag4.jpg)


R/L = y/{4Aω/c2}

y = 4Aω/c2 x R/L = 4VL/c2, where V = R x ω

That is, the SAGNAC EFFECT formula MUST HAVE the form: 4VL/c2.


2(R1L1 + R2L2)Ω/c2

Since R1 and R2, and L1 and L2, respectively, have values which are very close to each other, this formula simplifies to: 4VL/c2, which is exactly the formula obtained using Stokes' theorem.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 04, 2019, 12:32:20 AM
DECEMBER 10, 2011 SELENELION

(https://communicatescience.com/zoonomian/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/IMG_4877_540-1024x682.jpg)

https://communicatescience.com/zoonomian/2011/12/10/total-lunar-eclipse-10th-december-2011

(https://s22380.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/TLE_Dec2011_1418UT.jpg)

https://www.skyandtelescope.com/astronomy-news/observing-news/december-10ths-colorful-lunar-eclipse/

(http://www.zullophoto.com/Images/eclipse-2011.jpg)

(https://www.nathansauser.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/IMG_0923-800-300x225.jpg)



Lunar Eclipse as seen from San Diego CA - Dec 10, 2011



Lunar Eclipse as seen from southern New Mexico - Dec 10, 2011


"At what point during the day did the moon stop being in the sky and pass the threshold to become a refraction/reflection/mirage? There had to be a point somewhere where it happened."


But the refraction of the atmosphere argument pales in comparison with the fact that the shadow is on top:

http://worldreality.yolasite.com/selenelion--the-impossible-eclipse.php

"I found a few diagrams tying to explain the Sun and Moon visible above the horizon at the same time."

All show a shadow on the bottom of the Moon as expected.

(http://worldreality.yolasite.com/resources/demo%202.jpg)

(https://i.ibb.co/TWXhRDB/20190315-195721.jpg)

(https://i.ibb.co/bJ2dfb8/sel2.jpg)

"I can tell you haven't thought about it. Look at the model they say proves this. Then look at the "shadow" of earth on the moon. you really don't see the problem? Saying something you were taught with faith alone does not prove anything. can we agree on this statement?? "Like the sun, we always consider the moon as rising in the east and setting in the west." this statement is fact. So if the moon is traveling to the right, so would the sun.  The shadow is traveling the WRONG way.  Model where the earth is, where the sun is, where the moon is, and how the shadow looks when projected over the moon. The moon is setting to the right, the sun is rising from the left. You can tell this by looking at the moon and seeing where it HAS TO BE in order to be lighting up the face of the moon. The curve is upside down, traveling the wrong way. It's not a projection/mirage because it's clear as day and isn't inverted. The moon image is the correct orientation, everything else is wrong. moon traveling left to right as it sets. Correct? What part of earth would be blocking light from hitting the moon? The top of the earth, correct? Which way would a shadow of the top of the earth move across the moon in that situation? Which way is it traveling, and does it look like the top of a globe? The shadow is coming across the moon the wrong direction and the curve is the wrong way. You see what would be a shadow of the bottom of the earth, traveling downwards. can you REALLY not see that?

Can we agree that to us, the sun and the moon  both are seen to travel overhead in the same direction, rises in the east and sets in the west?
So now you can model this.
Here's why you are wrong, using known facts. If "on a full moon, as was on Dec 11, 2011", the moon sets in the morning, at sunrise. So if the moon is setting in the west in this video as is true, the sun is rising at the same time from the east. Now do you see the problem yet? The shadow is incorrect, the moon isn't flipped over so it cant be from a lensing effect or it would appear upside down. It isn't a mirage because mirages are wavy and not perfectly clear. It's oriented the correct way, yet everything else is wrong. if you can't see it, that's ok... but don't tell people who actually use their brains they are wrong when you didn't and only repeated what you were told. Proof is right there for you to see. You just need to actually do the proof yourself."

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 04, 2019, 07:18:05 AM
JULY 27, 2018 SELENELION


One of the most beautiful total lunar eclipses ever filmed (Norway, 24 hr midnight sun phenomenon, the moon is high up, the selenelion seems to last for some six hours):




Lunar eclipse Allais effect:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2138487#msg2138487

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 05, 2019, 08:48:02 AM
CORIOLIS-SAGNAC EFFECT FORMULA FOR RLGs/MGX EXPERIMENTS

(https://i.ibb.co/Byy1jQn/corsag4.jpg)

The first line integral is the CORIOLIS EFFECT formula. The last line integral represents the SAGNAC EFFECT formula.

Stokes' theorem proves that for each interferometer there will ALWAYS be two formulas to deal with: one is proportional to the area of the interferometer, the other one is proportional to the velocity of the light beams.

Proof:

The R/L factor of proportionality for an interferometer whose center of rotation does not coincide with its geometrical center was derived for the first time for the LISA Space Antenna. Given the huge cost of the entire project, the best experts in the field (CalTech, ESA) were called upon to provide the necessary theoretical calculations for the total phase shift of the interferometer. To everyone's surprise, and for the first time since Sagnac and Michelson and Gale, it was found that the ORBITAL SAGNAC EFFECT is much greater than the CORIOLIS EFFECT.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1985230#msg1985230

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1989098#msg1989098

The factor of proportionality was found to be R/L.

(https://image.ibb.co/iMSdB7/lisa3.jpg)

R is the actual radius of rotation.

L is the side of the interferometer.


If the center of rotation of the interferometer does coincide with its geometrical center, then the formula becomes:

(https://i.ibb.co/GW6FXrn/corsag5.jpg)

Thus we can see the huge discrepancy between the CORIOLIS EFFECT formula and the SAGNAC EFFECT formula for the MGX/RLGs (Michelson-Gale experiment/Ring Laser Gyroscopes).

There is NO velocity term for the CORIOLIS EFFECT formula: 4Aω/c2.

Therefore, if the interferometer itself is being rotated, and the RADIUS of rotation is R, then the SAGNAC EFFECT will be proportional to the velocity, V = R x ω.


A = L x l (long side multiplied by the short side)

Then, 4Aω = 4Vωl, where Vω = L x ω.

That is, the CORIOLIS EFFECT formula is equivalent to a SAGNAC EFFECT formula where the RADIUS of rotation now becomes L.

Since the RADIUS of rotation in the MGX/RLGs is actually the radius of the Earth, it becomes obvious that the SAGNAC EFFECT formula will be greater than the CORIOLIS EFFECT formula by at least a factor of R/l (interferometer in the shape of a rectangle), exactly the term found by CalTech and ESA for the LISA Space Antenna.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 09, 2019, 08:46:03 AM
LUNAR ECLIPSE ALLAIS EFFECT II

The excess of light into the shadow onto the Moon during lunar eclipses and its enlargement cannot be caused by the Earth's atmospheric refraction.

Both phenomena are encountered during lunar eclipses and selenelions.

Dr. P. Marmet has carefully investigated the enlargement of the shadow:

However, numerous reports show that the umbra-penumbra limit appears significantly displaced on the moon during an eclipse.

There is another factor about the atmosphere that has not been discussed. Light rays passing through the atmosphere are naturally bent because the atmosphere acts like a prism. This is why, during an eclipse, the Moon surface is never completely black but reddish: the red part of the solar spectrum passing through the low atmosphere is the only part scattered on the Moon in the region of totality before being reflected back to us on Earth.
        An hypothetical observer located on the Moon would see those rays being refracted by the Earth atmosphere and the Sun would appear bigger. Consequently, this second effect makes the Sun rays converge due to a lensing effect of our atmosphere. Therefore, due to that lensing effect, the umbra projected on the Moon would be smaller. This refraction by the Earth atmosphere gives an effect that is contrary to the observations claiming that the Earth's shadow must be larger due to the thickness of the atmosphere.

In his paper he proposes that the enlargement is actually an optical illusion; however, the second phenomenon which takes place during lunar eclipses, the excess of light into the shadow onto the Moon cannot be dismissed as an optical illusion.

"It was suggested that the brightness anomaly of the umbral region during an eclipse of the  Moon would be caused by refraction of sunlight through the upper regions of the Earth`s atmosphere. The red coloring arises because, they say, sunlight reaching the Moon must pass through a long and dense layer of the Earth`s atmosphere, where it is scattered. Shorter wavelengths are more likely to be scattered by the small particles and so, by the time the light has passed through the atmosphere, the longer wavelengths dominate. This resulting light we perceive as red. The amount of refracted light depends on the amount of dust or clouds in the atmosphere; this also controls how much light is scattered. In general, the dustier the atmosphere, the more that other wavelengths of light will be removed (compared to red light), leaving the resulting light a deeper red color.
Despite this reasoning, it has been found that towards the centre the umbra is too bright to be accounted for by refraction of visible sunlight. F. Link proposed that this excess be interpreted as luminescence. He concluded that about 10 percent of the Moon`s optical radiation is caused by luminescence. Observations seem to confirm the existence of lunar luminescence."

"What about major volcanic eruptions? These can loft many cubic kilometers of dust into the Earth's stratosphere, where it spreads around the globe and persists for many months. Nine months after a huge eruption of Mount Agung on Bali, the Moon became as dim as a star of visual magnitude 4.1 during the legendary total eclipse of December 30, 1963. But the 615 crater timings Sky & Telescope received from that event show an umbra size quite typical of most other eclipses, bright or dark."

The ozone layer cannot be responsible for the enlargement of the umbral size.

"It is suggested in "Celestial Shadows" [5] that the ozone layer absorption is responsible for the umbral enlargement, yet this is much lower than the notional eclipsing layer of around 85km [6]."

Dr. Marmet again, using the official science prerogatives for the introduction:

 We know that astronomical data give us accurate values of the radii of the Sun, the Earth and the Moon. Furthermore the knowledge of their relative distances gives us accurate predictions of the exact instant when the umbra-penumbra limit sweeps some specific crater on the moon during lunar eclipses.
        However, numerous reports show that the umbra-penumbra limit appears significantly displaced on the moon during an eclipse. It is believed that the thickness of the Earth atmosphere is responsible for that displacement. The article of Roger W. Sinnott ("Readers Gauge the Umbra Again", in Sky & Telescope, April 1983, p. 387) illustrates this interpretation of the shadow's enlargement in his statement: "It [the atmosphere] always increases slightly the silhouette of our globe in forming the sharply defined central region of the shadow called the umbra." Similar conclusions are also presented by Sinnott in "A Tale of Two Eclipses" (Sky & Telescope, December 1992, p. 678). Therefore, it could be implied that crater timings during full lunar eclipses can be used as a tool to evaluate the degree of pollution of our atmosphere.
        A similar result has also been claimed by Byron W. Soulsby in "Lunar Eclipse Crater Timing Programme" (Journal of the British Astronomical Association, Volume 95, Number 1, p.18) where he writes:

"Each eclipse can exhibit oblateness variations due in the main to the conditions prevailing in the Earth's atmosphere at the time of the event, particularly when large volcanic eruptions have occurred before the observations are made."
        In order to study more deeply that phenomenon, it is important to evaluate if the reported increase of 2% of the Earth's shadow at the Moon corresponds to a reasonable value of the height at which the atmosphere is opaque. Calculations give that this amount corresponds to an altitude of 92 km on the Earth.
        This usual interpretation of the umbral enlargement forces us to believe that the atmosphere is normally opaque up to 92 km or so. But how can that be when at that altitude, the air is so extremely rarefied? It is near the altitude at which a satellite can orbit around the Earth.
        In fact, according to "Astrophysical Data: Planets and Stars" (Kenneth R. Lang, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1992, p. 36), the atmospheric pressure at 90 km above sea level is about half a million times smaller than that at sea level. Above 15 km, the atmosphere becomes relatively transparent to light, since 90% of the air and almost all the humidity and pollution are below that level. That makes an umbral enlargement due to the opacity of the atmosphere of only 0.3% which is much smaller than the 2.0 % reported.
        Furthermore, the eruption of volcanos cannot explain the umbral enlargement. According to Patrick McCormick (Sky & Telescope, October 1982, p.390), the altitude reached by some material ejected from volcano El Chichon "is in the stratosphere, some 26 kilometers (16 miles) above Earth's surface - roughly 50 percent higher than material from even the famous Mount St. Helens.". So since the atmosphere does not appear to be responsible for the umbra-penumbra limit displacement of 2% on the moon, then what causes it?


Moreover, the ozone layer argument cannot be used for another important reason.

"Ozone, though heavier than oxygen, is absent in the lower layers of the atmosphere, is present in the upper layers, and is not subject to the “mixing effect of the wind.” The presence of ozone high in the atmosphere suggests that oxygen must be still higher: “As oxygen is less dense than ozone, it will tend to rise to even greater heights.” Nowhere is it asked why ozone does not descend of its own weight or at least why it is not mixed by the wind with other gases."


(https://i.ibb.co/sQ0VD61/lumis2.jpg)

(https://i.ibb.co/8XSmt6K/lumissp4.jpg)

What, then, could possibly be the cause of the excessive brightness?

(https://i.ibb.co/Dkyzm0N/lumis6.jpg)

(https://i.ibb.co/M2LYfVj/lumis7.jpg)

(https://i.ibb.co/RQ4f2j0/lumissp5.jpg)

(https://i.ibb.co/Br5qRcZ/lumis8.jpg)

So, only coronal mass ejections shock waves could be the source of energy for the wide area lunar luminescence phenomena.

However, the CME shock waves can only occur in the context of the ether solar theory (electric sun theory):

https://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/arch05/050624protonstorm.htm

Then on January 20 the fifth explosion produced a coronal mass ejection (CME) that achieved velocities incomparably greater than anything astronomers had seen before.

Powerful ejections can throw off a billion tons of solar material. Normally they travel relatively slowly. “Even the fastest ones, traveling one to two thousand km/s, take a day or so to reach Earth. You know a CME has just arrived when you see auroras in the sky”.

But how does the ejected material attain its observed speeds? Even common ejections travel faster and faster as they move outward from the Sun, achieving speeds up to a thousand miles per second or more. This acceleration, the theory surmises, can be explained by the “shock waves” that the CME produces. “Shock waves in front of the CME can accelerate these protons in our direction—hence the proton storm”.

But this space weather theory is “soon to be revised”, the story says. Here’s why: Though the speeds of typical CMEs are impressive, and have posed a deep mystery for decades, they do not come close to the speed of the January 20 ejection. Light from the Sun (or from a solar flare) reaches Earth in 8 minutes. An ejection reaching Earth in 30 minutes must be rapidly accelerated to velocities more than a quarter of the speed of light. From the traditional viewpoint, this is unthinkable. And yet it happened.


X-rays from the Sun are not generated thermally, electromagnetic particles are being accelerated through the Sun's own ether field to create x-rays. The cause of the solar x-rays is electrical, not thermal.

Koronium

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2057945#msg2057945

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2058259#msg2058259

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2064256#msg2064256

(https://image.ibb.co/ncz5dT/comle2.jpg)

Dr. Stuart D. Bale, UC Berkeley

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 12, 2019, 12:58:28 AM
ROMAN-PARTHIAN WARS REVISITED

Official chronology of history:

https://brewminate.com/parthia-romes-ablest-competitor/

However, Garri Kasparov investigated the entire storyline of these events and found out that they could never have taken place at all.

http://www.revisedhistory.org/Book%20of%20Civilization.pdf

Cavalry. If we believe «antic» sources, the Roman cavalry was not a serious force. One of the reasons was that there was no harness! Probably, there were already reins, but there were no stirrups. Stirrups appeared only in the 8th century according to the traditional dating of official history. Allegedly stirrups came from China. And in the 8th century AD together with stirrups chivalry came. It all coincides — stirrups and immediately chivalry. And it is right and understandable. But ancient Romans did not pay attention to harness at all. But the most dangerous battles in history of Rome were with oriental people, skillful horse riders. With mythical Parthians who disappeared all of a sudden. By the way, there was the Parthian kingdom and then ... disappeared. And those oriental people had two important advantages, i.e. cavalry archers that inflicted heavy casualties on the Romans. Arrows of heavy long bows smashed the infantry, knocked it down in rows. But Rome did not make any attempts to improve shooting arms. Ancient Rome did not have arbalests either. Although, the Romans, masters of ballistics, could have easily invented powerful enough shooting devices which could be operated by one person, like arbalests and long bows. Nevertheless, it did not happen, and in reality the quality of military actions of the Roman army did not change. There is one more discrepancy. Numerous heroes of ancient Greek myths were splendid archers. Even powerful Hercules had to use arrows many times. The bow of Odysseus possessing incredible killing power slew unlucky bridegrooms of Penelope. And so many giants were killed by brilliant Apollo with his well-aimed bow!

There are two well-known occasions of crushing defeats of Roman legions. The first is the fall of the Crassus army at Carrhae in 53 BC The second one is Adrianople, the defeat of the army of Emperor Valens in 378 AD The time period between the first and the second is allegedly 400 years! But both defeats are practically identical. In both cases heavy cavalry and archers just smash the Romans. The legions cannot maintain battle formation, the Roman cavalry gets stuck somewhere. The foes break up the formation and start to pursue the shocked crowd of warriors. The descriptions of both battles are almost alike. By the way, they took place in Asia Minor close to each other. In accordance with the proposed new chronology, it is more likely that the two mirages just lie on each other. In reality, a western army was once in ancient time completely defeated because it could not withstand well-aimed arrows and heavy cavalry cutting the formation apart. Quite probably, it was one of the battles of a medieval Trojan war.

The preface is written by Kasparov and is a fantastic analysis of "ancient" history: biological and anthropological factors, psychophysical factors, the primitivism of musical instruments, the inability to improve arms and military tactics, absence of geographical maps, absence of banking system and goods credit, absence of great scholars since the 1st century BC, absence of counting systems, absence of chemical investigations, absence of good medicine, paucity of life conditions and devices (no forks, knives, functional kitchenware).

http://www.revisedhistory.org/view-garry-kasparov.htm

Mathematics of the Past

But let us return to mathematics and to ancient Rome. The Roman numeral system discouraged serious calculations. How could the ancient Romans build elaborate structures such as temples, bridges, and aqueducts without precise and elaborate calculations? The most important deficiency of Roman numerals is that they are completely unsuitable even for performing a simple operation like addition, not to mention multiplication, which presents substantial difficulties. In early European universities, algorithms for multiplication and division using Roman numerals were doctoral research topics. It is absolutely impossible to use clumsy Roman numbers in multi-stage calculations. The Roman system had no numeral "zero." Even the simplest decimal operations with numbers cannot be expressed in Roman numerals.

Despite all these deficiencies, Roman numerals supposedly remained the predominant representation of numbers in European culture until the 14th century. How did the ancient Romans succeed in their calculations and complicated astronomical computations? It is believed that in the 3rd century, the Greek mathematician Diophantus was able to find positive and rational solutions to the following system of equations, called Diophantic today.

According to historians, at the time of Diophantus, only one symbol was used for an unknown, a symbol for "plus" did not exist, neither was there a symbol for "zero." How could Diophantic equations be solved using Greek letters or Roman numerals? Can these solutions be reproduced? Are we dealing here with another secret of ancient history that we are not supposed to question?

It is also interesting to look at the invention of the logarithm. The logarithm of a number x (to the base 10) expresses simply the number of digits in the decimal representation of x, so it is clearly connected to the idea of the positional numbering system. Obviously, Roman numerals could not have led to the invention of logarithms.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on October 19, 2019, 01:53:10 AM
GENERALIZED SAGNAC EFFECT X: OPERA-CERN NEUTRINO EXPERIMENT

(http://www.ipa.phys.ethz.ch/research/ResearchProjects/opera/_jcr_content/par/fullwidthimage/image.imageformat.lightbox.160967700.png)

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1109.4897.pdf

"The Earth’s revolution around the Sun and the movement of the solar system in the Milky Way induce a negligible effect, as well as the influence of the gravitational fields of Moon, Sun and Milky Way, and the Earth’s frame-dragging."

However, the ORBITAL SAGNAC effect and the GALACTIC SAGNAC effect were never even addressed, much less calculated, by the scientists who were part of the OPERA neutrino experiment.

http://operaweb.lngs.infn.it/Opera/publicnotes/note136.pdf

The gravitational fields consequences of the moon, sun and the galaxy were calculated, and not the ORBITAL or the GALACTIC SAGNAC effects.

The CORIOLIS EFFECT formula was computed and was found to be identical to the formula published earlier by N. Ashby and by C.C. Su:

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.615.3798&rep=rep1&type=pdf

https://web.archive.org/web/20050515161001/http://qem.ee.nthu.edu.tw/f1a.pdf

Dr. Stephan Gift tried to point out to the physicists at CERN and Gran Sasso Laboratory that the orbital Sagnac had never been computed at all:

(1) Why isn’t the effect of the orbital movement of the Earth also included?

So they tried to quiet him down:

Continuing to quote from page 16 (of 1109.4897v2), “The Earth’s revolution around the Sun and the movement of the solar system in the Milky Way induce a negligible effect, as well as the influence of the gravitational fields of Moon, Sun and Milky Way, and the Earth’s frame-dragging [39].”

But, as we have seen, those calculations have nothing to do with the orbital Sagnac effect, which is much larger than the rotational Sagnac effect (which was not recorded at all by the neutrino experiment).

Dr. Gift responded:

Moreover, the authors have given no basis for the claim in the paper that the Earth’s revolution around the Sun and the movement of the solar system in the Milky Way induce a negligible effect, particularly as the Earth’s rotational speed at the relevant latitude is about 330m/s while its orbital speed is 30km/s.


However, the biggest surprise came from the University of Cambridge.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1110.0392.pdf

The influence of Earth rotation in neutrino speed measurements between CERN and the OPERA detector

Markus G. Kuhn
Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge

For the first time ever, it was acknowledged that the SAGNAC EFFECT measured for the neutrino experiment is actually the CORIOLIS EFFECT.

As the authors did not indicate whether and how they took into account the Coriolis or Sagnac effect that Earth’s rotation has on the (southeastwards traveling) neutrinos, this brief note quantifies this effect.

And the resulting Coriolis effect (in optics also known as Sagnac effect) should be taken into account.

It is beyond belief that physicists who find themselves at the highest possible level in the mainstream scientific community can confuse the SAGNAC EFFECT with the CORIOLIS EFFECT.

The Coriolis effect is just a physical effect, a slight lateral deflection of the light beams. It is proportional to the area of the interferometer.

The Sagnac effect, by contrast, is an electromagnetic effect, it modifies the velocities of the light beams, and is much larger than the Coriolis effect, since it is proportional to the radius of rotation.

But Dr. Kuhn does acknowledge that the effect measured upon the neutrion beam is actually the CORIOLIS EFFECT.


Again, the Coriolis effect formula (angular velocity x area) was computed for the OPERA neutrino experiment:

http://alpha.sinp.msu.ru/~panov/Lib/Papers/OPERA/1109.6160v2.pdf


Let me now PROVE that, for an interferometer whose center of rotation does not coincide with its geometrical center, one will record BOTH the Sagnac and the Coriolis effects.

LISA Space Antenna

(https://image.ibb.co/ivHjjS/lisa2.jpg)

The LISA interferometer rotates both around its own axis and around the Sun as well, at the same time.

That is, the interferometer will be subjected to BOTH the rotational Sagnac (equivalent to the Coriolis effect) and the orbital Sagnac effects.

If the interferometer would not be rotating around its axis, but only would be orbiting the Sun, it will be subjected to BOTH the Coriolis effect of rotation and the orbital Sagnac effect.

For an interferometer which has regular geometry (square, rectangle, equilateral triangle) the Coriolis effect and the Sagnac effect coincide and are equal; for the first case, the interferometer can be stationary (not rotating around its own axis) while for the second case, the interferometer must be rotating.

Given the huge cost of the entire project, the best experts in the field (CalTech, ESA) were called upon to provide the necessary theoretical calculations for the total phase shift of the interferometer. To everyone's surprise, and for the first time since Sagnac and Michelson and Gale, it was found that the ORBITAL SAGNAC EFFECT is much greater than the CORIOLIS EFFECT.

The factor of proportionality is R/L (R = radius of rotation, L = length of the side of the interferometer).

(https://image.ibb.co/iMSdB7/lisa3.jpg)

Algebraic approach to time-delay data analysis: orbiting case
K Rajesh Nayak and J-Y Vinet

https://www.cosmos.esa.int/documents/946106/1027345/TDI_FOR_.PDF/2bb32fba-1b8a-438d-9e95-bc40c32debbe

This is an IOP article, published by the prestigious journal Classic and Quantum Gravity:

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0264-9381/22/10/040/meta

In this work, we estimate the effects due to the Sagnac phase by taking the realistic model for LISA orbital motion.

This work is organized as follows: in section 2, we make an estimate of Sagnac phase
for individual laser beams of LISA by taking realistic orbital motion. Here we show that, in general, the residual laser noise because of Sagnac phase is much larger than earlier estimates.

For the LISA geometry, R⊙/L is of the order 30 and the orbital contribution to the Sagnac phase is larger by this factor.

The computations carried out by Dr. R.K. Nayak (over ten papers published on the subject) and Dr. J.Y. Vinet (Member of the LISA International Science Team), and published by prestigious scientific journals and by ESA, show that the orbital Sagnac is 30 times greater than the rotational Sagnac for LISA.


The same phenomenon is at work for the MGX and RLGs.

One has an interferometer which is rotating on the surface of a sphere: it will be subjected to both the Coriolis effect and to the Sagnac effect.


According to Stokes' rule an integration of angular velocity Ω over an area A is substituted by an integration of tangential component of translational velocity v along the closed line of length L limiting the given area:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2023979#msg2023979

"Sagnac effect is a change in propagation time for light going in a closed path. The time delay Δt appears when a test equipment is rotated with an angular velocity Ώ. Sagnac effect is frequently used in rate gyros in navigational systems. Fiber optics is used with light-speed c inside the fiber in a circular light path. The difference in propagation time Δt for two opposite directions of light is described as

Δt = 4AΩ/c2

Where A is enclosed area. Δt is derived based on an integration of Ω over A.

According to Stokes' rule can an integration of angular velocity Ω over an area A be substituted by an integration of tangential component of translational velocity v along the closed line of length L limiting the given area. This interpretation gives

Δt = 4vL/c2

producing the same value as the earlier expression. This can also be demonstrated by geometrical relations. These two integrations have different physical implications. We must therefore decide which one is correct from a physical aspect. Mathematics can not tell us that. So the decision is whether the effect is caused by a rotating area or by a translating line. Since Sagnac effect is an effect in light that is enclosed inside an optical fiber we can conclude that Sagnac effect is distributed along a line and not over an area. No light and no rotation exists in the enclosed area. Sagnac detected therefore an effect of translation although he had to rotate the equipment to produce the effect inside the fiber.

We conclude that the later expression

Δt = 4vL/c2

is the correct interpretation."


Here is the CORIOLIS EFFECT formula:

https://www.ias.ac.in/article/fulltext/pram/087/05/0071

Spinning Earth and its Coriolis effect on the circuital light beams

The final formula is this:

dt = 4ωA/c2


The SAGNAC EFFECT, by contrast, does not feature an AREA at all.

(https://image.ibb.co/cPs5vd/sagnac3.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/m86n8y/sagnac4.jpg)


Here is the CORIOLIS FORMULA for the MGX:

4AωsinΦ/c2

Φ = (Φ1 + Φ2)/2


Here is the SAGNAC FORMULA for the MGX:

2(V1L1 + V2L2)/c2

V1 = V0cosΦ1
V2 = V0cosΦ2
L1 = L0cosΦ1
L2 = L0cosΦ2

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2117351#msg2117351


Let now V0 = V and L0 = L.
Let ε = sinΦ and ε1 = (cos2Φ1 + cos2Φ2)

Then, we obtain:

CORIOLIS EFFECT FORMULA

4Aωε/c2


SAGNAC EFFECT FORMULA

2VLε1/c2

Exactly the form required by the application of Stokes' theorem to light interferometers.


The effect of ether on beam neutrinos experiments:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2061804#msg2061804


Hasselbach and Nicklaus and Werner measured the CORIOLIS EFFECT of the ether drift upon the electrons/neutrons.

What S.A. Werner measured in 1979 is the CORIOLIS EFFECT upon the neutron phase:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1701.00259.pdf

Once the area of the interferometer is mentioned, one obtains the CORIOLIS EFFECT.



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 28, 2019, 11:38:04 AM
ACTIVE AND INERTIAL GRAVITATIONAL MASSES

(https://i.ibb.co/KrN41gb/ell1.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/xqJ972w/ell2.jpg)

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0701012.pdf

Dr. H.G. Ellis
Department of Mathematics,
University Colorado Boulder



http://web.archive.org/web/20090902090420/http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/Levi-Civita.pdf

A very nice paper by T. Levi-Civita in 1917, one of the inventors of Tensor Calculus, showing that Einstein's pseudo-tensor is nonsense because it leads to the requirement for a first-order, intrinsic, differential invariant, which, as is well known to the pure mathematicians, does not exist! This too has been ignored by the relativists.


The Repulsive Gravitation and Errors of Einstein

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6057/f99c6fcb7ffdb7584749aeb345b97a7e8a79.pdf



Energy-Momentum of the Gravitational Field: Crucial Point for Gravitation Physics and Cosmology

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0809/0809.2323.pdf

"Here it is shown that existence of well-defined positive energy-momentum of the gravity field leads to radical changes in gravity physics and cosmology, including such new possibilities as two-component nature of gravity – attraction (spin 2) and repulsion (spin 0).

The "pseudo-tensor" character of the gravity field in GR has been discussed from time to time for a century, causing surprises for each new generation of physicists.

The strategy and basic principles of the field gravity theory were discussed by Feynman, who emphasized that "geometrical interpretation is not really necessary or essential for physics" (Feynman, Morinigo & Wagner 1995, p. 113). He pointed to the central role of the energy of the gravity field for a reasonable theory of gravitational interaction.

For him gravitons were particles carrying the energy-momentum of the field: "the situation is exactly analogous to electrodynamics - and in the quantum interpretation, every radiated graviton carries away an amount of energy.

In the Poincare-Feynman field approach, the gravity force between Newton's apple and the Earth is caused by the exchange of gravitons.

The most intriguing consequence of the field gravity theory is that the scalar part (spin 0) corresponds to a repulsive force, while the pure tensor part (spin 2) corresponds to attraction."


The Energy-Momentum Tensor For The Gravitational Field

http://cds.cern.ch/record/392913/files/9907027.pdf


Recent cosmological observations have raised the possibility that under certain circumstances gravity might actually contain an effective repulsive component, to thus invite consideration of the degree to which, and of the specific set of conditions under which, gravity actually need be strictly attractive in the first place. In fact, familiar as attractive gravity is, its actual attractiveness stems from the a priori assumption that Newton’s constant G be chosen (purely by hand) to actually be positive. Then with this positive G being treated as a fundamental input parameter by both Newtonian gravity and its relativistic Einstein gravity generalization (and even by their quantum-mechanical string theory generalization as well for that matter), the universal attractive nature of gravity is then posited on all distance scales and for all possible gravitational field strengths. As such, this actually constitutes a quite severe extrapolation of observationally established gravitational information from the kinematic solar system distance scale weak gravity regime where it was expressly obtained in the first place. And indeed, when the standard Newton-Einstein gravitational theory is actually extended beyond its solar system origins, nonetheless, disturbingly many difficulties are also encountered, in essentially every single such type of extrapolation that is in in fact made.

Dr. Philip D. Mannheim
Department of Physics, University of Connecticut


Exact formula for the Biefeld-Brown effect:

(https://i.ibb.co/5YW8CPH/bie1.jpg)


Zero point energy (ether waves) and the mass of the graviton.

Effect of the Vacuum Energy Density on Graviton Propagation

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0409/0409098.pdf


Dr. Erik Verlinde:

General Relativity remains just a description of the force we call gravity. It leaves unanswered the key question of exactly how matter affects space and time.


"The graviton particle is chosen with the right mathematical characteristic to quantize gravity in accordance with quantum field theory and general relativity. These attempts however, fail to account for the origin of space-time curvature. Specifically, how does a graviton produce curvature when propagating from one mass to another? Does the graviton move in an already existing 4D space-time curvature? If it does, how is the space-time produced by the graviton? If not, how is 4D space-time curvature produced? In other words, if the 4D space-time curvature is not caused by the graviton exchanges, then what is the cause?"

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/9902/9902073.pdf


"Newton’s law of action and reaction is applicable to the bodies A and B only under the condition that gravity acts at a distance instantaneously, that is, at infinite propagation speed. But the general theory of relativity Einstein was expounding is a field theory in which gravitational effects propagate at finite speed."

Faster than light speed of gravity:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1943468#msg1943468



https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00696109

Quantum field theory cannot provide faster-than-light communication

Phillippe H. Eberhard, Ronald R. Ross
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory

https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5604n7md

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 06, 2019, 05:43:58 AM
GIZEH PYRAMID: WHEN WAS IT ACTUALLY BUILT? II


(https://i.ibb.co/NTYfsV6/Lunar-Eclipse-Above-the-Pyramid-and-Sphinx-web-1000-n-72.jpg)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1625605#msg1625605 (part I)

"The Great Pyramid took 20 years to build, with an estimated 12 blocks moved into place each hour for 24 hours a day on average."

The Gizeh pyramid was not built using ramps:

https://www.cheops-pyramide.ch/khufu-pyramid/pyramid-theories.html

Ropes/pulleys could not have been used to transport the 40 ton stress-relieving, granite slabs above the roof of the King’s Chamber. To transport a 60 ton block of stone, even using wheels, requires a sophisticated braking system.

Moreover the basic problem remains: how were those blocks of stone transported to the building site in the first place?

The Gizeh pyramid was not built using hydraulic methods:

https://arkysite.wordpress.com/2012/08/09/how-the-pyramids-were-really-built-really/

By comparison, here is the Penasquito mine tailing dam (one side will measure 4 km):

(https://d39ua1j16brbz0.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Penasquito-Tailings-Dam-Full-View-768x410.png?x87252)

"To give you an idea of the enormous size of Penasquito’s tailings dam, the red circle shows just how small the large Komatsu 930E haul truck is next to the dam. The Komatsu 930E haul truck, which Penasquito has 85 currently in its fleet, is 24 feet tall and can move 320 tons of ore, rock or sand in a single trip."

The ultimate height of the tailings dam will reach 142 meters: the total height of the Gizeh pyramid is 148.6 meters (frustum + apex).


Given these facts, engineers and physicists have sought to explain the Gizeh pyramid by other means: the use of concrete.

https://www.geopolymer.org/archaeology/pyramids/are-pyramids-made-out-of-concrete-1/

The author of the theory claims that even the Baalbek huge granite blocks, and the monuments at Tiahuanaco, were built using concrete.

Now, it is known for sure that the diorite vases/amphoras were produced using the potter's wheel (geopolymer cement).

http://chronologia.org/en/how_it_was/04_14.html

However, the geopolymer concrete technique would have still required the grinding down of the primary rocks into a dust-like powder. Then, that powder had to be transported to the construction site. Faced with these problems, the physicists were forced to come up with an explanation: sonic drilling was used to carve and grind down the stones.

But then, if sonic/ultrasonic carving and drilling was actually used, acoustic levitation could have been utilized to transport the enormous blocks of stone.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2179616#msg2179616

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1569140#msg1569140


Then, there is the matter of the arctangent extended infinite series used at Gizeh:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1834389#msg1834389

The use of advanced calculus means that the Gizeh pyramid was built exactly at the same time as the knowledge of mathematical analysis was being introduced in the 17th century:

Origin of Calculus: How Mathematical Analysis Was Imported to India, Italy, France and England

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1574605#msg1574605

The Gizeh pyramid and the zeros of the Riemann zeta function:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2006301#msg2006301

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2006274#msg2006274

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 09, 2019, 03:44:55 AM
ULTIMATE PROOF: METER UNIT OF LENGTH AND TAYLOR/EULER ARCTANGENT SERIES AT GIZEH

The angle that each face of the Pyramid makes with the base is exactly 51.8554°.

The most precise ever measuremets of the Giza pyramid were taken by D. Davidson (beyond Piazzi or Petrie):

http://www.magia-metachemica.net/uploads/1/0/6/2/10624795/davidson_the_great_pyramid_its_divine_message.pdf

Page 75

51° 51' 14.3"
= 51° + 51'/60 + 14.3"/3600
= 51.85397°

90° - 51.8554° = 38.1446°

All of the inner and outer measurements of the Gizeh pyramid were determined using three circles each having a radius of 60 sacred cubits = 38.18 meters (one sacred cubit = 0.636363 meters).

(https://image.ibb.co/h12HQd/pyr1_zps536964c8.jpg)

"Our own calculations show that the radius adopted for the three circles envisioned by us was equal to 60 such Sacred Cubits; the number 60 being, not accidentally, the base number of the Sumerian sexagesimal mathematical system. This measure of 60 Sacred Cubits is dominant in the lengths and heights of the pyramid's inner structure as well as in the dimensions of its base."

The value of 38.18 can only be inferred if, and only if, the 60 sacred cubits are expressed in meters.

The architects of the Gizeh pyramid had at their disposal the METER, as an UNIT OF BASIC MEASUREMENT OF LENGTH. In the official chronology of history, the meter was adopted in 1799 AD in France.


Virtually all of the authors who do study the dimensions of the Gizeh pyramid use the ARCTANGENT FUNCTION to calculate the various angles, especially those of the slope of the pyramid's outer casing. Yet, they do not understand that the planners of the pyramid had to do the same thing in order to calculate the very precise values of these angles.

51.85/38.1 = 1.361

5.23 (masonry base) + 136.1 (pyramid frustum w/o the masonry base) + 7.28 (apex) = 148.61

Length of the sides of the right triangle: 148.61 meters, 116.71204 meters, 188.961987 meters.

Again, we can obtain the value of 136.1 meters, if, and only if, we substract from the total height of the frustum of the pyramid, the elevation of the masonry base which is 5.23 meters. The height of the masonry base was obtained, for the first time, in 1985 with the help of the diagram which features the three circles.

The elevation of the king's chamber is 43.37 meters.

http://www.magia-metachemica.net/uploads/1/0/6/2/10624795/davidson_the_great_pyramid_its_divine_message.pdf (pages 151 - 158)

43.37 - 38.14 = 5.23

The width of the queen's chamber also measures 5.23 meters.


The architects of the Gizeh pyramid had to use the extended arctangent series to find the precise values of the angles, but in addition they also knew the value of the most important constant of the eta zeta function (alternating series zeta function): 2π/ln2.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/math/0209393.pdf

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0706.2840.pdf


90 - 38.1446 = 51.8554

51.85 x ln2/2π = 2 x 2.86


286.1 is the displacement factor of the Gizeh pyramid.

136.12° radians x 3.81553 = 2π/ln2

That is, 2π/ln2 is the arclength corresponding to the 136.12° expressed in radians multiplied by 6 sacred cubits.


Thus the builders of the pyramid also knew the value of π and made use of the radian measure and of the natural logarithm.

"The concept of radian measure, as opposed to the degree of an angle, is normally credited to Roger Cotes in 1714. He had the radian in everything but name, and he recognized its naturalness as a unit of angular measure

The first mention of the natural logarithm was by Nicholas Mercator in his work Logarithmotechnia published in 1668, although the mathematics teacher John Speidell had already in 1619 compiled a table on the natural logarithm."


In order to find the values of the two angles, 51.8554° and 38.1446°, the architects had to solve these equations:

TAN X = 1.27330478216 = 0.636652 x 2

SIN X = 0.617648


To find the final value of 51.8554 degrees, the architects MUST have used the extended arctangent series to achieve the final result.

Just a "very good approximation" won't do it.

One needs the correct value to the fifth decimal, something that can be achieved ONLY by using advanced calculus.

There is no way that Euler's extended arctangent series would have been used 4,500 years ago by the civilization which built the Gizeh pyramid: the entire development of the accepted chronology of history would be defied on a monumental scale.

The architects of the pyramid did use the extended arctangent series exactly in the 17th century, when they also infused the knowledge about calculus into mainstream science in Kerala, France, Italy, and England.

The derivation of the extended arctangent series, a result from advanced calculus:

http://eulerarchive.maa.org/hedi/HEDI-2009-02.pdf
https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1835310/new-series-formula-for-arctanx-lnx

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/1/a/6/1a65c25333063610ba7ca6aecd562356.png)

51.8554° = 0.907045 radians

1/1.27330478216 = 0.78535

Substituting the value of 0.78535 in the Maclaurin arctan series and solving the reciprocal arctan equation, up to the O(x11) term we get:

0.905045

This corresponds to a 51.983° value.

Therefore, the builders of the Pyramid must have had at their disposal the notion of the derivative (either the Newton-Leibniz or the Madhava definitions) in order to obtain the arctan Maclaurin series, not to mention the reciprocal arctan equation; even in that case, they had to be able to compute powers of certain numbers, going perhaps all the way to the O(x17) term (in the Maclaurin series) or even beyond, to obtain a meaningful accuracy.

And the value of TAN 51.8554° equals exactly two sacred cubits expressed as a dimensionless number (1.27330478216 = 0.636652 x 2).


The total height of the apex is 286.1 sacred inches = 7.28 meters.

148.61 - 7.28 = 141.33 meters.

The value of the first zero of Riemann's zeta function is 14.134725.

The GIZEH PYRAMID is a large scale representation of the SMALLEST PARTICLE OF QUANTUM PHYSICS (even smaller than a boson).

https://web.archive.org/web/20170605173236/http://reocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/3324/nefersschooloflearning.htm

https://web.archive.org/web/20170605171457/http://reocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/3324/nefershouse.htm

https://web.archive.org/web/20120802231648/http://reocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/3324/pan3.gif

There are several values to be used for the sacred cubit depending on the color of the light spectrum: starting from 0.62832 all the way to 0.64 – the most important value is of course 0.636363..., the sacred cubit.

The authors of the work even express each and every value of the Gizeh pyramid using a very special type of circle:

https://web.archive.org/web/20120802231648/http://reocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/3324/pan5.gif


Reference #1

http://davidpratt.info/pyramid.htm

For example, the angle of slope of the Pyramid’s outer casing was 51.85 degrees.


Reference #2

The Pyramid Age, E.J. Sweeney

Chapter 1, page 4

This ratio provides a slope of 51.85 degrees (calculated).


Reference #3

http://stochasticprojectmanagement.com/?p=105

ratio of height to width: 1.571 (one half of pi)  slope: 51.85 degrees


Reference #4

https://web.archive.org/web/20160401055724/http://www.numberscience.me.uk/Giza.html

The slant angle of the face of the pyramid approximates to 51.85 degrees.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 27, 2019, 03:05:30 AM
GIZEH PYRAMID: WHEN WAS IT ACTUALLY BUILT? III

When tourists enter the Grand Gallery and the so-called King's Chamber of the Great Pyramid for the first time, most are surprised to encounter high humidity. In 1974, a joint research project carried out by Stanford Research Institute (SRI International), of Stanford (California) and Ain Shams University, in Cairo, indicated that whereas the bedrock of Giza is dry, the pyramid blocks are full of moisture.

(Davidovits & Morris, The Pyramids: An Enigma Solved, p. 15).

"Nobel Prize winning "scientist" Dr. Luis Alvarez was given the task of x-raying the pyramids at Giza to find hidden chambers. Using naturally occurring cosmic rays, his scheme was to place spark chambers, standard equipment in the high-energy particle physics of this time, beneath the second pyramid of Chephren in a known chamber. By measuring the counting rate of the cosmic rays in different directions the detector would reveal the existence of any void in the overlaying rock structure.

Alvarez and his team were about to use space age technology to look inside the oldest building in the world.

Dr. Luis Alvarez recommended using cosmic rays to x-ray all the pyramids in the Giza Plateau.

Archaeologist and author Ahmed Fakhry was his liaison in Egypt.

Their work continued until the Six-Day War in June 1967."

(http://www.reformation.org/en-x-team.jpg)
http://www.reformation.org/en-x-team.jpg

Preparing to X-ray the pyramids with Egyptologist Ahmed Fakhry and team leader Jerry Anderson, Berkeley, 1966.

"The results were ASTONISHING. The cosmic rays could not penetrate the water saturated limestone blocks of the pyramids."

(http://www.reformation.org/alvarez-pyramid-team.jpg)
http://www.reformation.org/alvarez-pyramid-team.jpg

"The x-ray team in front of the Great Pyramid. Alvarez is on the left."


In 1974, a massive 1 million dollar project was launched by the National Science Foundation in the U.S. to locate hidden chambers in the Giza pyramids.

(http://www.reformation.org/x-raying-great-pyramid.jpg)
http://www.reformation.org/x-raying-great-pyramid.jpg

(setting up the x-ray equipment in the Great Pyramid)

"In 1974, apparently unaware of the pyramid x-raying of Alvarez, the National Science Foundation launched another attempt to x-ray the pyramids.

This time the results were published.

The limestone rocks were too saturated with water to allow penetration by cosmic rays."

(http://www.reformation.org/x-raying-great-pyramid2.jpg)
http://www.reformation.org/x-raying-great-pyramid2.jpg

(oscilloscope setup in Belzoni's Chamber)

The search had to be abandoned because the electro-magnetic sounder equipment could not penetrate the limestone rocks due to their high water content.

(http://www.reformation.org/cheops-limestone.jpg)
http://www.reformation.org/cheops-limestone.jpg

(Cheops limestone water content chart)

"Limestone from all over Egypt was tested against Cheops limestone for water content.

The results were that Great Pyramid limestone is UNIQUE because it is saturated with MOISTURE and not found anywhere else in the world.

It is antediluvian limestone."

A Joint Egyptian-American research team conducted electromagnetic sounder experiments during autumn 1974 with the primary objective of locating archaeologically significant chambers in the Giza area. Radio frequency losses in the limestone rock of the area, ranging from 6 dB/m at 10 MHz to 25 dB/m at 150 MHz, appear to preclude much practical application of radio-frequency sounding in the vicinity of Giza. The high losses are contrary to expectations based on samples analyzed before the Giza experiments, but are consistent with later laboratory analyses made at the high temperature and high humidity characteristic of the Giza environment.

(Electromagnetic Sounder Experiments at the Pyramids of Giza. p. iii).

http://www.ldolphin.org/egypt/egypt1/index.html

Electromagnetic Sounder Experiments at the Pyramids of Giza

Stanford University

During its autumn 1974 electromagnetic sounder experiments the joint Egyptian-American research team established that high attenuation due to high water content in the limestone of the Giza area precluded many practical applications of radio-frequency sounding for archaeological purposes in that area.

The 10-MHz transmitter and antenna were carried 100 m up the south face of Cheops' pyramid, and placed by the air shaft from the King's chamber:

(http://www.ldolphin.org/egypt/egypt1/fig12.jpg)
http://www.ldolphin.org/egypt/egypt1/fig12.jpg

Even when the receiving antenna in the portable receiver was placed next to the air shaft on the south wall of the King's chamber, no sounder signals could be heard through the intervening 50 m of rock.


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1936055#msg1936055 (Gizeh pyramid challenge for Velikovsky and heliocentrism)


1643 AD (first cosmic cataclysm; Tiamat is split into two disks: Rahu and Ketu (Black Sun and Shadow Moon, by Venus and Mercury (Typhon) the former satellites of Jupiter)

1643 + 63.6 = 1706

1706 AD (great Flood occurred, caused by Typhon/Nibiru/Mercury)

1706 + 63.6 = 1769

1769 AD (end of Venus transit, the island of California becomes part of the American continent, Tartaria/Tartary could no longer defend its former territories in North and South America since Siberia was totally covered by ice)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 28, 2019, 01:27:04 AM
GIZEH PYRAMID: WHEN WAS IT ACTUALLY BUILT? IV

(https://www.ancient-code.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/giza-sea-saturation.jpg)

“We can clearly see the pristine condition and the details of the perforations of the exoskeleton, this means that the sea creature must have been petrified in recent times.” -Sherif El Morsy

https://www.gigalresearch.com/uk/Menkara-petrified-shallow-marine-creature.php

“During one of the documentations of the ancient coastline, I almost tripped with a block of the second level of a temple,” said Mr. Morsy in an article published on the website Gigal Research. “To my surprise, the bump on the top surface of the block that almost tripped me was in fact a  exoskeleton of a fossil of what appears to be a echinoid (sea urchin) which are marine creatures that live in relatively shallow waters.”

Archaeologist Sherif El Morsy, who has worked extensively on the Giza plateau for over two decades, and his colleague Antoine Gigal, were the ones who made the discovery of this controversial fossil, which backs up studies and theories that the Pyramids of Giza and the mighty Sphinx were once submerged under the sea.

According to El Morsy, the flooding, was quite significant, peaking at about 75 meters above current sea level and creating a coastline spanning to the Khafra enclosure near the Sphinx at the temple of Menkare.

A convincing clue proving that the Giza plateau was once covered by the sea is being studied, along with other evidence of erosion due to saturation by deep water of the surface of the plateau. An echinoid (a type of sea urchin or shallow marine creature) petrified in “recent times” has been found embedded upright in the upper surface of a block adjoining the Menkaura pyramid and within the ancient intertidal range.


"Since the end of the third millennium B.C. the climate of Egypt has been generally similar to that of the present day. Between 2350 B.C. and A.D. 700 the average temperature seems to have been, if anything, a trifle above and the average rainfall a little below the modern levels, but with at least two 'quite moist' spells, one in late Ramesside times [circa 1200-1100 B.C.] and one about 850 B.C."

"The nature and especially degree of weathering seen in the Sphinx enclosure and on the body of the Sphinx itself, is incompatible with sporadic flash floods since dynastic times. Even if occasional heavy rains occur on the Giza Plateau, the fact remains that currently on average only about an inch of rain each year occurs in the region (25 to 29 mm annually)."

"The Giza Plateau has had a mean annual rainfall of about one inch (2.5 cm) per year since Old Kingdom times."


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1644103#msg1644103 (late upthrust of the Himalaya range in the age of historical man)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 28, 2019, 05:39:21 AM
ORBITAL STABILITY OF THE HELIOCENTRICAL SOLAR SYSTEM II

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1935048#msg1935048 (part I)

(https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/522614d5e4b02f25c1dfd53c/1413433161443-JRSDLAI4B4U1DLTG99X6/ke17ZwdGBToddI8pDm48kNBhxsR5AixTPaSt36FQjZRZw-zPPgdn4jUwVcJE1ZvWQUxwkmyExglNqGp0IvTJZamWLI2zvYWH8K3-s_4yszcp2ryTI0HqTOaaUohrI8PIHEpb-MmdDNvFVgjmeoENIlexef176In2EgYPtI8R2-8KMshLAGzx4R3EDFOm1kBS/image-asset.jpeg)

Madison boulder near Conway, New Hampshire, measures 90 by 40 by  38 feet, and weighs 10,000 tons. Unlike the bedrock beneath, it is composed of granite.

"In many places of the world, and especially in the north, large  boulders are found in a position which proves that a great force must  have lifted them up and carried them long distances before depositing them where they are found today. They are of an entirely different mineral composition than the local rocks, but are akin to formations many miles away. Thus, occasionally an erratic boulder of granite perches on top of a high ridge of dolerite, whereas the nearest outcrops of granite lie far away. These  erratic boulders may weigh as much as ten thousand tons, about as  much as one hundred thirty thousand people."

"In Britain and Germany are found many such boulders brought across the sea from Norway. Boulders from Finland have been swept over Poland, the site of Moscow, and as far as the River Don.  Often they are frighteningly piled up.

Huge blocks from Canada and Labrador lie strewn over North America.  Some are plain GIGANTIC.

An erratic boulder in Warren County, Ohio, covers ¾ acre and weighs 13,500 tons (the load of a large cargo ship). And near Malmö, southern Sweden, is a mass of chalk stone 1,000 feet wide, up to 200 feet thick and THREE MILES LONG!"

https://ancientpatriarchs.files.wordpress.com/2019/06/sweden-malmo-limestone-chalk.jpg?w=474&h=328

Glaciers carry stones downhill, not uphill.

Also, erratic bounders are found in places where continental ice could hardly have deposited them… on the Azores, islands separated from the ice cover by a wide expanse of ocean.

Azores islands erratic boulders:

https://books.google.ro/books?id=iGrpHKIdi8IC&pg=PA305&lpg=PA305&dq=azores+island+erratic+boulder&source=bl&ots=ZpgSfZthMP&sig=ACfU3U3lFhrSN10jOATkoGZVN0zxYt8Lnw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjWhZGs8tXmAhUjmYsKHU64BO0Q6AEwCXoECAkQAg#v=onepage&q=azores%20island%20erratic%20boulder&f=false

"In Europe, huge rocks (one of them 10,000 cubic feet) were carried from the Alps, across a space now occupied by Lake Geneva, and hurled 2,000 feet up on to the Jura Mountains, where they still sit!"


To explain these facts, the scholars of the first half of the nineteenth  century assumed that enormous tides had swept over the continents  and carried with them masses of stone. The transfer of the rocks was  explained by the tides, but what could have caused those billows to  rise high over the continents?

“It was conceived that somehow and somewhere in the far north  a series of gigantic waves was mysteriously propagated. These waves  were supposed to have precipitated themselves upon the land, and  then swept madly on over mountain and valley alike, carrying along  with them a mighty burden of rocks and stones and rubbish. Such deluges were styled ‘waves of translation’; and the till was believed  to represent the materials which they hurried along with them in  their wild course across the country.”  The stones and boulders on  the hilltops and the mounds of sand and gravel in the lowlands were  explained by this theory.


In the heliocentrical setting these enormous tides could have been caused only by a close encounter with another planet.

"The ocean tides are produced by the action of the sun and to a  larger extent by that of the moon. A body larger than the moon or  one nearer to the earth would act with greater effect. A comet with a head as large as the earth, passing sufficiently close, would raise the waters of the oceans hundreds of meters high."

J. Lalande, Abrege d’astronomie (1795), p. 340, who computed that a  comet with a head as large as the earth, at a distance of 13,290 lieues, or about  four diameters of the earth, would raise ocean tides 2,000 toises or about four  kilometers high.

"The slowing down or stasis  of the earth in its rotation would cause a tidal recession of water  toward the poles, but the celestial body near by would disturb this poleward recession, drawing the water toward itself. "

"The fact that accumulations of stones were transferred from the  equator toward the higher latitudes, an enigmatic problem in the ice  theory, can be explained by the poleward recession of the equatorial  waters at the moment the velocity of rotation of the earth was reduced or its poles were shifted. In the Northern Hemisphere, in India, the moraines were carried from the equator not only toward higher  latitudes, but also toward the Himalaya Mountains, and in the Southern Hemisphere from the equatorial regions of Africa toward the higher latitudes, across the prairies and deserts and forests of the black continent."


A close encounter/collision with another planet, during historical times, nullifies and defies the orbital equations of motion ascribed to the celestial bodies in general (which are based on Newtonian mechanics), and the calculations performed by J. Laskar in particular.

It also illustrates the correctness of the calculations carried out by Dr. Robert Bass and by Dr. W.M. Smart (see part one of this series).


Venus' Argon-36 and Argon-40 age:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1938506#msg1938506

Venus' carbon dioxide age:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1938793#msg1938793

Venus' neon krypton age:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1938826#msg1938826

Venus and Earth spin orbit resonance:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1939336#msg1939336

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 30, 2019, 06:52:26 AM
ORBITAL STABILITY OF THE HELIOCENTRICAL SOLAR SYSTEM III

The Kvarnby chalk quarry from Sweden is three miles long.

The largest ever concealed megablock/bedrock raft is to be found in Saskatchewan, with dimensions of 30 km x 38 km (volume 60 cubic km, area 1000 square km, maximum thickness 100 m).

Glaciotectonic Landforms and Structures (ch. 6, Megablocks and Rafts)
By J. S. Aber, David G. Croot, Mark M. Fenton

(https://creationconcept.info/BR/emb.jpg)

This map shows the Esterhazy megablock, composed of the Odanah Member of the Pierre Shale, in gray.

"The large masses of Cretaceous bedrock are a puzzling feature of these intertill deposits, and their presence is as yet completely unexplained. The occurrence of these large bedrock masses amid the Pleistocene drift is disconcerting. Slumping takes place with great ease in the soft, easily lubricated bedrock of the area,, but this is not thought to be the cause of their displacement. Slumping should cause more contortion and deformation of the beds than is found, and such extensive but relatively thin blocks would hardly be expected to hold together under such a method of transportation. The chief argument against slumping as then agent of transportation is the apparent lack of proper conditions of gradient necessary to cause such slumping. Shove or pushing by an ice-sheet also seemingly would not allow such widespread thin  blocks to retain their shape or even hold together during movement."

1962 Geologic Survey of Canada, A. MacS. Stalker


"The presence of huge slabs of intact bedrock in the drift seems enigmatic and strange in the glacial interpretation. It has been a source of embarrassment to glacialists such as Stalker, who called their presence disconcerting. The glacial theory does not easily accommodate or explain the emplacement of large slabs of rock over drift supposed to have been deposited either directly from ice, or when the proposed ice-sheet finally melted. Where the width to thickness ratio for the bedrock rafts is very large, the idea of glacial transport and deposition is rendered highly unlikely and impractical.

A mechanism for forming similar structures does not seem to exist in existing ice sheets. The presence of bedrock slabs, hundreds of square km in area, being transported in the base of ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica would show up in seismic profiles, and should be rather easy to detect.

The lateral dimensions of bedrock rafts would probably be limited by the erosion of valleys that cut through them, in the environment of catastrophic erosion due to the currents of retreating flood waters. Also, expansion effects that accompanied the formation of the drift underlying megablocks may have caused lateral movements which could possibly cause extensive rafts to break up into smaller ones.

The sand, clay and gravel of the drift is explained by a disintegration of the sedimentary rocks, during former catastrophic conditions, that accompanied pressure release as overburden was eroded by currents, exposing fresh rock surfaces to lower pressure, and a stress gradient, in which the components of the rocks responded to the altered conditions. The process formed layers as it penetrated from the low pressure surface to the higher pressure."

Formation of the Esterhazy megablock

"While the sediments in the vicinity of the Esterhazy megablock were under hydrostatic stress, an uplift event generated currents which eroded the sediments in the area. Vertical stress was removed by the rapid erosion of overburden. This put the megablock and the surrounding rock under net horizontal compressive stress. Disintegration converted rock surrounding the megablock to drift. The disintegration penetrated deeper on all sides of the megablock, which forms a cap over a raised bedrock platform.

Horizontal compression in the surrounding drift was maintained, because the disintegration was accompanied by expansion. Currents of the retreating flood waters above eroded a valley in the drift, right through the middle of the megablock. This became the Qu'Appelle valley. Erosion and removal of drift in the valley exposed underlying rock to lower pressure so there was further disintegration. The valley was eroded deeper. The erosion removed much of the drift that filled the valley. Meanwhile disintegration also occurred in the buried Rocanville valley south of the megablock, which is roughly parallel to the Qu'Appelle valley, but it was not eroded. The disintegration penetrated to an even greater depth in this buried valley, which was much wider than the Qu'Appelle valley. The depth of the drift here is about 250 m (Figure 8 in Aber, 1989). When the disintegration was penetrating downwards in the buried Rocanville Valley, conditions in the adjacent rock at a particular level were apparently suitable for the disintegration to occur, and so a thin layer of drift was formed at that level, that separated the Odanah Member of the Pierre Shale from its base, forming what is called a megablock."


Have geologists found evidence for a flood?

https://creationconcept.info/GT/Flood_refs.html


Flood Evidence in Eastern Washington

https://creationconcept.info/scabland.html


Catastrophic Flood Dynamic Database

https://creationconcept.info/cfdb.html


Michigan's Fossil Whales

https://creationconcept.info/michwls.html


(https://steemitimages.com/640x0/http://i.imgur.com/L3ASVPS.jpg)

An Erratic Boulder in County Wicklow


"An erratic is a rock or boulder that is found in a location where, geologically speaking, it does not belong. Erratics first entered the scientific arena in the late 18th century when the Swiss geologist and mountaineer Horace-Bénédict de Saussure noticed that the southern slopes of the Jura Mountains were strewn with rocks and boulders of Alpine origin:

One will see that the majority of these stones and boulders are made of granite, foliated rocks, or other rocks of Alpine and primitive origin, while the ground on which they have been deposited is composed of limestone or sandstone, and therefore of a completely different nature. One will observe that these stones and large fragments are only ever found on the surfaces of the limestone or sandstone ridges, and that these same ridges never contain the slightest trace of them in their interiors. On the contrary, if one compares each of these stones with those found in the Alps, one will recognize them almost to the point of being able to identify the very rock from which the stone in question was broken off. One will remark that they do not belong to the soil on which they have been cast, and do not resemble the earth that surrounds them, that this same soil has completely different qualities to them, and finally that one finds none of them on the northern slopes of the Jura, but only on those of its slopes which lie opposite the Alps. After having weighed these considerations, one cannot but recognize that these fragments were not formed in this valley, or on the surrounding mountains; but that they are foreign bodies, adventitious, torn from the Alps, their native land, by a powerful agent, which has transported them, rounded their surfaces and piled them up in confusion. (Saussure §206:201-202)

Saussure had no doubt that this powerful agent was water:

§207: That water was this agent cannot in the least be doubted; because these stones, both large and small, are found deposited on horizontal ridges, mixed with sand and gravel, just as water transports them. For if one sees one of these fragments exposed on a rock, inspection of the site alone clearly demonstrates that rainwater or meltwater has carried off the lightest pieces, which formerly surrounded these large masses. (Saussure §207:202)"

(https://steemitimages.com/640x0/http://i.imgur.com/akXInRX.jpg)

Pierre à Martin, a large erratic near Ballaison


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2169555#msg2169555 (Island of California/Vermian Sea, seven consecutive messages)

The extinction of the mammoths occurred simultaneously with the end of the Tartarian Empire:

(https://www.stolenhistory.org/attachments/1754-i-e-carte-de-l%E2%80%99asie-jpg.1431/)


Extinction of the mammoths:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2171192#msg2171192

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2171410#msg2171410


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1936055#msg1936055 (almost perfect north-south orientation means that no tilt or change of poles has occurred since the Great Pyramid was constructed)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1635693#msg1635693 (mammoths and the stationary Earth hail of ice blocks)


High humidity of the Gizeh pyramid:

http://www.ldolphin.org/egypt/egypt1/index.html

Figures 39(a) and 39(b) show these results. Egyptian sands and granite from Aswan showed not only low losses by comparison, but also minimal sensitivity to ambient humidity. The environmental-chamber data showed not only that the losses of the Giza limestones were highly sensitive to local relative humidity, but also that the rocks were sufficiently porous so that small samples equilibrated with the environment in a few days' time. Evidently the rock samples lying around the surface at Giza, selected for our Giza laboratory tests, were slightly drier than either the bedrock or the large building blocks in which the in situ measurements were made, and this accounted for the lower losses in the samples even when measurements were made under Giza ambient environmental conditions.

During its autumn 1974 electromagnetic sounder experiments the joint Egyptian-American research team established that high attenuation due to high water content in the limestone of the Giza area precluded many practical applications of radio-frequency sounding for archaeological purposes in that area.


136.1/2 = 68.05

radius of the circle = 68.05 units

s = r x θ


θ = π/4

s = 53.44


θ = 2 radians

s = 136.1


θ = 286.1 degrees

s = 339.8

534 sc = 339.8


136.1 meters = 5343 sacred inches


51.8554 sc x Phi = 53.4


Missing apex = 286.1 sacred inches

Total height of the Gizeh pyramid (subterranean pit to apex) = 286.1 sacred cubits


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 06, 2020, 11:29:03 AM
GIZEH PYRAMID: HOW WAS IT ACTUALLY BUILT?

(https://hbombkaraoke.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/p9289587.jpg)

It has been shown that the Gizeh pyramid was not constructed using ropes, ramps, hydraulic methods or geopolymer concrete technology.

Acoustic levitation methods still leave unexplained the fact that 2.3 million blocks had to be actually cut from the limestone/granite quarries (using sonic drilling). While the acoustic levitation technique is a huge improvement over the geopolymer concrete procedure, the sheer number of the stone blocks (2.3 million) means that even had such an advanced antigravitational method been used, it would still be an impractical way to build a pyramid of this size.

Moreover, the construction of the four shafts would have required tremendous difficulties in having the adjoining blocks of stones fit to each other.

(http://www.cheops.org/startpage/thefindings/shaftblock.JPG)
(http://www.cheops.org/startpage/thefindings/schacht1.JPG)
(http://www.cheops.org/startpage/thefindings/schacht2.JPG)

Then, there is only one possible explanation: the stones, the mortar utilized for some of the interior blocks, and the copper fittings found inside the shafts, came into existence by using a molecular construction method (materialization of the substances/elements).

It is of interest to note that this kind of materialization process technology was mentioned during a Stargate SG-1 episode:

https://stargate.fandom.com/wiki/Molecular_construction_device

(https://web.archive.org/web/20210607142851/https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/stargate/images/5/53/Quest2.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20100305215039)

https://web.archive.org/web/20210607142851/https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/stargate/images/5/53/Quest2.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20100305215039

"It allows you to design and configure something virtually and then materializes it."
Daniel Jackson

That is, the entire pyramid came into existence simultaneously, at once. A similar method was used for the other pyramids in Egypt, although on a much lower scale (perhaps a few blocks of stone being materialized at a time).


"The passages inside the pyramid are all extremely straight and precise, such that the longest of them, referred to as the descending passage, which is 350' 0.25" long deviates from being truly straight by less then 0.25 inches, while one of the shorter passages with a length of just over 150 feet deviates from being truly straight by a mere 0.020 inches. These and the above statistics prove the pyramid to be literally the most accurately constructed building on the face of the earth despite having been created several millennia ago. All theories which sufficiently allow for this level of accuracy assume a level of technology approximately equal to or exceeding current technology, at least in the area of tool making and construction.

Whether they can cast concrete or not, the idea that a civilization which did not even have the wheel could build a structure that was visually indistinguishable from the Great Pyramid, if they were willing to work hard enough to do it, could maybe be plausible. But the idea that they could have built such a structure, to those tolerances and with that degree of precision is laughable at best. The diamond-tipped blades typically used to cut large blocks of stone wear and warp (both due to mechanical stress and due to heat) during use sufficiently that they could not cut stone with that kind of precision -- to the casual observer the cut would look quite straight, but detailed measurements would not show the kind of tolerances found in the Great Pyramid."


"The accuracy and the precision of the Great Pyramid both at the level of individual blocks, and as a whole, are without precedent. Modern day engineers are at a loss as to how it was done. The tools described as necessary for the cutting of stone and the positioning of stone have never been found nor are they referred to in ancient records. The precise cutting of granite, including precise interior surfaces, requires complex, powered machinery with industrial diamond bits. The raising and exact positioning of granite blocks as heavy as 80 tons to heights as much as 300 feet above grade would require huge, powerful cranes – according to current industrial practice. It is simply beyond the capacity of wooden structures and human laborers. The entire positioning of the whole structure is so accurate that modern, surveying, optical equipment would seem to be an absolute necessity.

The interior fit of stones in the Kings Chamber and Great Gallery appears to be almost watertight. A mortar was used which had a higher hardness than the stones it was used on. The mortar was analyzed for elemental content but it has not been duplicated.

The construction has a hard industrial signature rather than an artistic one."


The flood occurred when the waters of Okeanos (the huge ocean which exists beyond the dome) were allowed to enter the space surrounded by the ether/aether shield (dome).

https://i.ibb.co/71z3cvT/enclosure3-1-4.jpg

There was also a huge hail of ice blocks:

Credo Mutwa, an 80-year old Zulu Sanusi (shaman) and elder from South Africa, and author of Song of the Stars: The Lore of a Zulu Shaman, gave a talk at the Living Lakes Conference, in California on October 2 1999, which included the following:

Let me tell you two last things please. One, it is this, that I am told by the great storytellers of our tribes, that fresh water is not native to our earth. That at one time, many thousands of years ago a terrible star, or the kind called Mu-sho-sho-no-no, the star with a very long tail, descended very close upon our skies. It came so close that the earth turned upside down and what had become the sky became down, and what was the heavens became up. The whole world was turned upside down. The sun rose in the south and set in the north. Then came drops of burning black stuff, like molten tar, which burned every living thing on earth that could not escape. After that came a terrible deluge of water accompanied by winds so great that they blew whole mountaintops away. And after that came huge chunks of ice bigger than any mountain and the whole world was covered with ice for many generations. After that the surviving people saw an amazing sight. They saw rivers and streams of water that they could drink, and they saw that some of the fishes that escaped from the sea were now living in these rivers. That is the great story of our forefathers.

https://www.varchive.org/itb/ecocean.htm (the origin of oceans)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 09, 2020, 10:00:19 AM
EIGHTEENTH AND NINETEENTH CENTURY MUD FLOODS

~1706 AD

Antarctica is covered by ice
The Giza pyramid is flooded

1769 AD

The island of California is realigned with the continent
The Grand Canyon is formed
Sahara becomes a desert
Siberia is covered by ice
Extinction of the mammoths

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2169555#msg2169555 (island of California, seven consecutive messages)

1811

The New Madrid earthquake is caused by a meteor impact

https://www.earthfrenzyradio.com/conspiracies/2422-the-great-comet-quake-of-1811-a-neo-connection

https://archaeologica.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3691

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1830487#msg1830487 (impossible details relating to Napoleon's biography)

http://www.dillum.ch/html/napoleon_maystre_uebersetzung_09.htm (amazing related events in the history of the reigns of Napoleon III/I)

1862

The great flood originated with the largest volcano eruption in Africa ever recorded (May 1861, Dubbi volcano)

http://www.atmosedu.com/Geol390/articles/ComingMegaFloos4.pdf

https://cepsym.org/Sympro2012/Schick.pdf


This subject is currently being debated on several alternative history forums, but they cannot date these events as precisely as here.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 10, 2020, 06:34:18 AM
PLASMA COMPRESSION FUSION DEVICE

"The patent application for a “Plasma Compression Fusion Device” was just published on September 26 after being lodged on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy back on March 22, 2019. The inventor is Dr. Salvator Pais, who works at the Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division and has previously lodged other patents on behalf of the Navy:"

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2194598#msg2194598

(Craft using an inertial mass reduction device)
(High Frequency Gravitational Wave Generator)

At present there are few envisioned fusion reactors/devices that come in a small, compact package (ranging from 0.3 to 2 meters in diameter) and typically they use different versions of plasma magnetic confinement. Three such devices are the Lockheed Martin (LM) Skunk Works Compact Fusion Reactor (LM-CFR), the EMC2 Polywell fusion concept, and the Princeton Field-Reversed Configuration (PFRC) machine. These devices feature short plasma confinement times, possible plasma instabilities with the scaling of size, and it is questionable whether they have the ability of achieving the break-even fusion condition, let alone a self-sustained plasma burn leading to ignition.

The plasma compression fusion device utilizes controlled motion of electrically charged matter via accelerated vibration and/or accelerated spin subjected to smooth yet rapid acceleration-deceleration-acceleration transients, in order to generate extremely high energy/high intensity electromagnetic fields. These fields not only confine the plasma core but also greatly compress it (by inducing a high energy negative potential well) so as to produce a high power density plasma burn, leading to ignition."

Dr. Salvatore Cezar Pais
Naval Air War Center Aircraft Division

https://patents.google.com/patent/US20190295733A1/en?inventor=Salvatore+Pais&oq=inventor:(Salvatore+Pais)

"It is claimed in the patent application that this plasma compression fusion device is capable of producing power in the gigawatt (1 billion watts) to terawatt (1 trillion watts) range and above with input power only in the kilowatt (1,000 watts) to megawatt (1,000,000 watts) range."

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 12, 2020, 01:52:17 AM
BINARY PULSARS GRAVITATIONAL WAVES AND REPULSIVE GRAVITY

(https://i1.sndcdn.com/artworks-000412203432-fghajv-t500x500.jpg)

The gravitational wave solution with the support of observation was claimed by J. H. Taylor Jr., who gets a Nobel Prize for the observation of the binary pulsars.

However, their calculation is incorrect in mathematics. Thus he could not justify his calculation when Professor Emeritus Philip Morrison of MIT went to Princeton to ask for his justification.


The Necessary Existence of Gravitational Waves and the Repulsive Gravitation

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/d92d/7f8b7771e0e3c4df0a25b712d7de2274ed59.pdf


P. Morrison of MIT had gone to Princeton University to question J. A. Taylor on their justification in calculating the gravitational radiation of the binary pulsars. As expected, Taylor was unable to give a valid justification.

Incompleteness of General Relativity, Einstein's Errors, and Related Experiments

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/fc3d/acc6c279bbee452fd190067f1a50e0825414.pdf


On the Nobel Prize in Physics, Controversies and Influences

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/7fd8/be64c7937e6301922cefec9f8e0d4ec0763a.pdf?_ga=2.73864978.1458775269.1578739572-1267759101.1578739572


Linearization of the Einstein Equation and The 1993 Press Release of the Nobel Prize in Physics

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/28d8/db055f7258cd6151cde8964ca573e27e287b.pdf


The Einstein equation cannot have a bounded dynamic solution for a two-body problem or gravitational wave solutions; and the Hulse-Taylor binary pulsars experiments actually support the modified Einstein equation.

Einstein claimed in his 1923 Nobel lecture that his considerations led to the theory of gravity, which yields the Newtonian theory as a first approximation, as well as yielding the motion of the perihelion of Mercury, the deflection of light by the sun.
In so doing, he did not respond to those questions raised by Gullstrand on the perihelion of Mercury. In particular, he failed to show the existence of a bounded dynamic solution, whose existence is crucial for the perturbation approach to calculate the perihelion of Mercury. However, The Nobel Prize Committee, well known for its cautious attitude, would not have changed its opinion based on Einstein’s statements alone; Gullstrand would have to have been proven wrong mathematically.

A search of the literature between 1921 and 1993 reveals a “proof” of the existence of bounded dynamic solutions. Two Princeton professors in mathematics, Christodoulou and Klainerman, published a 500 page book in 1993, claiming that bounded (in amplitude) dynamic solutions of the Einstein equation had been constructed. This book was highly regarded by Princeton University and considered a classic in mathematics. Moreover, Wheeler, an advocate of Einstein then, mentored Christodoulou and claimed him to be a genius. Thus, under the full weight of the reputation of Princeton University, the Nobel Committee understandably changed their mind.

However, upon closer examination, their construction of “dynamic” solutions has problems. Some are as follows:

1. They did not show that their constructed solutions are compatible with Einstein’s radiation formula.

2. Their construction is a set of time-dependent solutions only, since they did not show that such a solution has dynamic sources. This is necessary according to the principle of causality.

3. They have shown only that a static solution belongs to their set. However, they did not prove that it includes time-dependent solutions, or provide even an example.
In other words, these two authors failed to prove the crucial issue that their set of bounded dynamic solutions is non-empty. This problem alone is sufficient to establish that their construction of dynamic solutions is at least incomplete even if one ignores other problems that demonstrate the invalidity.


(https://i.ibb.co/wQ2cgCM/mane.jpg)

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234454208_Einstein's_Radiation_Formula_and_Modifications_to_the_Einstein_Equation


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2194825#msg2194825 (general relativity antigravity coupling terms)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2196454#msg2196454 ((general relativity antigravity coupling terms, part II)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1982291#msg1982291

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 15, 2020, 02:47:15 AM
VITRUVIUS' INVERSE SQUARE LAW

(https://i.ibb.co/tKYVVkp/vitr1.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/fNxX5TW/vitr2.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/WgpPpmT/vitr3.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/xD2vMQj/vitr4.jpg)

Principle of Leonardo da Vinci:

All movement tends to maintenance, or rather all moved bodies continue to move as long as the impression of the force of their motors (original impetus) remains in them.

First law attributed to Newton:

Every body continues in its state of rest, or of uniform motion in a straight line, unless it is compelled to change that state by forces impressed upon it.


Hipparchus and Vitruvius' inverse square law:

http://www.hellenicaworld.com/Greece/Science/en/HipparchusGraviation.html (Hooke and Newton copied the inverse square law)


The Forgotten Revolution (Lucio Russo):

https://books.google.ro/books?id=ld8lBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA376&lpg=PA376&dq=inverse+square+law+pythagoras+hipparchus&source=bl&ots=ewLCzkmklM&sig=ACfU3U0vRbygC53vjlWJ5XAxqXg07w2cxA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiV_KWs_aLmAhXvtYsKHSSKAyMQ6AEwEXoECAwQAg#v=onepage&q=inverse%20square%20law%20pythagoras%20hipparchus&f=false

Inverse square law: discovered by Vitruvius and Pythagoras
Steam engine: invented by Heron
Centripetal/Centrifugal forces: discovered by Plutarch
Integral calculus: invented by Archimedes

http://www.ams.org/notices/199805/review-graffi.pdf

The Forgotten Revolution
Reviewed by Sandro Graffi

Now, if every heavenly body pulls on every other, this leads to the idea of a dynamic theory of planetary motions, seeing planetary motions as composed of rectilinear inertia and gravitational pull. Indeed we read in Vitruvius: "the sun’s powerful force attracts to itself the planets by means of rays projected in the shape of triangles; as if braking their forward movement or holding them back, the sun does not allow them to go forth but [forces them] to return to it" (297). Pliny likewise has it that planets are "prevented by a triangular solar ray from following a straight path" (298). The reference to triangles suggests an underlying mathematical treatment, and indeed there are further traces of this (298-302). Furthermore, "the technical tool of vector addition for displacements is present in Heron and in the pseudo-Aristotelian Mechanics, and indeed it is used in this latter work to explain how a uniform circular motion can be regarded as a continuous superposition of a displacement 'according to nature', along the tangent, with one 'contrary to nature', directed toward the center." (301-302)


Plutarch and the theory of gravity

http://www.cultureandcosmos.org/pdfs/16/Cappi_INSAPVII_Gravity_before_Newton.pdf


Pythagoras inverse square law and pythagorean triples:

http://www.brooksdesign-ps.net/Reginald_Brooks/Code/Html/MSST/TPISC/TPISC.html


Inverse Square Law and Inverse Pythagorean Theorem (theorems 7 and 8 ):

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/333606009_Pi_and_It's_Hidden_Circles


https://physicstoday.scitation.org/doi/pdf/10.1063/1.1306365 (Archimedes' Palimpsest)


A. Fomenko: History: Science or Fiction? vol I

https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_YcjFAV4WZ9MC

pg 27-28

De Arhitectura by Vitruvius was written during the Renaissance and not two thousand years ago


Origin of Calculus:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1574605#msg1574605


http://ckraju.net/papers/Springer/ckr-Springer-encyclopedia-calculus-2-final.pdf

Newton, himself, claimed credit only for making the calculus rigorous, not for inventing it (though he did claim credit for the sine series). He thought the calculus could be made rigorous by making time metaphysical. Ironically, that was the precise reason why his physics failed. Changing that understanding of time/calculus improves physics including the theory of gravitation.

http://ckraju.net/papers/retarded_gravitation_theory-rio.pdf

The problem of equal intervals of time in Newtonian physics

Calculus, the continuum, and the nature of time

Briefly, what is today taught as the authoritative way to do calculus is hardly the only
way or the best way to do it. Therefore, theories of the calculus ought not to decide the
nature of time in physics, as Newton did.
One can also object to Newton’s procedure on the grounds that it is inappropriate to
allow metaphysical beliefs to dictate something as fundamental to physics as the nature
of time. Time may be like the real line, or it may be discrete or structured. But, whatever
the nature of time, this should be decided by physics, not by mathematics.



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 16, 2020, 08:59:57 AM
GENERALIZED SAGNAC EFFECT XI

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2211156#msg2211156 (part X)

The formula which features an area and an angular velocity is now derived DIRECTLY using the CORIOLIS force:

(https://i.ibb.co/3y1qt05/sak1.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/p1gG2tm/sak2.jpg)

The Sagnac Phase Shift
G. Rizzi and M.L. Ruggiero
(two of the best known experts on the SAGNAC EFFECT in the world)

(M.L. Ruggiero is member of the GINGER collaboration)

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0305046.pdf

The CORIOLIS EFFECT formula, 4Aω/c2, has been derived using solely the CORIOLIS FORCE.

But this is not the SAGNAC EFFECT formula, which is proportional to the velocity of the light beams.

Stokes' theorem/formula guarantees that there will always be two formulas for each interferometer: the CORIOLIS EFFECT formula and the SAGNAC EFFECT formula.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2208102#msg2208102

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2208660#msg2208660

(https://i.ibb.co/Qf86Hpx/sak3.jpg)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2117351#msg2117351 (counterclockwise and clockwise phase differences for the Michelson-Gale interferometer)

It is of interest to note that Rizzi and Ruggiero have derived the SAGNAC EFFECT formula which does not feature an area; yet, they seem unable to understand that the formula which does display the area and the angular velocity is the CORIOLIS EFFECT phase difference:

(https://image.ibb.co/cPs5vd/sagnac3.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/m86n8y/sagnac4.jpg)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 17, 2020, 04:05:50 AM
GENERALIZED SAGNAC EFFECT XII

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0305084.pdf (pages 10-11)

(from Relativity in Rotating Frames: Relativistic Physics in Rotating Reference Frames
edited by G. Rizzi, M.L. Ruggiero, pgs. 179-221)

Using the relativistic law of velocity addition, G. Rizzi and M.L. Ruggiero prove that the CORIOLIS EFFECT formula (proportional to the area and to the angular velocity) is valid, if and only if, the condition of ”equal relative velocity in opposite directions” is imposed.

"However, when condition (24) is imposed, the difference ∆τ between these times does depend only on the angular velocity Ω of the disk, and it does not depend on the velocities of propagation of the beams with respect the turnable."

(https://i.ibb.co/9TNZLfM/afl1.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/yh1ckrh/afl2.jpg)


Classical and Relativistic Derivation of the Sagnac Effect
Wolfgang Engelhardt
Max-Planck-Institut fur Plasmaphysik

http://aflb.ensmp.fr/AFLB-401/aflb401m820.pdf

Using the relativistic law of velocity addition, the author proves that the coherent beams leaving the beam splitter at the same time in opposite directions will return at the same time as they both travel at the same speed c.

In other words, the SRT correctly applied to a rotating Sagnac Interferometer does not predict the Sagnac Effect.


https://web.archive.org/web/20160314211410/https://relativityoflight.com/Chapter29.pdf

THE RELATIVISTIC COMPOSITION OF VELOCITIES
From the Lorentz transformation equations, Einstein derived a relativistic formula for the kinematic addition of two velocities in the same direction, which algebraically never could exceed the velocity c. Einstein claimed that this formula mathematically confirmed his second postulate concerning the constant propagation velocity of light at c in every inertial frame. Later he claimed that the 1851 Experiment of Fizeau empirically confirmed the validity of this formula. But it turns out that neither claim is correct.


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1978311#msg1978311

DUFOUR-PRUNIER EXPERIMENT

“In his final essay on the subject in 1937, Langevin proposed that the results published that year by Dufour and Prunier showed that one had to assume either (a) the light speed varied to c + wr in one direction and c – wr in the other direction, or (b) the time aboard the spinning apparatus had to change by a factor of +/-2wA/c2 in either direction. Indeed, Langevin went as far as to say that assuming (a), “we find, by a very simple and very general reasoning, the formula for the difference of the times of the path of the two light beams in the Sagnac experiment.” .

The proposition (b) though is untenable because if this were true then when the light beam passed back to the moving detector, the local time from each direction would be out of synchronization, meaning that the clocks cannot be counting real time and that the effective time dilation is meaningless. This was also pointed out by Herbert Ives in his 1938 paper criticizing Langevin. Ives says about the absurdity of Langevin’s proposition (b):

” There are of course not merely two clocks, but an infinity of clocks, where we include those that could be transported at finite speeds, and around other paths. As emphasized previously, the idea of “local time” is untenable, what we have are clock readings. Any number of clock readings at the same place are physically possible, depending on the behaviour and history of the  clocks used. More than one “time” at one place is a physical absurdity. “

The only explanation left, is Langevin’s proposition a) that the light speed varies by C+/-wr in one or the other direction around the disk, consistent with Dufour and Prunier’s experimental results."

Herbert Ives, Light Signals Sent Around a Closed Path:

http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Ives/Herbert_Ives_Light_Signals_Sent_Around_a_Closed_Path.pdf


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 19, 2020, 10:24:26 AM
GENERALIZED SAGNAC EFFECT XIII: SINGLE INTERFEROMETER/TWO FORMULAS

Algebraic approach to time-delay data analysis: orbiting case
K Rajesh Nayak and J-Y Vinet

https://www.cosmos.esa.int/documents/946106/1027345/TDI_FOR_.PDF/2bb32fba-1b8a-438d-9e95-bc40c32debbe

This is an IOP article, published by the prestigious journal Classic and Quantum Gravity:

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0264-9381/22/10/040/meta

(https://i.ibb.co/hHLx0x9/ulsag1.jpg)

Two separate effects: rotation around the interferometer's own axis, and the orbital motion of the same interferometer; one is much greater than the other, by a factor of R/L.

(https://image.ibb.co/iMSdB7/lisa3.jpg)

(https://i.ibb.co/vZ849vd/ulsag2.jpg)

Two separate phase equations: (https://i.ibb.co/X4RR74G/ulsag3.jpg) and (https://i.ibb.co/92JNW0r/ulsag4.jpg).

Dr. Daniel Shaddock has derived the (https://i.ibb.co/92JNW0r/ulsag4.jpg) formula:

(https://i.ibb.co/4t0TGrR/ulsag5.jpg)

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0306125.pdf (Dr. Daniel Shaddock, Jet Propulsion Laboratory)

For an interferometer, whose center of rotation coincides with the geometrical center, the CORIOLIS EFFECT and the SAGNAC EFFECT formulas are equivalent:

(https://i.ibb.co/LnMn6BS/ulsag6.jpg)

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/45ae/22d15a3b92d8b095b56daf26ea9416577483.pdf (Dr. Ruyong Wang, Triangle Sagnac Experiment)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 20, 2020, 01:58:28 AM
DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX VII

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1905467#msg1905467 (part III)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1910009#msg1910009 (part V)

Two boats on a lake, boat X and boat Y, are being pulled toward each other using a single rope by the two men on each boat.

Of course forces X and Y will ALWAYS be different.

The NET FORCES on each end of the rope might be the same, but the APPLIED FORCES will ALWAYS be different.

Modern Newtonian mechanics has this story to tell:

The net force on boat x is -A.
The net force on boat y is -B.
The net force on the string is A+B.
As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.

The net force on boat x is -A.
The net force on boat y is A.
The net force on the string is A-A=0.


By the very hypothesis, A DOES NOT EQUAL B.

A cannot equal B.

Yet, by using the twisted RE logic, using only a single force acting on boat X (respectively on boat Y), the analysis reaches a point where the absolute value of A equals the absolute value of B. A most direct contradiction of the hypothesis.


The RE analysis leads to a total disaster, where the basic requirement is this |A|=|B|.

Which can NEVER be the case.

Force A can never equal force B.


Let us suppose now, that only one of the rafts/boats does the pulling (that is, side X will have the rope attached to it, no person X would be pulling).

Person Y pulls on the rope from the right.

What are the forces on the left side of the rope (in boat X)?

-B (reaction force on force B).



Now let us bring person X back.

Both persons are pulling now, force A does not equal force B.

What are the forces on the left side of the rope now?

Yes, person X is pulling with force -A (to the left) BUT ALSO person Y is pulling.

Reaction force is the SAME as in the previous situation: -B.

Then, the net force on the left side of the rope is now: -A + -B, or -A -B.

Very simple to understand.


The fact that force B (and force A) are being applied THROUGHOUT the entire rope is something modern mechanics has yet to acknowledge.

There will be action-reaction pairs diagrams at each end of the rope, involving BOTH PULLING FORCES A and B.


On solid ground (or someone who is in a truck), there will always be FRICTION to deal with (FA, the frictional force on player A exerted by the ground, and FB, the frictional force on player B exerted by the ground).

When the forces are unbalanced, the system accelerates in the direction of the net force.

The acceleration is caused by the imbalance of frictional forces at different parts of the system.

The tug-of-war is won by the person who applies a larger force on the ground (which is equal to the frictional force by Newton's third law), and not by the person who pulls the rope harder.

There is also the matter of the static friction force between the rope and the person's hands.


The standard analysis for the two boats connected by a rope on a lake fails miserably.

By contrast, the FE analysis is very well defined.


Two boats pulled toward each other on a lake.

Man from boat X is pulling with force A, directed to the left.

Man from boat Y is pulling with force B, directed to the right.

Forces A and B are, of course, of different magnitude.


What are the forces acting on boat X?

To the left we will have a negative direction.

Boat X will be acted upon by TWO FORCES: A (the reaction force on the action force -A) and B.


What are the forces acting on the left end side of the rope?

-A and -B.


What are the forces acting boat Y?

To the right we will have the positive direction.

Boat Y will be acted upon by two forces: -B (the reaction force on the action force B) and
-A.


What are the forces acting on the right end side of the rope?

A and B.


Net force on boat X: A + B

Net force on boat Y: -A - B


Net force on the string: [-A - B] + [A + B]


The string/rope will not move: [-A - B] + [A + B] = 0


All forces balance out perfectly.

But they include TWICE THE FORCES NEEDED in the Newtonian system.

The man in boat X is pulling on the rope, while at the same time boat Y is pulling on that same rope with force B. The correct analysis must take these facts into account.

A perfect demonstration that there are indeed two forces acting on boat X, respectively on boat Y: the equations work out in total balance.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 20, 2020, 06:48:17 AM
SCHAUBERGER-DEPALMA EFFECT - JET ENGINE LEVITATION II: SIMON NEWCOMB WAS RIGHT

Is it not demonstrated that a true flying machine, self-raising, self-sustaining, self-propelling, is physically impossible?
— Joseph LeConte, November 1888

I can state flatly that heavier than air flying machines are impossible.
— Lord Kelvin, 1895

I have not the smallest molecule of faith in aerial navigation other than ballooning, or of the expectation of good results from any of the trials we heard of. So you will understand that I would not care to be a member of the Aeronautical Society.
— Lord Kelvin, 1896

The demonstration that no possible combination of known substances, known forms of machinery and known forms of force, can be united in a practical machine by which men shall fly along distances through the air, seems to the writer as complete as it is possible for the demonstration to be.
— Simon Newcomb, 1900

Flight by machines heavier than air is unpractical and insignificant, if not utterly impossible.
— Simon Newcomb, 1902

Simon Newcomb, directed the American Nautical Almanac Office, professor of mathematics and astronomy at Johns Hopkins University, founder and first president of the American Astronomical Society, vice-president of the National Academy of Sciences.

http://www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/essays/v3p167y1977-78.pdf

The Outlook for the Flying Machine


It turns out that Simon Newcomb was correct in his assertions.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1odAffPmcOhVX9D7wVXXiCS7caNOZywXg/view

Scientific American, February 2020

No one can completely explain why planes stay in the air

By Ed Regis

http://milesmathis.com/lift.pdf

Addendum January 18, 2020: Scientific American just published an article admitting that “no one can explain why planes stay in the air”. They should say “no one promoted by the mainstream” can explain it, since I just did above. But despite that obvious omission, it is incredible they would be admitting this in 2020, confirming many of the points I make above, as if they had read this paper and were doing their best to respond to it without mentioning it. Because I think that is precisely what is going on. But although I think that is true, I still find it incredible they would admit to their own ignorance this late in the game. They don't completely admit it, and the author Ed Regis makes some weak stabs at promoting old theories, as well as promoting Doug McLean. But it is all sort of half-hearted and desperate, and Regis doesn't even try very hard to disguise that. He starts by admitting that John Anderson, curator of aerodynamics at the Air and Space Museum, can't explain lift, and has said so in print. Anderson hedged in his 2003 interview in the New York Times, confessing there was no agreement on the subject. Bernoulli's Theorem from 1738 is still the go-to explanation for a majority in academia, but it is admitted that fails to answer all questions. Regis includes the least of these questions in his “But...” insert, admitting that the curved upper surface theory has been disproved. He does not admit that Bernoulli's “lift” vector is unsupported by even the least shred of mechanics, being nothing more than a word. A naming standing for an explanation.

The scathing and devastating analysis by M. Mathis reveals that the explanations put forth by modern science regarding the flight of airplanes, are completely false.

But not even M. Mathis can deliver the correct explanation.

There is only one physicist who was ever able to explain why airplanes stay in flight. He even invented the jet engine: Viktor Schauberger.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2044376#msg2044376 (V. Schauberger effect, jet engine levitation, part I)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 24, 2020, 02:28:12 AM
POMPEII - HERCULANEUM VII

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1683424#msg1683424 (parts I-V, part I also addresses the features of the canal built by Domenico Fontana)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1968535#msg1968535 (part VI)

New discovery: the canal built by architect Domenico Fontana feeds the artificial rivers of at least two villas : Julia Felix and Loreius Tiburtinus.



This is the water conduit that had been built during the Renaissance, but which runs right through Pompeii:

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-AaDZJNIpWUo/UyLdQaz6BPI/AAAAAAAAB7M/_mw1ttDNTVA/s1600/pompei-e-canale-artificale.png)

The Renaissance flourished some 150 years later, during the 18TH century



https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1968555#msg1968555 (the best proof discovered by the Swiss historian, Christoph Pfister)

Pompeii and Herculaneum were destroyed, I believe, during the world-wide conflagration (geological and astronomical) which occurred in 1769 AD.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 25, 2020, 02:37:30 AM
POMPEII - HERCULANEUM VIII: PIRANESI TEMPLE OF ISIS ETCHING (1788 AD)

(http://www.piranesiselection.com/upl/piranesi-7-medium.jpg)

http://www.piranesiselection.com/Home-gallery/1/Piranesi-Francesco-View-of-the-Temple-of-Isis-in-the-City-of-Pompeii-Year-178889/322

Postcard from the 19th century, the fountain is still visible:

(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/pom-isis2.jpg)

"On a postcard from the end of the 19th century with the Temple of Isis you can see a fountain in the background between the columns."

Isis temple today:

(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/pom-isis1.jpg)

"There is an earlier representation of the Temple of Isis with a fountain of Fontana. An etching by Francesco Piranesi from the 18th century shows the Isis temple shortly after the excavations.

It can be clearly seen that the fountain has the side bevels, which were apparently originally equipped with a lockable lid, which is typical of the urban and rural wells.

In all likelihood, these bevels indirectly contributed to reducing the load on the volcanic ash on the lids of the well, thereby ensuring that the water pipeline continued to function even after the eruption. When the picture is enlarged, it can be seen that the fountain is marked with the letter "F", with Piranesi giving the following explanation in the footnote: "Fountain with two windows covered with movable lids, where the ashes of sacred offerings go threw.""

(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/pom-isis4.jpg)

"I suspect the fountain lids were wooden. From bronze, lead, concrete, titanium, etc. - more than unlikely. How long can wood endure in an aggressive environment and under humid conditions? One and a half to two thousand years? Hard to believe. Taking into account that in Herculaneum (Resina), everything that was not burned has rotted and the fountain lids have been exposed to moisture not only from above but also from below from the evaporating water, then the only explanation that they are still in 18th century is that they were not too long underground. I would say a hundred years for wood to be preserved under unfavorable conditions is more credible than 1700 years, right?"

The fact that during the excavation of the Isis temple the workers came across the lid of the fountain was also noted in the excavation diary:

"As the excavations of the Temple of Isis continued, after the removal of the lapilli, a building was discovered in the site that had been excavated earlier, which could have been considered a fountain wreath if it had not been found covered with a lid on the floor burnt fruits were found. Since this soil is close to the surface, it could not have been antique soil, but the canal that goes through it, which leads the water to the powder factory, carries so much water that it is impossible to dig deeper."
Alcubierre, R., et al., Pompeianarum Antiquitatum Historia 1.

"Piranesi and Alcubierre thereby confirm my assumption that the fountain was initially considered to be part of the Isis temples. This fountain was the first of Fontana's fountains to be excavated, so it was not yet known in the times of Piranesi what threat these fountains posed to the official version of Pompei's demise in ancient times."


Giovanni Mascolo, 1633 AD

(https://image.ibb.co/n5GTFd/1631a.jpg)

Vesuvius before the eruption attributed to 1631 AD

Pompeii and Herculaneum clearly visible as contemporary cities

(https://image.ibb.co/hrPb1J/1631b.jpg)

Vesuvius after the eruption of the volcano; both Pompeii and Herculaneum heavily affected

http://www.scribd.com/doc/150505992/Vesuvius-A-historical-approach-to-the-1631-eruption-cold-data-from-the-analysis-ofthree-contemporary-treatises#scribd

(https://i.ibb.co/r36M1fm/1631j.jpg)

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fartifact.org.ru%2Fpersonalnie-dela-%2Fe-n-shurshikov-pompei-1631-god.html&edit-text=

Multiple proofs and references relating to the fact that the eruption which destroyed Pompeii and Herculaneum occurred in fact some 1600 years later in time.


The eruption must have taken place not in 1631 AD, but at least 100 years later in time, since the technology in use at Herculaneum for perfectly flat glass was developed after 1688 AD at St. Gobain:

(http://www.ilya.it/chrono/images/gallery/pom16.jpg)

It was in 1688, that in France experts developed a new process of making flat glass, mainly used in mirrors. The process was pouring molten glass onto a special table and roll it flat, later when cooled it was polished using felt disks, then it was coated with reflective material to produce the mirrors.

https://books.google.ro/books?id=jXgnnCpz22QC&pg=PA3&lpg=PA3&dq=flat+window+glass+first+obtained+at+st.+gobain+1688&source=bl&ots=kADb-hHyu9&sig=CZw5-KyF8ZGQDxyrtHnG2SA7b90&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=Spw3VbvTNcWmsgHgsIDgCg&ved=0CEsQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=flat%20window%20glass%20first%20obtained%20at%20st.%20gobain%201688&f=false


The Count Sarno canal built by Domenico Fontana passes right through Pompeii.

https://pompeiiinpictures.com/pompeiiinpictures/R0/sarno%20canal.htm


https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ro&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ilya.it%2Fchrono%2Fpages%2Fpompejidt.htm&edit-text=

Not The Last Day Of Pompeii

by German engineer Andreas Tschurilow

Section V, The Water Pipe of Domenico

1. The water pipe was not built for the water supply of Pompeii and also not for the supply of drinking water from Torre Annunziata, but for trouble-free work of the mills while avoiding the seasonal fluctuations in the water level in the Sarno river, which still supplies very little water today. Therefore, it was in no way connected to the Pompeii water supply system. The water pipe was, more or less, even of military-strategic importance, so the opinion of the local population was hardly taken into account.

I mean both the possible inconveniences and the interruptions in the usual ways. I also admit that Fontana may have had no choice but to spare one of the city streets if he encountered an obstacle such as B. basalt or old lava. I suspect that its water pipe, although raised to about a meter above the street level at this point, did not constitute an insurmountable obstacle for the Pompeian wagoners and their horses, who must have got used to it, the numerous stool-like pedestrian crossings that were almost as high are to be overcome.

The precautionary pipes across the hump of the sewer ceiling for rainwater drainage need a special explanation. Why should Domenico Fontana have done something like this when the road was resting under the thick layer of ash?

2. The water pipe did not run above the ceilings because Pompeii is on a hill and the height difference between the sources of the Sarno river and the sea level is relatively small. As an engineer, Fontana would surely not build an Italian 'Main-Danube Canal' with a complicated system of water rises to a few tens of meters under time pressure; he would try to bypass the Pompeian hill, which would make the project much cheaper. And he was just trying to make that happen, but the wall of the city and the former moat, which had lost its strategic importance and had long been used by the inhabitants as a necropolis for burial purposes, disturbed his plans. Therefore he had to lead the canal through the city.

4. Of course you can also assume that Domenico Fontana cleaned an existing water pipe from the times of some "emperors, fifteen times Cesars Vespasians (wasp-like) Augustus and etc.", collected the money and left for the Vatican then there were still the questions of ventilation and maintenance that Fontana inevitably had to solve while working in the almost two-kilometer tunnel under the buried city, but there are no ventilation shafts or traces in Pompeii.

The construction of the canal in the city should face Fontana with at least three problems:

1. Pompeii stands on a cooled lava flow, which makes it almost impossible to get through without blasting. With the height of the canal of 2 meters and an average thickness of the floor in Pompeii of 3 meters, minus the depth of the foundations of the buildings, its laying resembles a jeweler's work.

2. The engineer Fontana should observe all the necessary inclinations so that the water could flow without outside help, but not at a high speed.

3. The construction work had to be carried out in an inhabited city without massive disruption to their normal life.

The section of the canal of around 1700 meters in Pompeii that Fontana has built under the city corresponds to the topography of the site, its natural inclinations. He was really a brilliant engineer, you can only envy him. He managed to solve the three problems I mentioned!

Preliminary Findings

1. The route of the aqueduct I examined coincides with the route of the engineer Domenico Fontana on the map of the Pompeii excavations at the end of the 18th and beginning of the 19th century.

2. The building material from which the water pipe was made is completely identical to the building material of the city. Partially fired bricks of standardized sizes were used.

As far as I could see through the bars: the walls are made of stone, the arches are made of bricks. Everything is carefully plastered from the inside. The plaster continues to this day, while the water pipe has of course not been thoroughly repaired for a long time. In addition, a photo of P 6 , here you can see that the water pipe goes a few meters lower before crossing the Via Stabiana street. If Fontana had built the canal in a dead city, he didn't have to do that, did he?

3. The depth of the canal in relation to the street level of Pompeii is relatively small. With the exception of one area (see above), the canal runs everywhere under the streets and walls of the houses, leaving the important cultic buildings undamaged.

Until the start of the excavations, none of the fountains are listed on Pompei's early topographical maps because all the fountains in the city were only discovered during the excavations. If Domenico Fontana had laid his water pipe under the volcanic ash that was several meters thick, the wells would also be several meters deep. They would also be drawn on old topographic maps. The fountain at the Temple of Isis is a characteristic example of what the situation was like at the beginning of the excavations.

In the 18th century, the usual urban fountains had lids inclined on both sides, in the 19th century they were already without lids, in the 20th century the top was completely missing on the paths of pilgrim tourists. Remains of the fountain have been preserved in places that are inaccessible to tourists. In the photo from 1851 the fountain, in the foreground, can still be seen in its original state, but without the lid.

It was not until much later, in 1870, that Ernest Breton suspected that this fountain belonged to the Domenico Fontana Canal.

“To the right, symmetrical to the altar, is an ancient fountain, which is now used to observe the Sarno Canal, designed by Domenico Fontana. At the time of the excavation, it was filled with black ash, which apparently came from burnt fruit. This fountain had a simple purpose, as did the entire territory adjacent to the Greek Temple of Isis: to take up the ashes of the victims ". - Pompeia by Ernest Breton (3rd ed. 1870)

It is quite natural that the archaeologists in their diary of the excavations attributed the well with a lid they had encountered to the Isis temple as a recycling container for the remains of the victims. Of course, the black dirt on his floor could also be perceived as such. However, they could not properly examine the fountain because it disturbed the flowing water of the canal.

Just like today's fountains as access to the city's underground connecting channels. In addition, it is difficult to imagine that Fontana like a worm the Pompeian hill with a shovel and a peck about two kilometers long in the volcanic soil without inevitable ventilation, yes not straight, but constantly changing its direction, and with a striking Attention to all inclinations.

What do we know about the construction of a tunnel in a loose floor at the end of the 16th to the beginning of the 17th century? The loose volcanic ash and lapilli would have been an insurmountable obstacle for Fontana if he wanted to dig horizontal tunnels under Pompeii. It would be impossible to strengthen the roof arch of the tunnel in such conditions. Domenico Fontana was an architect, but not a miner.

It still happens that even the miners are mistaken by digging dozens of meters. My conclusion: Domenico Fontana built his canal in an open pit. And if it did, he would inevitably have to dig up the city. His diligence in construction cannot be explained in a conventional way: he neither damaged a wall nor a building, he went deeper when crossing the streets (with one exception) and he made inspection wells exactly at street level. Some of them even have a side entrance. There cannot be so many coincidences. One can only believe in it, but it is not possible to explain it reasonably.

Summary

All of the above makes it possible to say with certainty that the existing canal (1594-1600) had been built in compliance with all the rules at that time for laying the urban connecting canals in the city of Pompeii, which was still alive at the time. As a result, the city of Pompeii, which has been partially uncovered by archaeologists today, is the same as that at the eruption of Vesuvius in 1631, which is also reflected in the epitaph of that time in Torre del Greco, where Pompeii in line with Herculaneum, Resina and Portici in the list of cities of sacrifice mentioned is directly confirmed.

In the Brockhaus encyclopedia, the first accidental discoverer of Pompeii is a famous Pope architect, engineer Domenico Fontana, who was also responsible for the completion of the construction of St. Peter's Cathedral in the Vatican, the relocation of the Egyptian obelisk to the cathedral square and the construction of the Palazzo Reale in Naples is celebrated.

«In the Middle Ages, even the place where Pompeii was was forgotten over the course of one and a half thousand years. Pompeii hid under the spilling ashes and the later layers of soil. In 1592, when the architect D. Fontana created an underground channel for the delivery of water from the Sarno river to the Torre Annunziata, which still exists today, he came across the ruins of Pompeii. But nobody noticed them. »

This water pipe was ordered by Count Sarno from the architect Domenico Fontana with the aim of supplying the water to the Torre Annunziata. It was still used by farmers to irrigate their fields in the early 1900s and continued to function until 1960 when the canal was abandoned, which ultimately led to its decay.

It could be concluded from these words that the engineer was working on the work after the tunnel had been laid through the city at some depth and that he had come across the roofs and walls of the houses under the layer of ash several meters thick. It wouldn't be strange if you didn't ask the question: How did he manage, technically, almost two kilometers in the volcanic soil, which still emitted dangerous carbon dioxide gas, without the necessary ventilation?

It looks as if Domenico Fontana in 1592 directed the 1764 meter underground gallery through the Pompeian Hill so that it not only ran underground, but even under the foundations of the buildings and the castle walls and has not touched or damaged any of them on their way!

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 28, 2020, 08:25:27 AM
PLASMA COMPRESSION FUSION DEVICE II

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2228751#msg2228751 (part I)

In a significant breakthrough, Dr. Salvatore Pais' paper on double torsion technology applied to portable fusion devices has been published by a major and prestigious mainstream scientific journal.

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/8871349

The Plasma Compression Fusion Device—Enabling Nuclear Fusion Ignition
Publisher: IEEE

November 2019 (Vol 47, Issue 11), IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science (published by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers)

The plasma compression fusion device (PCFD) generates the energy gain by plasma compression-induced nuclear fusion. This concept has the capability of maximizing the product of plasma pressure and energy confinement time to maximize the energy gain, and thus give rise to fusion ignition conditions. The preferred embodiment of this original concept uses a hollow cross-duct configuration of circular cross section in which the concentrated magnetic energy flux from two pairs of opposing curved-headed counter-spinning conical structures (possibly made from an alloy of tungsten with high capacitance) whose outer surfaces are electrically charged compresses a gaseous mixture of fusion fuel into a plasma, heated to extreme temperatures and pressures.

The PCFD concept can produce power in the gigawatt to terawatt range (and higher) with input power in the kilowatt to megawatt range.

Dr. Pais' other major paper was also published in a mainstream scientific journal:

https://www.scribd.com/document/408469834/High-Frequency-Gravitational-Waves-Induced-Propulsion2017

https://saemobilus.sae.org/content/2017-01-2040


Let us remember that the tokamak plasma device will release 1014 positrons (laevorotatory subquarks) from the ether lattice:

https://web.archive.org/web/20170808100451/http://www.ccfe.ac.uk/assets/Documents/PRLVOL90p135004.pdf

Dr. Menahem Simhony has researched the existence of the electron-positron lattice:

http://www.epola.co.uk/epola_org/

http://web.archive.org/web/20040606235138/www.word1.co.il/physics/mass.htm

http://web.archive.org/web/20040616160252/http://word1.co.il/physics/article.html


Further research, the existence of the electron-positron double torsion wave structure, has been conducted by Dr. F. Tombe:

http://www.cartesio-episteme.net/ep8/electron_positron_sea.pdf


Gertsenshtein-Zel'dovich effect:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2194420#msg2194420

Li effect:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2194548#msg2194548

High-Frequency Gravitational Wave Induced Nuclear Fusion

http://www.gravwave.com/docs/AIP;%20HFGW%20Nuclear%20Fusion.pdf

The electrodynamic Hamiltonian of a particle in ZPF (zero point energy field/ether) was obtained for the first time in 1994, and was published in the Physical Review A:

https://journals.aps.org/pra/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevA.49.678

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9069/0be66e03f535dd3b47aeb76ea36bfc3d1909.pdf

Inertia as a zero-point-field Lorentz force
Bernhard Haisch, Alfonso Rueda, and H. E. Puthoff
Phys. Rev. A 49, 678

Under the hypothesis that ordinary matter is ultimately made of subelementary constitutive primary charged entities or "partons" bound in the manner of traditional elementary Planck oscillators (a timehonored classical technique), it is shown that a heretofore uninvestigated Lorentz force (specifically, the magnetic component of the Lorentz force) arises in any accelerated reference frame from the interaction of the partons with the vacuum electromagnetic zero-point field (ZPF).

Partons are Feynman's particles which make up protons and neutrons ahd have fractional charges.

Partons are positrons:

https://vixra.org/pdf/1910.0161v1.pdf

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 31, 2020, 05:09:12 AM
COMPTON TUBE HOAX

Physicist Arthur Holly Compton (1892-1962) devised an ingenious way to demonstrate rotation in 1913 (a sort of Foucault's pendulum constructed with a tube of water).

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/74/Watching_the_Earth_revolve%2C_Fig-4.jpg)

(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-kFnC2KnswDM/USyu20pu6qI/AAAAAAAAuFM/Le_QU8Lh5gA/s640/TatumOnIsingOnCompton.PNG)

http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/ComptonTube.html

"It uses a large 1 meter diameter glass torus filled with liquid having small particles in suspension. It is aligned in a plane east-west allowed to stabilize for a day or more, then quickly rotated 180 degrees about its diameter. The suspended particles are observed with a microscope and for a few seconds they rotate with respect to the tube, the motion damping out in about 20 seconds. This motion occurs because the liquid and the particles were initially moving with the tube around the earth's axis. After the tube flips, the liquid and the particles, are now moving in the opposite direction inside it. Their speed can be observed with the microscope. This device not only indicates the direction of North, but also shows which direction the earth rotates."

(https://www.lockhaven.edu/~dsimanek/puzzles/compton-tube.gif)

However, the tube can measure TWO possible rotational motions: the hypothetical rotation of the Earth, or the rotation of the ether drift above the surface of the Earth (which is latitude dependent, as proven by Dr. Dayton Miller's experiments).

That is, the particles will reveal the effect of the CORIOLIS FORCE:

https://www.princeton.edu/~romalis/PHYS203/HW9.pdf

The deciding factor, as always, is the SAGNAC EFFECT.

Here we have further undeniable proof that the CORIOLIS EFFECT is just a kinematic effect, a purely mechanical interaction.

In fact, researchers in the field of gravitomagnetism are defining terrestrial gravity in terms of the Coriolis force (effect exerted by gravitons upon particles):

https://www.gsjournal.net/books/De-Mees-Gravitomagnetism-and-Coriolis-Gravity-2011-A4.pdf (chapter 8 )


The SAGNAC EFFECT, by contrast, is an electromagnetic effect.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2023979#msg2023979

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 02, 2020, 02:58:48 AM
CORIOLIS AND SAGNAC EFFECTS - GRAVITATIONAL AND LIGHT LONGITUDINAL WAVES

The CORIOLIS EFFECT is caused by the rotation of the ether drift above the surface of the Earth. It is an effect on the gravitational (dextrorotatory) string.

The SAGNAC EFFECT is caused by the velocity of the ether waves impact on the light beams of the interferometer. It is an effect on the light/electromagnetic (laevorotatory) string.

The electrogravitational field propagates in double torsion fashion (one string, the one which has a right-handed spin, is the gravitational flux of bosons, the other string, with a left-handed spin, is the electromagnetic stream of bosons; both are longitudinal waves which travel through subquark transverse waves):

(https://i.ibb.co/C83PjcW/leed.jpg)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg759332#msg759332 (magnetricity - double torsion flow of the electrogravitational field)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2009680#msg2009680

One of the basic and most profound discoveries in this thread, is that the second string of the magnetic field, the NORTH-SOUTH flux of particles, is the GRAVITATIONAL stream of bosons, while the usually depicted SOUTH-NORTH flux is the electromagnetic stream.


The magnetic field effect has a rotational counterpart:

https://journals.aps.org/pra/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevA.46.7079

(https://i.ibb.co/5KvKyVg/conn.jpg)

http://www.cartesio-episteme.net/ep8/maxwell8.pdf

Maxwell’s Original Equations

The compound centrifugal force (Coriolis force) that acts on an element moving with velocity v in a magnetic field: the solenoidal alignment of the tiny vortices causes a differential centrifugal pressure to act on either side of the element when it is moving at right angles to the rotation axes of the vortices, and this causes a deflection in the path of motion.

http://www.cartesio-episteme.net/ep8/vorticity.pdf

The Cause of Coriolis Force

The most fundamental Coriolis force of all arises in the all pervading electron-positron sea in connection with the torque which causes the rotating electron-positron dipoles to align solenoidally, hence producing the magnetic field. An electron-positron dipole generates a net aether pressure when it is disturbed from its equilibrium alignment, either by being stretched, compressed, caused to precess, or being caused to spin faster.

 
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327447483_Scalar_Waves (the best article on scalar waves, from a mainstream source)


"Light is an undulation in the same medium that is the cause of electric and magnetic phenomena: light is an electromagnetic wave."

The Compton tube experiment proves the existence of the Coriolis force of rotation of the ether drift, it is just a deflection of the path of the particles, it affects the dextrorotatory string (gravitational wave). Since both strings propagate in a double torsion helix form, the slight deviation of the gravitational string's path will also mean a slight offset of the light/electromagnetic string path as well.

(http://www.selfhealgo.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/DOUBLE_HELIX_PHASE_CONJUGATED_WAVE_1-300x165.jpg)

The Sagnac effect is directly related to the velocity of the light beams, light is the laevorotatory string (electromagnetic wave).

In an interferometer whose center of rotation coincides with the geometrical center, BOTH these effects will have equal values.

However, for an interferometer whose center of rotation no longer coincides with its geometrical center, the SAGNAC EFFECT will be much greater than the CORIOLIS EFFECT (since it is directly proportional to the radius of the rotation), while BOTH effects will be recorded/registered by the fringe shifts.

Rotation will affect BOTH the dextrorotatory and the laevorotatory waves, the entire electrogravitational field. To prove the rotation of the Earth, one needs to register BOTH these effects, CORIOLIS and SAGNAC.


The SAGNAC EFFECT is directly related to the radius of rotation (and thus to the velocity of the light beam itself):

Sagnac formula for an interferometer whose center of rotation coincides with its geometrical center:

Δt = l/(c - v) - l/(c + v)

Sagnac formula for an interferometer located away from the center of rotation (different radii, different velocities):

Δt = (l1 + l2)/(c - v1 - v2) - (l1 + l2)/(c + v1 + v2)

The velocity terms are immediately identified: c - v1 - v2 and c + v1 + v2.


Δt = (l1 + l2)/(c - v1 - v2) - (l1 + l2)/(c + v1 + v2) = 2[(l1v1 + l2v2)]/c2


Coriolis effect formula:

4AΩ/c2


https://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Mathematical%20Physics/Download/6220

FULL HYDRODYNAMIC GRAVITY EQUATION (the Coriolis force is part of entire/full acceleration equation):

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2033009#msg2033009

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 04, 2020, 03:14:55 AM
GPS OPERATIONAL CONTROL SYSTEM SOFTWARE IGNORES SPECIAL RELATIVISTIC EFFECTS/LORENTZ TIME TRANSFORMATION

https://web.archive.org/web/20120205022334/tycho.usno.navy.mil/ptti/1996/Vol%2028_16.pdf (page 11)

"But it's the absence of any explicit acknowledgment of special relativistic effects due to the speed of light being the same whenever measured by an observer, leading to the relativity of simultaneity and the associated Lorentz transformation physics - there's nothing of that at all modeled in the current system."

This is the main reason why N. Ashby introduced the Galilean time transformation t' = t between the inertial ECI and the rotating ECEF system:

http://www.ipgp.fr/~tarantola/Files/Professional/GPS/Ashby_2003.pdf (Sec. 2, equation (3))

GPS software uses the Newtonian or Galilean time transformation t' = t rather than t = γ(t−xv/c2) for the calculation of the Coriolis effect (called by modern science the Sagnac effect, even though the formula features the area and the angular velocity).

What would happen is the GPS software would incorporate the STR/Lorentz transformation effects? Then, no Coriolis effect correction would be recorded at all and the errors would amount to hundreds of nanoseconds (a timing error of one nanosecond can lead to a navigational error of 30 cm).


https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1303/1303.5309.pdf

On the Origin of the Lorentz Transformation

Dr. Wolfgang Engelhardt
Max-Planck-Institut für Plasmaphysik

The Lorentz Transformation, which is considered as constitutive for the Special Relativity Theory, was invented by Voigt in 1887, adopted by Lorentz in 1904, and baptized by Poincaré in 1906. Einstein probably picked it up from Voigt directly.


https://www.ion.org/publications/abstract.cfm?articleID=937

http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Ronald_Hatch/Hatch-Relativity_and_GPS-II_1995.pdf


"Electromagnetic Phenomena Not Explained by Maxwell's Equations"

Dr. T.W. Barrett
(Stanford Univ., Princeton Univ., U.S. Naval Research Laboratory, Univ. of Edinburgh, author of over 200 papers on advanced electromagnetism)

Essays on the Formal Aspects of Electromagnetic Theory, pg 6 - 85

(https://i.ibb.co/0s9v4XM/sagb.jpg)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 07, 2020, 03:22:23 AM
SUPERLUMINAL SAGNAC EFFECT - SUBLUMINAL CORIOLIS EFFECT

SAGNAC EFFECT: a superluminal effect, the speed of light varies to c + wr in one direction and c – wr in the other direction. It is based on the original superluminal Maxwell equations.

CORIOLIS EFFECT: a subluminal effect, the path of the light beams is slightly modified. It is based wholly on the modified Heaviside-Lorentz equations.

That is why all of the formulas generated using general relativity can only capture the CORIOLIS EFFECT. The addition of the stress energy tensor of the gravitational field by H. Yilmaz to the stress energy tensor for matter has ensured that general relativity can now predict light speed constancy on a rotating platform (east-west light travel yields light speed constancy).

Here is the latest analysis of the SAGNAC EFFECT, using general relativity:

On the general relativistic framework of the Sagnac effect

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1902.03895.pdf

First, using Galilean transformations, the authors derive the correct SAGNAC EFFECT formula, which features the superluminal speed c+v.

Then, they stipulate that the local velocity of light is always c.

Using this hypothesis, then the authors proceed to derive the CORIOLIS EFFECT formula, using general relativity:

(https://i.ibb.co/zXB7mjT/grcor1.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/VTLd1vs/grcor2.jpg)

"The Coriolis force has a general relativistic explanation.

Conclusions

In this paper some considerations about the Sagnac experiment have been made. It has been shown that, by considering the rotating metric and by imposing the cancellation of the line element, one has an unexceptionable explanation only from the mathematical point of view. In this way, it seems that the speed of light varies by c±ωr in one or the other direction around the disk. Instead, as it happens for example in Rindler or Schwarzschild metric, the apparent variation of the speed of light is a consequence of time dilation. For this reason, it seems that the physics of the experiment is clearer by using the "gravitational" Coriolis time dilation."

An explicit derivation of the formula which features the area and the angular velocity using only the CORIOLIS FORCE and general relativity, and which deliberately eliminates the superluminal light speed c+ωr.

No matter which metric is being used, general relativity can only capture the subluminal CORIOLIS EFFECT, nothing else.

However, the light speed varies by c±wr in one or the other direction around the disk, consistent with Dufour and Prunier’s experimental results:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2230304#msg2230304


The original superluminal Maxwell equations:

Velocity addition equations for the rotational Sagnac effect: c + v1 + v2 and c - v1 - v2.

The Heaviside-Lorentz equations are not invariant under Galilean transformations.

However, the original J.C. Maxwell dynamical equations are invariant under Galilean transformations:

(https://image.ibb.co/gcfFwJ/md12.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/gpLyGJ/md14.jpg)
(https://image.ibb.co/dikXbJ/md15.jpg)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2058884#msg2058884 (Dynamical Maxwell equations)

Equation (2.24) represents two waves: one wave propagating forward at a speed of (c+u) in the direction of the positive x axis and another wave propagating backward at a speed of (c-u) in the direction of the negative x axis.


https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/back-to-galilean-transformation-and-newtonian-physics-refuting-thetheory-of-relativity-2090-0902-1000198.php?aid=80761

A solution to the corrected Maxwell equations indicates that these equations are invariant under the Galilean transformation. Consequently the time-rate, space and mass are invariant and that velocity vectors are additive, which means that the speed of light can be exceeded.

The Heaviside-Lorentz equations are applicable to static systems only, and not to dynamic systems.

That is why they cannot capture the SAGNAC EFFECT which features superluminal speeds (c+v), since the speed of light is assumed to be always c.

Static vs. dynamical Maxwell equations

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2168036#msg2168036


That is why the CORIOLIS EFFECT formula is only a comparison of TWO SIDES (ARMS/SEGMENTS of the interferometer). The SAGNAC EFFECT, by contrast, is a comparison of TWO LOOPS:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2117351#msg2117351

(http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Michelson-Gale_webapp/image002.png)

Point A is located at the detector
Point B is in the bottom right corner
Point C is in the upper right corner
Point D is in the upper left corner

l1 is the upper arm.
l2 is the lower arm.


CORIOLIS EFFECT

Path 1 - A>B, D>C
Path 2 - C>D, B>A

A comparison of TWO SEGMENTS, a subluminal description based on the static Heaviside-Lorentz equations. It is mechanical effect: a slight deviation of the path of the light beams. It compares the phase shifts of two different segments/sides of the interferometer.


SAGNAC EFFECT

Path 1 - A > B > C > D > A is a continuous counterclockwise path, a negative sign -

Path 2 - A > D > C > B > A is a continuous clockwise path, a positive sign +

A comparison of TWO LOOPS, a superluminal phenomenon based on the original dynamical Maxwell equations. It is an electromagnetic effect: the speed of light varies by c±ωr in one or the other direction. It compares the phase shifts of the two continuous loops of the interferometer.


The letters sent to President of the Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB) by concerned German scientists/physicists regarding the GPS signal calculations:

Is it true that, contrary to the information provided by PTB, the effects of special relativity due to its insignificance and irrelevance are not taken into account in routine GPS application?
-
Is it true that, contrary to the information provided by PTB, it has been experimentally proven that the Sagnac effect applies and that the light runs with c + v accordingly?

https://www.kritik-relativitaetstheorie.de/2012/07/neutrino-experiment-anfrage-an-die-physikalisch-technische-bundesanstalt/ (translate to English option)

http://www.lothar-pernes.de/GPS-beweist-LG-c-v-gem-Emiss (translate to English option)

https://www.naturalphilosophy.org//pdf//abstracts/abstracts_7067.pdf

https://www.naturalphilosophy.org//pdf//abstracts/abstracts_7068.pdf


Acoustic gyroscopes (Coriolis effect):

https://www.mdpi.com/2072-666X/8/1/2/htm

This proves that the ether drift which rotates above the surface of the Earth is a TESLA SOUND WAVE.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2193463#msg2193463

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 11, 2020, 02:29:26 AM
KASSNER TIME GAP/DISCONTINUITY: THE CORIOLIS EFFECT IS NOT RELATED TO THE SAGNAC EFFECT

In 1997, Dr. Franco Selleri, one of the top researchers of the Sagnac effect, published the time gap/discontinuity paradox which arises from the application of the Einstein synchronization: the clock on the disk is out of synchronization with itself (equivalently, since time “jumps” a gap between 360° and 0°, one could say time is discontinuous on the rotating disk. Also equivalently, one could say time is multivalued, as a given event has more than one time associated with it).

Actually, the paradox was discovered in 1938 by Dr. Herbert Ives, who proved that ”there are of course not merely two clocks, but an infinity of clocks, where we include those that could be transported at finite speeds, and around other paths. As emphasized previously, the idea of “local time” is untenable, what we have are clock readings. Any number of clock readings at the same place are physically possible, depending on the behaviour and history of the  clocks used. More than one “time” at one place is a physical absurdity.“

The only explanation left, is Langevin’s proposition a) that the light speed varies by c±wr  in one or the other direction around the disk, consistent with Dufour and Prunier’s experimental results."

Herbert Ives, Light Signals Sent Around a Closed Path:

http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Ives/Herbert_Ives_Light_Signals_Sent_Around_a_Closed_Path.pdf

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1978311#msg1978311


https://web.archive.org/web/20160305011520/https://www.uniurb.it/Filosofia/selleri%20inglese.htm (scientific papers by Dr. Selleri)


The time gap/discontinuity paradox analyzed by Dr. Robert Klauber:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0604118.pdf

The paradox was also studied by Dr. T.A. Weber (ISU).


The full description of the paradox was presented by Dr. Klaus Kassner (Institut fur Theoretische Physik, Germany) in 2012:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1302.6888.pdf

"In his Minkowsky analysis of the circular Sagnac effect, Kassner is met with a discontinuity related to the speeds c + v and c−v of Selleri's paradox. Because of it, in order to confirm that the local speed of light is c along the disk circumference, Kassner tries to justify the discontinuity by introducing the unusual concept of a ‘time gap’ and states that ‘the speed of light is c everywhere except at the point on the circle where we put the time gap."

In order to make sense of the entire situation, the modified Lorentz transformation is used (Einstein synchronization) so that the CORIOLIS EFFECT formula is derived, which features the area and the angular velocity.

None of these authors has realized that by having derived the CORIOLIS EFFECT formula using STR/GTR, there will ALWAYS be a time gap/discontinuity paradox.

That is, the CORIOLIS EFFECT formula does not compare TWO LOOPS, but only TWO SEPARATE SEGMENTS. This fact was discovered, here on this thread, for the very first time, and proven to be true for the Michelson-Gale interferometer. Now, we have the full proof which also addresses interferometers whose center of rotation coincides with their geometrical center: only by introducing the TIME GAP/DISCONTINUITY can the CORIOLIS EFFECT formula be derived. In this case, we have a comparison of two separate segments, and not the comparison of two loops, as required by the definition of the SAGNAC EFFECT.


Dr. Gianfranco Spavieri has also examined the Kassner time gap/discontinuity and has debunked Dr. Kassner's second attempt to explain the paradox (by means of the absolute synchronization):

https://medcraveonline.com/PAIJ/testing-einsteinrsquos-second-postulate-with-an-experiment-of-the-sagnac-type.html

After his Minkowsky analysis, Kassner concludes by acknowledging that “Einstein synchronization fails when performed along a path around a full circle”, i.e., on a closed path on the rotating disk, a failure that has also been observed by Weber and earlier by Anandan.

Thus, in order to account for the resulting unphysical time discontinuity arising from the speeds c + v and  c − v and solve Selleri’s paradox, Kassner introduces the unusual concept of a “time gap” on the rotating disk and states, “the speed of light is c everywhere except at the point on the circle where we put the time gap. The position of this point is arbitrary but there must inevitably be such a point.”


A second paper published by Dr. Kassner:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1109.2488.pdf


The best analysis of the Kassner time gap paradox belongs to Dr. Stephan J.G. Gift:

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/66fe/0dc3683bca9f1be34923ac8e47c2870e16f7.pdf

On the Selleri Transformations: Analysis of Recent Attempts by Kassner to Resolve Selleri’s Paradox

Kassner’s first approach employed Einstein synchronization and failed as it led to an unphysical time discontinuity. His second approach ironically involved the introduction of the Inertial (or Selleri) transformations which explain the associated Sagnac effect using light speed anisotropy but preserve the paradox. His core methodology based on his belief that a clock synchronization procedure can be freely chosen is shown to be without foundation and therefore the paradox stands unresolved.

Kassner continued in his effort to explain the Sagnac effect in the frame of the commoving observer by utilizing Minkowski analysis. He concluded by acknowledging that “Einstein synchronization fails when performed along a path around a full circle” i.e. on a closed path on the rotating disc. This failure has also been observed by Weber (1997) and earlier by Anandan (1981).


Dr. Wolfgang Engelhardt (Max-Planck-Institut fur Plasmaphysik) has proven, using the full Lorentz transformation (the Einstein synchronization adopted by Post, Malykin, Ashby and every other relativist), that when STR is correctly applied to the Sagnac interferometer, it will NOT predict the Sagnac effect.

http://aflb.ensmp.fr/AFLB-401/aflb401m820.pdf

Dr. Engelhardt points out that all of the relativists are using a modified Lorentz transformation, which then directly leads to the Kassner time gap/discontinuity paradox.


In a 62 page important presentation, Dr. J.H. Field (Departement de Physique Nucleaire et Corpusculaire Universite de Geneve) also proves (as did Dr. Engelhardt) that using the full Lorentz transformation (Einstein synchronization) the Sagnac effect will not be detected at all. Only by utilizing the modified Lorentz transformation can the CORIOLIS EFFECT formula be derived, meaning that also the time gap/discontinuity Kassner-Ives paradox cannot be avoided:

http://www.relativity-myths.org.uk/jhfield/pdf/sagnachkpap.pdf

A shorter version of Dr. Field's paper:

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/fdc7/3a4dfb13de49d558704513a6cd0a8eb7c384.pdf

Dr. Field also carefully investigates the errors committed by Malykin and Ashby.


The SAGNAC EFFECT is a superluminal formula (c + v), and is derived by the comparison of TWO LOOPS.

The CORIOLIS EFFECT is a subluminal formula (related to the area and the angular velocity of the interferometer), and is derived by the comparison of two separate segments, leading directly to the KASSNER-IVES time gap/discontinuity paradox, and is not related at all to the SAGNAC EFFECT.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on February 12, 2020, 03:01:37 AM
KASSNER TIME GAP/DISCONTINUITY: THE CORIOLIS EFFECT IS NOT RELATED TO THE SAGNAC EFFECT II

(https://i.ibb.co/BnHgWLK/gisag.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/C2TPN8P/gisag1.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/5T550L1/gisag2.jpg)

Dr. Stephan J.G. Gift

"Thus regarding the frame on the rotating disc he stated, “the speed of light is c everywhere except at the point on the circle where we put the time gap. The position of this point is arbitrary but there must inevitably be such a point.” "

A time gap means that we are no longer dealing with TWO CONTINUOUS LOOPS, as required by the definition of the SAGNAC EFFECT. Having compared two separate segments, only the CORIOLIS EFFECT formula will be derived.

"He concluded by acknowledging that “Einstein synchronization fails when performed along a path around a full circle” i.e. on a closed path on the rotating disc."

It has to fail on a closed path since the Einstein synchronization deals only with subluminal speeds, while the full closed path (two continuous loops) requires the use of superluminal speeds (c+v) for the SAGNAC EFFECT.

(https://i.ibb.co/syJNmsk/spasag1.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/rtyQKRH/spasag2.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/ZhYXSQs/spasag3.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/5nW0vNH/spasag4.jpg)

http://www.espenhaug.com/SagnacEffectFavorsAbsolute.pdf

Dr. Gianfranco Spavieri

In both the outward and return paths, the one-way speed is c (in agreement with Einstein’s second postulate) if the length L of the outward path covered by the signal is reduced to L(1 - 2v/c) < L in Eq. (3).

CORIOLIS EFFECT = a path measuring L(1 - 2v/c), a comparison of two separate/different segments

SAGNAC EFFECT = a path measuring L, a comparison of two continuous loops

Therefore, Michelson and Gale, Silberstein, Langevin, Post, Bilger, Anderson, Steadman, Rizzi, Targaglia, Ruggiero, have been measuring ONLY the CORIOLIS EFFECT formula (area and angular velocity), nothing else. The formulas features on the wikipedia and mathpages websites are the CORIOLIS EFFECT equations, not the correct SAGNAC EFFECT formulas.


Here is the crown jewel of all the SAGNAC EFFECT formulas:

Δt = (l1 + l2)/(c - v1 - v2) - (l1 + l2)/(c + v1 + v2)

The velocity terms are immediately identified: c - v1 - v2 and c + v1 + v2.


Δt = (l1 + l2)/(c - v1 - v2) - (l1 + l2)/(c + v1 + v2) = 2[(l1v1 + l2v2)]/c2

Proof:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2117351#msg2117351

For the first time, now we have the correct SAGNAC EFFECT formula for the Michelson-Gale/ring laser gyroscopes experiments.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2153966#msg2153966

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 07, 2020, 05:21:19 AM
PLANCK'S THIRD QUANTUM THEOREM, PLANCK AETHER, ZERO POINT ENERGY, KALUZA-KLEIN PARTICLES, DARK MATTER, DARK ENERGY, DARK FLOW

Few physicists know that M. Planck had developed a third quantum theory by 1915, which supplanted the second quantum theory which had been published in 1911.

In a letter of 1915 to Heike Kamerlingh Onnes in Leiden Planck wrote: “I have almost completed an improved formulation of the quantum hypothesis applied to thermal radiation. I am more convinced than ever that zero-point energy is an indispensable element. Indeed, I believe I have the strongest evidence for it."

It is this third quantum theory, wholly based on the zero point energy concept, which was advanced by Walter Nernst ( theory of a cosmic ether filled with a huge amount of
zero-point energy).

"Whatever difficulties we may have in forming a consistent idea of the constitution
of the aether, there can be no doubt that the interplanetary and interstellar spaces
are not empty, but are occupied by a material substance or body, which is certainly the largest, and probably the most uniform body of which we have any knowledge."

J.C. Maxwell

Dr. Friedwardt Winterberg

Ph.D., Physics 1955 Max Planck Institute, Goettingen, Germany (Adv: Prof. W. Heisenberg)
1968-Present Professor of physics, University of Nevada Reno
1955-1959 Group leader theoretical physics division at nuclear research reactor in Hamburg, Germany, under President Eisenhower's "Atoms for Peace" program
Elected member International Academy of Astronautics, Paris, France.
Member of American Physical Society.
Recipient of the 1979 Hermann Oberth Gold Medal (the highest award in astronautical research given for his work on nuclear rocket propulsion).
More than 260 single author papers in refereed journals, two books, with many citations, including citations by the NY Times, Scientific American, Physics Today et al., 55 publications since 1992.
Invented GPS technology, in 1955, at the age of 26: proposing to put atomic clocks into artificial satellites.

Maxwell’s Aether, The Planck Aether Hypothesis and Sommerfeld’s Finestructure Constant

http://www.space-lab.ru/files/pages/PIRT_VII-XII/pages/text/PIRT_VIII/Winterberg_1.pdf

"String theory has candidates for the nonbaryonic cold dark matter but is unable to explain the 70% negative pressure energy. Candidates for the 26% cold dark matter are axions and neutralinos, but none of them have ever been observed in a laboratory or else.

List of articles published by Dr. F. Winterberg:

https://bourabai.ru/winter/relativ.htm

Planck Mass Rotons as Cold Dark Matter and Quintessence

http://www.znaturforsch.com/aa/v57a/s57a0202.pdf

Planck Scale Physics and Newton's Ultimate Object Conjecture

http://zfn.mpdl.mpg.de/data/Reihe_A/52/ZNA-1997-52a-0183.pdf

The Averaged Null Energy Condition and the Madelung Constant for
Cold Dark Matter and Energy

http://www.znaturforsch.com/s69a/s69a0017.pdf

The Einstein-Myth and the Crisis in Modern Physics

http://bourabai.kz/winter/relativ.htm

Planck-mass-rotons cold dark matter hypothesis

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00671599


Dark energy and dark matter as due to zero point energy

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-plasma-physics/article/dark-energy-and-dark-matter-as-due-to-zero-point-energy/DFAC4A98338A39DDFD72DA85A6B09F06


Zero-point energies, dark matter, and dark energy

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1910.09953.pdf


The electrodynamic Hamiltonian of a particle in ZPF (zero point energy field/ether) was obtained for the first time in 1994, and was published in the Physical Review A:

https://journals.aps.org/pra/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevA.49.678

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9069/0be66e03f535dd3b47aeb76ea36bfc3d1909.pdf

Inertia as a zero-point-field Lorentz force
Bernhard Haisch, Alfonso Rueda, and H. E. Puthoff
Phys. Rev. A 49, 678

This equation was used by Dr. Takaaki Musha (Honda R&D Institute) to obtain the formula for the maximum weight loss of a capacitor subjected to the Biefeld-Brown effect:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2178412#msg2178412


Planck's second quantum theorem and zero point energy:

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/34a3/c4118bfa21884103ea81788bd6c5a248ee27.pdf



https://www.researchgate.net/publication/226789463_Physics_of_the_Zero-Point_Field_Implications_for_Inertia_Gravitation_and_Mass

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/13386630_Gravity_as_a_zero-point-fluctuation_force

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/13385874_Source_of_vacuum_electromagnetic_zero-point_energy


http://immanuelvelikovsky.com/NewtonEinstein&Veli.pdf (pgs 239-257)

Dark Matter/Quintessence

Distance From The Galactic Center


"The first piece of evidence came from the work of a young Dutch astronomer
named Jan Oort . . . Oort had already made a significant contribution to Galactic
astronomy.

Oort measured the positions and motions of a number of stars lying outside
the visible disk of the galaxy. Then he used that information to calculate how much
mass must lie inside their orbits to produce their observed motions. This amount is
called the Oort Limit, and it is equal to about 0.03 of a solar mass per cubic lightyear.
Next, Oort added up the masses of the visible stars in the Galactic disk. The
result was surprising: The actual mass present in the Galaxy seemed to be 50
percent less than what was needed to cause the actual movements of the stars that
lay outside the visible Galactic disk."

Joel Davis, Journey to the Center of Our Galaxy


Another problem arose in the 1930s: certain celestial motions were not in accordance
with Newtonian theory.

“The first glimmer that something was amiss in astronomy’s understanding of
the universe came in the 1930s. Caltech astronomer, Fritz Zwicky, an eclectic
wizard of his craft, was measuring the velocities of galaxies within the famous
Coma cluster and noticed that they were moving at a fairly rapid pace. He added
up all the light being emitted by these galaxies and realized that there was not
enough visible, or luminous, matter around to gravitationally bind the speeding
galaxies to one another. Under the standard laws of celestial mechanics, the Coma
cluster should [have been] flying apart, but it [wasn’t]. The situation seems
paradoxical . . . "

"By the 1970s, however, the problem of the missing mass was brought closer
to home. By then, both radio and optical telescopes were beginning to reveal
curious rotations in both the Milky Way and nearby galaxies which suggested that
galaxies contained more mass than previously assumed. Astronomers always took
it as a matter of course that stars in a spiral galaxy would evolve around the galaxy’s
core like planets in the solar system whose motions adhere to Newton’s laws of
gravitation. Newton recognized that the gravitational attraction between a planet
and the Sun follows a simple rule of thumb: the attraction between two celestial
objects is inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. That
means that if the distance between the Earth and the Sun were doubled, their mutual
gravitational grip would lessen by a factor of four. Triple the distance, and the
attraction would fall off to a ninth of its original strength, and so on."

“The distance between a planet and the Sun also determines the planet’s orbital
velocity. “In the solar system, the planets all orbit the Sun with velocities that get
smaller and smaller as they get farther from the Sun, the system’s center of mass,”
explained Vera Rubin of the Carnegie Institution of Washington. “So the inner
planets go fast and the outer planets go slow. That’s just a direct response to
Newton’s law.”

“But to everyone’s surprise, observers discovered that galaxies weren’t acting
like [a] gigantic solar system at all.

“In spiral galaxy after spiral galaxy, the Carnegie group saw that stellar material
on the outer edges of a disk travels around at speeds much faster than theory had
estimated. It was the Coma cluster problem all over again.”

Marcia Bartusiak, Thursday’s Universe

Therefore, the stars in spiral galaxies do not follow Kepler’s law of distance cubed
equal period squared. In order to do so, the stars farther from the central mass of spiral galaxies must revolve slower than stars closer to the central mass, and they simply do not do this; they travel at the same velocity. James Trefil states, “In fact, no galactic rotation curve has ever been observed to turn over and become Keplarian. All of them remain flat out to distances of 200,000 or 300,000 light years.”

This evidence is a basic contradiction of fundamental gravitational theory and implies
that something is fundamentally wrong with our understanding of these matters.


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1920865#msg1920865

"Klein theorized that Kaluza's new dimension likely had somehow collapsed down to the "Planck length" itself -- supposedly the smallest possible size allowed by these fundamental interactions: 10-33 cm."


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1921372#msg1921372

Dark matter consists of KK particles


The Kaluza-Klein particle is the boson, which makes up the Planck aether, and also constitutes dark matter.


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1964696#msg1964696

In an important development, published in the peer reviewed and prestigious journal Physical Review D, cosmologist C. Tsagas has proven that the universe either has dark flow or dark energy, but not both.


There is no way out for modern science on this issue: it needs dark matter to account for the orbits of the stars/galaxies, but dark matter consists of Kaluza-Klein electrogravitational particles (Planck aether).


Kaluza-Weyl spaces:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2195432#msg2195432


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 12, 2020, 09:22:35 AM
TERRESTRIAL SCALAR MICROWAVES BACKGROUND RADIATION

Dr. P.M. Robitaille proves that the monopole of the microwave background, as initially
detected by Penzias and Wilson, is being produced by the Earth itself:

The Planck Satellite LFI and the Microwave Background:
Importance of the 4 K Reference Targets

http://www.ptep-online.com/2010/PP-22-02.PDF


COBE: A Radiological Analysis

http://www.ptep-online.com/2009/PP-19-03.PDF


WMAP: A Radiological Analysis

http://www.ptep-online.com/2007/PP-08-01.PDF


Dr. P.M. Robitaille (radius of the sun paradox):

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2075989#msg2075989

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2090897#msg2090897

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2093726#msg2093726


Coronanipahvirus/Mycobacterium

https://www.academia.edu/42175251/IN_PRESS_Coronavirus_Revisited_Northern_Italy_Covid-19_and_a_Beijing_Strain_of_TB_a_Lesson_to_Be_Learned

https://www.academia.edu/42110050/SARDI_BROXMEYER_INTERVIEW_Why_are_Antibiotics_and_Not_Anti-Virals_Quelling_the_COVID-19_Coronavirus_Is_It_Really_A_Virus

The point is that the coronavirus has not been around long enough for in-depth study, and should it prove to be merely a “passenger” virus, secondary to an underlying bacterial or mycobacterial cause, such a microbe, perhaps similar to the Beijing strain of mycobacteria isolated in Milan prior to its COVID-19 outbreak, would then assume the mantel of the true “underlying condition” and not the virus.

Today, although tuberculosis is still a global pandemic, it is still treatable, but only if looked for and considered. What is the cause of the present Pandemic/Epidemic? Most are 98% certain that it is a virus. But until we are 100% certain, which we are not, we still need to keep a differential diagnosis open as to the possibility that we are dealing with a “passenger” virus with a deadly underlying cause. To do otherwise, would be a disservice to many.

https://www.academia.edu/41727245/THE_NEW_CORONAVIRUS


H1N1/Mycobacterium

http://www.oilgeopolitics.net/Swine_Flu/Tuberculosis/tuberculosis.html

SARS/Mycobacterium

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.573.8374&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Spanish flu/Mycobacterium

https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/49/9/1405/301441

(https://www.who.int/csr/disease/nipah/en/)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on March 19, 2020, 12:11:26 PM
THE GIZEH PYRAMID WAS SUBMERGED UNDER THE SEA

(https://jojo2903.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/montage1-egypt2.jpg)

Both Nobel prize winning Dr. Luis Alvarez and and the National Science Foundation (Stanford University) determined that the limestone rocks of the Gizeh pyramid were too saturated with water, up to an elevation of 100 meters, to allow penetration by cosmic rays (the rocks had a high water content). Another convincing proof showing that the Gizeh plateau was once covered by the sea is represented by the exoskeleton of an echinoid (sea urchin) which was found embedded upright in the upper surface of a block adjoining the Menkaura pyramid.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2225892#msg2225892

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2226078#msg2226078

Given these undeniable proofs that the Gizeh pyramid was actually submerged under the Mediterranean Sea, mainstream scientists have sought to find a possible explanation.

The first of these attempts was to claim that the tsunami generated by the explosion of the Santorini volcano reached the shores of Egypt. However, the studies which have been carried out show that the height of the initial wave was only 28 meters in height; moreover, the northern coastline of Crete would have blocked the tsunami from reaching Egypt.

https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/186/2/665/589033

https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1312/3/3/745/htm

https://theconversation.com/santorini-eruption-new-theory-says-pyroclastic-flows-caused-devastating-bronze-age-tsunamis-68368

(https://www.volcanodiscovery.com/typo3temp/pics/3f420df572.jpg)

“Crete's northern coastline would have acted like a 250 kilometer long breakwater that absorbed and reflected much of the tsunami's energy back into the Aegean. This would have significantly reduced the amount of wave energy able to escape into the open waters of the Mediterranean Sea.”

(https://www.minoanatlantis.com/pix/Aegean_Sea.jpg)

The sea surge lasted long enough for sea urchins to embed themselves on the rocks on some of the temples; the Gizeh plateau was submerged under the sea at least for a period of time measuring in days (the Great Flood) or even years (1761 AD – 1769 AD, in the new radical chronology of history timeline).

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/nw2PdtDJkfY/hqdefault.jpg)

Since the Santorini volcano explosion could not possibly explain that the Gizeh pyramid was submerged under the water, researchers in the field have begun to understand that the only possible period of time in the official chronology of history when this event could have taken place is at the end of the last Ice Age (some 12,000 years ago):

https://humanoriginproject.com/younger-dryas-event-extinction-prehistoric-period/

https://humanoriginproject.com/early-earth-history-the-great-flood/

http://mgu.bg/geoarchmin/naterials/64Manichev.pdf

In view of the fact that these scientists could not possibly accept that the Gizeh pyramid had already been built some 12,000 years ago, new explanations were required. The only feasible scenario is that proposed by Charles Ginenthal: that the last Ice Age ended some 3,500 years ago, so the Gizeh plateau was submerged under water in the period 1,500 BC:

http://immanuelvelikovsky.com/NewtonEinstein&Veli.pdf (page 129)

http://immanuelvelikovsky.com/Mammoth.pdf  (pages 257, 274-277 and 284-291)

The only possible cause of the huge sea surge could have been a pole shift (heliocentrical theory); however, this fact would render useless the current approach to orbital mechanics based on nonlinear ordinary differential equations with initial values (it would prove the instability of the solar system and that the solutions obtained through numerical methods have no scientific basis):

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2226137#msg2226137

However, in this case we are left with a question that no one, not even I. Velikovsky, could answer:

One other question, of a like nature. I think it is generally accepted that the Great Pyramid of Gizeh was built before this close approach. The sides of the Great Pyramid are oriented—north, south, east, west—within, as I recall, about three minutes of arc, about the smallest angle one could expect the orientation to be if surveying was done with the naked eye. It seems a rather unusual coincidence that this north, south, east, west orientation could have come out of an Earth that had been thrown into such a chance disorientation by the close approach.

The almost perfect north-south orientation means that no tilt or change of poles has occurred since the Great Pyramid was constructed.

In the heliocentrical context, a massive pole shift must have taken place in the recent historical time; however, this fact is disproven by the north-south orientation of the Gizeh pyramid, not to mention its precise calendar of the solstices and of the equinoxes (the Gizeh pyramid was constructed, we are told, well before the time of the pole shift itself).

Moreover, the facts concerning the north-south orientation are even more startling.

"To understand why, we look at Livio Catullo Stecchini, who was a professor of ancient history at Paterson State Teachers College and wrote on the history of science, ancient weights and measures (metrology), and the history of cartography in antiquity.
Professor Stechhini is best known for his numerological theories about the dimensions of the Great Pyramid.

In the 1960’s Professor Stecchini wrote about the apparent inaccuracies detected in the north-south orientation of the Great Pyramid and how these were present with a purpose.

As Stecchini claimed, the alignment axis of the western side of the Great Pyramid was drawn first by its builders, then, the builders outlined the northern side so it could be perfectly perpendicular to the western side. The eastern side, however, was intentionally placed at a larger angle of 3 arcmins, resulting in a larger side.

In other words, the northeast corner should have been 90 ° 03 ’00 “, not 90 °. As for the southern side of the Great Pyramid, it was predicted to be half an arcminute larger than perpendicular, so that the southwest corner measured 90 ° 00 ’30.
However, Stecchini also studied a small line on the floor of the base of the Great Pyramid located near the center of the northern side. Some authors have assumed that this was the original north-south axis of the Great Pyramid.

The data shows that the axis line is located at 115.090 meters in the northwest corner, and 115.161 meters in the northeast corner, so it seems to be a bit off center. This variation was typically rejected as human error.

However, Professor Stecchini concluded that this was not a mistake. Rather, the north-south axis of the Great Pyramid was misaligned on purpose. Therefore, the apex was also misaligned on purpose by about 35.5 millimeters westward."
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on April 28, 2020, 11:19:21 AM
OPTICAL AHARONOV-BOHM EFFECT

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF02189249

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1367-2630/10/8/083036

http://news.mit.edu/2019/aharonov-bohm-effect-physics-observed-0905

https://phys.org/news/2014-05-breakthrough-paper-aharonov-bohm-effect-published.html

Bohren experiment:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2001816#msg2001816 (Bohren's experiment collects 18 times more energy from the usually nondiverged Heaviside component)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 15, 2020, 07:41:18 AM
OPTICAL BIOPHYSICS AND THE SAGNAC EFFECT

"Pasteur discovered that solutions which had organic material dissolved within  them had the incredible property of rotating polarized light to the “left” while liquid solutions devoid of organic material did not hold that capability.

In an 1870 letter, Pasteur described his cosmological insight into the dissymmetrical property of life to a friend Jules Raulin stating:

“You know that I believe that there is a cosmic dissymmetric influence which presides constantly and naturally over the molecular organization of principles immediately essential to life; and that, in consequence of this, the species of the three kingdoms, by their structure, by their form, by the disposition of their tissues, have a definite relation to the movements of the universe. For many of those species, if not for all, the Sun is the primum movens of nutrition; but I believe in another influence which would affect the whole organization [geometry], for it would be the cause of the molecular dissymmetry proper to the chemical components of life. I want by experiment to grasp a few indications as to the nature of this great cosmic dissymmetrical influence. It must, it may be electricity, magnetism…”"

"Nearly all biological polymers must be optically pure (all its component monomers having the same handedness) to function. All amino acids in proteins are ‘left-handed’, while all sugars in DNA and RNA, and in the metabolic pathways, are ‘right-handed’.

A recent world conference on ‘The Origin of Homochirality and Life’ made it clear that the origin of this handedness is a complete mystery to evolutionists. The probability of forming one optically pure polymer of n monomers by chance = 2⁻ⁿ. For a small protein of 100 amino acids, this probability = 2⁻¹⁰⁰.

Note, this is the probability of any optically active polypeptide. The probability of forming a functional optically pure polymer is much lower, since a precise amino acid sequence is required in many places. Of course, many optically pure polymers are required for life, so the probabilities must be compounded. Chance is thus not an option.

The basic building blocks of much of the machinery that all life requires are called amino acids, of which there are 20 different ones in the human body.1 Proteins are long chains (100 or more) of these amino acids, whereas chains shorter than this are called peptides.

The problem of chirality remains to this day an unsolved problem to both chemists and biologists that undermines evolutionary biology’s path to any functional first protein, much less the appearance of a first cell.

A further problem is that homochiral biological substances racemize in time. "


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1885655#msg1885655 (biochirality and subquark chirality, part II)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1488624#msg1488624 (biochirality and subquark chirality, part I)


Now, we can solve one of the greatest mysteries of biophysics, the origin of the biochirality of molecules.

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/0347/dc8586a6a0c40cb1e7d867c0455d7290a645.pdf?_ga=2.116458118.1885361626.1589464805-1655719662.1589019479

Light takes longer to travel East than West between fixed points on the surface of the Earth.

East-West c + v
West-East c - v


This is the origin of the biochirality of molecules: the ether atmospheric tide which contains both laevorotatory subquarks and dextrorotatory subquarks.

This means that, in order for organic life to exist, one needs superluminal speeds (proven to exist by the Kassner effect).

Left-handed amino acids are activated by the ether atmospheric tide which produces c + v superluminal speeds (laevorotatory subquarks, antigravitational force).

Right-handed sugars are activated by c - v  dextrorotatory subquarks at subluminal speed (terrestrial gravity).

"All living plants and animals can only use left-handed amino acids to make proteins. Life therefore requires what is known as an ‘optically pure’ supply of solely left-handed amino acids."


http://www.orgonelab.org/cart/xbions.htm

https://wilhelmreichtrust.org/bion_experiments.pdf

https://livebloodonline.com/pleomorphism-and-germ-theory-explained/

http://www.medicinacomplementar.com.br/biblioteca/pdfs/Biomolecular/mb-0464.pdf

http://members.iimetro.com.au/~hubbca/soil.htm

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 22, 2020, 01:50:44 AM
GREEN FLASH THROUGH A PRISM

One can see the green flash phenomenon every day in Hawaii, as an example, if the day is clear, and almost every day from Puerta Vallarta (November through May).

The perfect conditions to see a 'green flash' as the sun sets can often be found on your Kauai sunset sails. Perfect conditions generally include a few criteria: seeing the sun set on a flat surface like the surface of the ocean, viewing the sunset from many miles away, having clear and non polluted conditions and having a non cloudy horizon. Since these conditions happen with such regularity on Kauai it is almost a staple for sunset sail boats here.

Mazatlan is one of the very few warm weather destinations where you can regularly see the Green Flash.

Mazatlan is known for it's beautiful sunsets...especially the famous Green Flash, which only occurs regularly in about three places in the world.


The green flash occurs every day, DESPITE the atmospheric conditions, that is, it has nothing to do with atmospherics.


The green flash can be explained in either of two ways:

RE - Green flashes occur because the earth's atmosphere can cause the light from the Sun to separate out into different colors.

FE - A ray of light DOES NOT split into any component colours.

We can narrow down these choices even more:

RE - constant speed of light

FE - variable speed of light

That is, if the speed of light is variable, then we view the green flash through a prism (the dome).

Let's narrow down the choices further:

A superluminal speed of light means a variable speed of light, and thus we are viewing the green flash phenomenon through the dome.

Thus everything comes down to the SAGNAC EFFECT.


If the SAGNAC EFFECT is superluminal, then we view the green flash through a dome.

That is why the KASSNER EFFECT is so important with regard to this crucial issue.

To solve the KASSNER EFFECT, one needs superluminal speeds for the SAGNAC interferometer: c + v and c - v, c + v1 + v2 and c - v1 - v2.


The KASSNER EFFECT applied to the SAGNAC interferometer immediately proves the existence of superluminal speeds (c + v and c + v1 + v2).

Thus we are viewing the green flash through a dome (sunset/sunrise).


Variable speed of light = one is viewing the green flash through a dome

(https://secureservercdn.net/160.153.137.153/5p2.77b.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/ytterbiumclock.jpg)

An YTTERBIUM lattice double clock.

And this optical clock goes slower when it is lower.

“If one clock in one lab is 30cm higher than the clock in the other lab, we can see the difference in the rates they run at."

David Wineland of NIST

And Einstein ABANDONED HIS CONSTANCY OF LIGHT PRINCIPLE AS EARLY AS 1907.

Only two years after his special relativity postulate, there’s Einstein talking about a speed of light that varies with gravitational potential.

Wikipedia tells us that Einstein, after 1912, gave up on the variable speed of light theory.

Completely false.

1913: “I arrived at the result that the velocity of light is not to be regarded as independent of the gravitational potential. Thus the principle of the constancy of the velocity of light is incompatible with the equivalence hypothesis”.

1915: “the writer of these lines is of the opinion that the theory of relativity is still in need of generalization, in the sense that the principle of the constancy of the velocity of light is to be abandoned”.

1916: “In the second place our result shows that, according to the general theory of relativity, the law of the constancy of the velocity of light in vacuo, which constitutes one of the two fundamental assumptions in the special theory of relativity and to which we have already frequently referred, cannot claim any unlimited validity”.

1920: “Second, this consequence shows that the law of the constancy of the speed of light no longer holds, according to the general theory of relativity, in spaces that have gravitational fields. As a simple geometric consideration shows, the curvature of light rays occurs only in spaces where the speed of light is spatially variable”.

The last quote is the English translation of what Einstein said in German in 1916: “die Ausbreitungsge-schwindigkeit des Lichtes mit dem Orte variiert”. That translates to “the propagation speed of light with the place varies”. Einstein never did abandon his variable speed of light.


The KASSNER EFFECT proves superluminal speeds, a variable speed of light.


Official atmospheric physics hypothesis:

Green flashes occur because the earth's atmosphere can cause the light from the Sun to separate out into different colors.

Light does not separate into different colors.

(https://www.solarancestor.com/uploads/4/8/0/0/48009501/5591387_orig.jpg)

White is green:

https://web.archive.org/web/20160312043114/http://web.csulb.edu/~percept/kyotocolor.html

(https://web.archive.org/web/20160312043114im_/http://web.csulb.edu/~percept/prism.gif)

The green flash phenomenon can only be caused by the Sun's rays which pass through the aether prism (Dome).

"Newton surmised that when we see a colour spectrum emerge from a prism,
it is due to 'the splitting of light into its component colours'.

If this were the case, then in the photograph below, there should be
a spectrum with GREEN in the middle. Yet, since the aperature through which
the light is shining is large, we get no such spectrum, we only get colour
at the edges. In an attempt to isolate the phenomena, Newton decided to
narrow the aperature which results in the spectrum we are now familiar with,
and which he used as a basis for his Optiks.

What Newton failed to do, was to take a look through the prism.
If you actually do this, the white areas do not split into a rainbow of
colour as might be expected -- you only see colour at the edges of objects.

When light shines through a prism, we are simply projecting a picture
whose aperature has edges -- there is darkness outside this circular patch,
and relatively light within it. We notice that it is at the edges between
the light and dark areas where Colours first make their appearance.

When the aperature is sufficiently small so that the edges meet in
the middle to form the green -- only then can you see a continous spectrum.
A wider aperature brings us to the primal phenomenon -- a reddish/yellow
on some edges, and a bluish/cyan on the others.

The continuous spectrum with green in the middle arises only where
the (blue-cyan and yellow-red) edges come close enough to overlap.

We no longer see the original phenomenon when we make so small a circle
that the colours extend inward from the edges to overlap in the middle
to form what is called a 'continuous spectrum', while with the larger
circle, the colours formed at the edges stay as they are.

Thus, this is the primal phenomenon -- that Colours arise at the borders
where Light and Dark work together, and the Spectrum is a secondary,
compound phenomenon.

In the 1780's a number of statements as to the way colours arise came to
Goethe's notice. Of the prismatic phenomena, it was commonly held by
physicists that when you let colourless light go through a prism the
colourless light is split up. For in some such way the phenomena were
interpreted.

If we let a cylinder of colourless light impinge on the screen, it shows a
colourless picture. Putting a prism in the way of the cylinder of light,
we get the sequence of colours: red, orange, yellow, green, blue - light
blue and dark blue, - violet.

The physicists explain it thus - the colourless light already contains the
seven colours within itself - and when we make the light go through the
prism, the prism really does no more than to fan out and separate what is
already there in the light, - the seven colours, into which it is thus
analyzed.

A look through the prism shows that we do not see the light in seven
colours. The only place you can see any colour is at some edge or
border-line.

If we let light pass through the space of the room, we get a white circle
on a screen. Put a prism in the way, and the cylinder of light is
diverted, but what appears is not the series of seven
colours at all, only a reddish colour at the lower edge, passing over into
yellow, and at the upper edge a blue passing over into greenish shades. In
the middle it stays white.

Goethe now said to himself: It is not that the light is split up or that
anything is separated out of the light as such. In point of fact, I am
projecting a picture, - simply an image of this circular aperture. The
aperture has edges, and where the colours occur the reason is not that
they are drawn out of the light, as though the light had been split up
into them. It is because this picture which I am projecting - the picture
as such - has edges. Here too the fact is that where light adjoins dark,
colours appear at the edges. It is none other than that. For there is
darkness outside this circular patch of light, while it is relatively
light within it.

The colours therefore, to begin with, make their appearance purely and
simply as phenomena at the border between light and dark. This is the
original, the primary phenomenon. We are no longer seeing the original
phenomenon when by reducing the circle in size we get a continuous
sequence of colours. The latter phenomenon only arises when we take so
small a circle that the colours extend inward from the edges to the
middle. They then overlap in the middle and form what we call a continuous
spectrum, while with the larger circle the colours formed at the edges
stay as they are. This is the primal phenomenon. Colours arise at the
borders, where light and dark flow together.

Subsequent to this, Goethe's went on to make more exact observations
which further call this 'splitting up of the light' by a prism into question:

- Begin with a circular slit from which Light shines through a PRISM.
- Light is deflected upwards.
- The projection is not an exact circle, but rather elongated.
- The upper portion is edged with Blue.
- The lower portion is edged with Red.

- Taking into account the observation that Light passing through
  any medium is dimmed. In this case, there is a dimming of light
  within the prism.

- Therefore, we have to do not only with the cone of light that is here
  bent and deflected, but also with this new factor - the dimming
  of the light brought about by matter.

- Into the space beyond the prism not only the light is shining,
  but there shines in, there rays into the light the quality of dimness
  that is in the prism.

- This dimming is deflected upward in the same direction as the light.

- Here then we are dealing with the interaction of two things:
  i) the brightly shining light, itself deflected,
  ii) then the sending into it of the darkening effect that is poured
      into this shining light. Only the dimming and darkening effect is
      here deflected in the same direction as the light.

- The Outcome is that in the upward region the bright light is infused
  and irradiated with dimness, and by this means the dark or bluish colours
  are produced.

- Downwards, the light outdoes and overwhelms the darkness and there arise
  the yellow shades of colour.

- Simply through the fact that the prism on the one hand deflects the full
  bright cone of light and on the other hand also deflects the dimming of it,
  we have the two kinds of entry of the dimming or darkening into the light.
  We have an interplay of dark and light, not getting mixed to give a grey but
  remaining mutually independent in their activity.

- The material prism plays an essential part in the arising of the
  colours. For it is through the prism that it happens, namely that on the
  one hand the dimming is deflected in the same direction as the cone of
  light, while on the other hand, because the prism lets its darkness ray
  there too, this that rays on and the light that is deflected cut across
  each other. For that is how the deflection works down here. Downward, the
  darkness and the light are interacting in a different way than upward.
 
  Colours therefore arise where dark and light work together."

In the local-ether model, the speed of light is variable.

Here is the green flash being observed in the radiant energy discharged by a capacitor:

(http://www.tuks.nl/Mirror/Bedini/john34/Bedini%20green%20flash%201.jpg)

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/d2/98/1e/d2981e618232c2b64bb72d9ec6401053.png)

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/51/f9/c0/51f9c0e450d3e1bbc43ff55ba51b540b.png)

The green flash means the sunlight passes through a prism (dome).

A ray of light DOES NOT split into any component colours.


https://web.archive.org/web/20140305015809/http://home.earthlink.net/~johnrpenner/Articles/GoetheColour.html

Newton surmised that when we see a colour spectrum emerge from a prism, it is due to 'the splitting of light into its component colours'.

What Newton failed to do, was to take a look through the prism. If you actually do this, the white areas do not split into a rainbow of colour as might be expected -- you only see colour at the edges of objects.

(https://web.archive.org/web/20130116025123im_/http://home.earthlink.net/~johnrpenner/Images/ColourProjection.jpeg)

The physicists explain it thus - the colourless light already contains the seven colours within itself - and when we make the light go through the prism, the prism really does no more than to fan out and separate what is already there in the light, - the seven colours, into which it is thus analyzed.

A look through the prism shows that we do not see the light in seven colours. The only place you can see any colour is at some edge or border-line.

If we let light pass through the space of the room, we get a white circle on a screen. Put a prism in the way, and the cylinder of light is diverted, (Figure IIc), but what appears is not the series of seven colours at all, only a reddish colour at the lower edge, passing over into yellow, and at the upper edge a blue passing over into greenish shades. In the middle it stays white.

https://web.archive.org/web/20150406161136im_/http://home.earthlink.net/~johnrpenner/Images/prisma-lightSpectrum-goethe.gif

The speed of light is variable.

In order to explain refraction, in fact, Newton's Opticks (1704) postulated an "Aethereal Medium" transmitting vibrations faster than light, by which light (when overtaken) is put into "Fits of easy Reflexion and easy Transmission" (causing refraction and diffraction).


RE - Green flashes occur because the earth's atmosphere can cause the light from the Sun to separate out into different colors.

FE - A ray of light DOES NOT split into any component colours.


Kassner time gap/discontinuity:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2234871#msg2234871 (two consecutive messages)

Gertsenshtein-Zel'dovich effect: graviton-photon conversion

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2194420#msg2194420

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 27, 2020, 09:59:00 AM
GREEN FLASH THROUGH A PRISM II

(https://d2r55xnwy6nx47.cloudfront.net/uploads/2017/04/Chart_1440x310.png)

The values of the Riemann zeta function are shown for various inputs of real (horizontal axis) and imaginary (vertical axis) numbers. Black areas are where the zeta function returns zero — the “zeros” of the function. So-called nontrivial zeros lie along the vertical line where the real numbers equal ½.

The energy levels for the Hydrogen atom (difference between two energy levels) MUST equal the wavelength x constant.

But the Rydberg formula cannot be derived from the Bohr atomic model:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1830498#msg1830498

The hydrogen emission spectral lines come from a subquark  quantum model, and not from the Bohr model:

(http://www.weare1.us/Babbitt%20color.jpg)

White light is the activated aether which propagates through the center of the subquarks.

This aether can also be activated without providing light, as in the Allais effect, where the Black Sun activates the center portion of the laevorotatory subquarks to a much more subtle level, causing the huge disruptions in the pendulum's swing (100 million times greater than the luni-solar component).

The aether has different levels of subtleties/densities: it can become light if activated, or it can be absorbded/emitted by antibosons (gravitons) or bosons (photons).


Now, an even more profound discovery: the spectral lines of the Hydrogen atom are totally related to the Riemann zeta function.

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/46f2/b0d72d34024c3f48de2852cfdc010ddcba70.pdf

Riemann Zeta Function and Hydrogen Spectrum

In fact, the energy levels of all of the atoms (including U-238) are related to the distribution of the zeta zeros:

https://www.ias.edu/ideas/2013/primes-random-matrices

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1505.07481.pdf


Riemann zeta function model of the boson:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2006301#msg2006301


I was able to prove that the precise location of the Riemann zeta zeros (their actual values) can be found using successive ratios of proportionality which involve the sacred cubit:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2082601#msg2082601


Even more startling discoveries about quantum mechanics and the distribution of the zeta zeros were published recently:

https://aip.scitation.org/doi/pdf/10.1063/1.5124598

Prime Numbers, Atomic Nuclei, Symmetries and Superconductivity


https://www.americanscientist.org/article/the-spectrum-of-riemannium


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1101.3116.pdf

Physics of the Riemann Hypothesis


https://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/berry-keating1.pdf

The Riemann Zeros and Eigenvalue Asymptotics

https://web.archive.org/web/20150713204200/https://michaelberryphysics.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/berry306.pdf

H = xp and the Riemann Zeros


https://www.mdpi.com/2073-8994/1/1/64/htm

Nuclei, Primes and the Random Matrix Connection


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1410.1214.pdf

Will a physicist prove the Riemann Hypothesis?


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1601.01797.pdf

The Riemann zeros as spectrum and the Riemann hypothesis


https://arxiv.org/pdf/0805.4079.pdf

Landau levels and Riemann zeros

Dynamics of an electron moving in two dimensions under the action of a uniform perpendicular magnetic field and a electrostatic potential and the Riemann zeta zeros


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1404.4252.pdf

The Riemann zeros as energy levels of a Dirac fermion in a potential built from the prime numbers in Rindler spacetime


https://arxiv.org/pdf/0712.0705.pdf

A quantum mechanical model of the Riemann zeros


https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0550321307002246

H=xp with interaction and the Riemann zeros


The Riemann zeta function is related to each and every aspect of the quantum mechanics of atoms, subquark and bosons.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 29, 2020, 09:52:03 PM
MAGNETIC SKYRMIONS II

(https://www.eurekalert.org/multimedia/pub/web/164695_web.jpg)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2036652#msg2036652 (part I)


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1803.09736.pdf

Antigravity from a spacetime defect

Published in the Physical Review D by the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology

Specifically, we have constructed a new type of Skyrmion classical solution. Even before the final soliton was constructed, there were hints that the soliton could have an unusual asymptotic property, namely, a negative active gravitational mass. This was confirmed by a detailed numerical analysis.

The skyrmion is a finite-sized object bounded by a background region of uniformly oriented triads, with a core that is identified as the locus of points with fully inverted spins: a quantum knot.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 01, 2020, 02:17:48 AM
POLE SHIFTS OF THE EARTH IN HELIOCENTRISM

(https://i.ibb.co/KbmH24z/erve.jpg)

A significant pole shift of the spherical Earth must have taken place in historical times:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2225892#msg2225892

"The results were ASTONISHING. The cosmic rays could not penetrate the water saturated limestone blocks of the pyramids." (1967)

"In 1974, apparently unaware of the pyramid x-raying of Alvarez, the National Science Foundation launched another attempt to x-ray the pyramids.

This time the results were published.

The limestone rocks were too saturated with water to allow penetration by cosmic rays."

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2226078#msg2226078

Archaeologist Sherif El Morsy, who has worked extensively on the Giza plateau for over two decades, and his colleague Antoine Gigal, were the ones who made the discovery of this controversial fossil, which backs up studies and theories that the Pyramids of Giza and the mighty Sphinx were once submerged under the sea.

According to El Morsy, the flooding, was quite significant, peaking at about 75 meters above current sea level and creating a coastline spanning to the Khafra enclosure near the Sphinx at the temple of Menkare.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2226137#msg2226137 (orbital stability of the heliocentrical system, two consecutive messages)


Extinction of the mammoths and pole shifts

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2171192#msg2171192

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2171410#msg2171410

". . . discovery in Utah of the unfossilized skull of an extinct camel, with a bit of dried flesh still clinging to the bone. The relatively fresh condition of the specimen argues that its one-time possessor died only a few centuries or millennia ago; present ideas hold that this particular sort of camel did become extinct a half-million years ago. If this camel really died so long ago, the bone should have been largely or wholly replaced by stone, and there should have been no flesh on it all."

Science Newsletter, Vol. 14, (1928), p. 81

The mammoths had frozen to death in mid-summer by being suddenly overcome by an outside temperature: more recent studies have found that the necessary temperature must have been at least -300F.


This is not so much an “intriguing question” as a scientific, biological, zoological
contradiction to the stable pole hypothesis. The only reason for warmth-loving species to migrate south is that the climate did just the opposite of what proponents of a stable pole require to explain, support and corroborate, that mathematical, astronomical paradigm that North America warmed instead, it had to get cooler when the Ice Age ended. Ice sheets do not melt away where the climate becomes cooler. If there was a stable pole, at the end of the Ice Age, all the warmth-loving animals would migrate north. The established stable pole theory cannot be upheld unless one is prepared to throw both the sciences of botany and zoology out the window. If this theory was right, then we would have armadillos tapirs, jaguars, speckled bears, llamas, oscillated turkeys and peccaries living in Mexico and well into the United States.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1936055#msg1936055 (part I)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1938384#msg1938384 (part II followed by parts III and IV)


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1635693#msg1635693

"Why did the glaciers of the Ice Age cover the greater part of North America and Europe, while the north of Asia remained free? In America the plateau of ice stretched up to latitude 40° and even passed across this line; in Europe it reached latitude 50°; while northeastern Siberia, above the polar circle, even above latitude 75°, was not covered with this perennial ice.

If we look at the distribution of the ice sheet in the Northern Hemisphere, we see that a circle, with its center somewhere near the east shore of Greenland or in the strait between Greenland and Baffin Land near the present north magnetic pole, and a radius of about 3,600 kilometers, embraces the region of the ice sheet of the last glacial age. Northeastern Siberia is outside the circle; the valley of the Missouri down to 39° north latitude is within the circle. The eastern part of Alaska is included, but not its western part. Northwestern Europe is well within the circle; some distance behind the Ural Mountains, the line curves toward the north and crosses the present polar circle. Now we reflect: Was not the North Pole at some time in the past 20° or more distant from the point it now occupies—and closer to America? In like manner, the old South Pole would have been roughly the same 20° from the present pole."


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2169555#msg2169555 (Island of California/Vermian Sea, seven consecutive messages)


Venus' Argon-36 and Argon-40 age:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1938506#msg1938506

Venus' carbon dioxide age:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1938793#msg1938793

Venus' neon krypton age:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1938826#msg1938826

Venus and Earth spin orbit resonance:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1939336#msg1939336


The pole shift of the spherical Earth did occur AFTER the construction of the Gizeh pyramid.


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 02, 2020, 03:29:51 AM
STATIONARY EARTH: PRECESSIONAL CLOCK OF THE GIZEH PYRAMID

(https://cdn.disclose.tv/sites/default/files/styles/node_image/public/img/post/2016/06/08/great-pyramid-sphinx-may-be-800000-years-old-after-surviving-great-flood-131937.jpg?itok=Zo0daPb6)

The pole shift of the Earth which occurred, in heliocentrism, after the Gizeh pyramid was built, would have thrown into disarray any and all calendars based on its position and dimensions.

Usually, the north-south orientation of the pyramid is brought in the discussions, in order to prove that the Earth is stationary.

However, there is a much more precise calendar, the display of the equinoxes in the form of shadows, at work using the Gizeh pyramid's dimensions.

https://blog.world-mysteries.com/mystic-places/giza-the-time-machine/ (it includes videos of the concepts being discussed)

(https://blog.world-mysteries.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/KhufuCalendarDec211.jpg)

(https://blog.world-mysteries.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/SummerSolstice.jpg)

As a result of the position of the Gizeh Necropolis on the 30 degrees latitude the rays of the rising Sun accurately indicate the direction of due east at the time of the autumnal and vernal equinoxes; while the Sunrise is directed 28 degrees to the north of this (i.e. N62ºE) at the time of the summer solstice and 28 degrees to the south of this (i.e. S62ºE) at the time of the winter solstice.

This means that, had the Earth been orbiting the Sun since the Gizeh pyramid had been constructed, the precise calendar would have been disrupted to a huge degree. The fact that it still displays the equinoxes with such precision means that the Earth is stationary, and that it is the Sun which undergoes the annual westward precessional shift (1.5 km/year).

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2097827#msg2097827 (upper/lower bounds for the six gates)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2221986#msg2221986 (meter unit of length and Taylor/Euler arctangent series at Gizeh)





Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 06, 2020, 06:45:11 AM
GRAVITONS AND LOOPS

(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/_I6sqljFZpGw/TPVl_LqemMI/AAAAAAAAAXg/bpeK_XE128g/s1600/tripod.jpg)

One cannot have quantum gravity without particles, unless a non perturbative observable can be defined in their place

"Absence of particles means absence of Poincare invariance, no standard Fock space.

Particle physics is defined by local perturbative quantum field theory (Poincare groups).

However, Planck level physics is governed by general covariance.

That is why quantum gravity must be defined in terms of loops/knots.

Knot theory is the physical theory that classifies the independent physical states of the quantum field.

Genuine quantum gravitational physics is non perturbative.

General relativity forced in the quantum perturbative framework doesn't work."

Dr. Carlo Rovelli
Are knots quantum states of spacetime?
Knots, Topology And Quantum Field Theory (pg. 51-69)

A graviton is a string with closed loops.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 06, 2020, 07:16:13 AM
OPTICAL BIOPHYSICS/GRAVITONS AND LOOPS II

https://cds.cern.ch/record/223258/files/9202054.pdf

Gravitons and Loops

Abhay Ashtekar, Carlo Rovelli and Lee Smolin

The “reality conditions” are realized by an inner product that is chiral asymmetric, resulting in a chiral asymmetric ordering for the Hamiltonian, and, in an asymmetric description of the left and right handed gravitons.

The first step towards this goal is to recast the Fock description of graviton also in terms of closed loops.


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1010.3552.pdf

Chiral vacuum fluctuations in quantum gravity

Is made up of the right handed positive frequency of the graviton and the left handed negative frequency of the anti-graviton.

Anti-graviton = laevorotatory subquark = positron

Graviton = dextrorotatory subquark = electron

Exactly the subquark model derived earlier:

In this ultimate state of physical matter two types of units, or Anu, have been observed; they are alike in everything save the direction of their whorls and of the force which pours through them. In the one case force pours in from the "outside," from fourth-dimensional space, the Astral plane, and passing through the Anu, pours into the physical world. In the second, it pours in from the physical world, and out through the Anu into the "outside" again, i.e., vanishes from the physical world. The one is like a spring, from which water bubbles out; the other is like a hole, into which water disappears.

Astral plane = aether

(http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/fig003.gif)

Proof:

The description of Adyarium (H dibaryon) matches exactly the image provided by the RIKEN Institute.

1908: meta-neon is described with number weight 22.23

1912: neon-22 is discovered


1908: Y-shaped configurations of lines of force ending on the subquarks (UPAs)

1975: baryons regarded as Y-shaped strings with quarks at their ends


1909: illinium described, number weight 146.66

1945: promethium-147 discovered


1909: masurium described, number weight 100.11

1937: technetium-99 discovered


1932: element 85 described, number weight 221

1940: astatine-219 discovered


1932: element 87 described, number weight 222.55

1939: francium-223 discovered


The number weights for all of the elements and their isotopes were not obtained randomly, but by a direct process of division by 18 (number of subquarks in a Hydrogen atom). See the precise formula on page 498 (page 10 of the pdf document):

https://web.archive.org/web/20120128042636/http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_09_4_phillips.pdf


Ether vortex model, published in the Journal of Mathematical Physics.

Dr. Ellis' groundbreaking paper takes GTR from a singularity to a drainhole aether model, the paper was published in the JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICAL PHYSICS.

Now, the mathematical theory for the absorption/emission of aether through a Planck length level particle.

http://euclid.colorado.edu/~ellis/RelativityPapers/EtFlThDrPaMoGeRe.pdf

Ether flow through a drainhole: a particle model in general relativity

Journal of Mathematical Physics, vol. 14, no. 1, 1973



Dr. Ellis:

This ether is in general "more than a mere inert medium for the propagation of electromagnetic waves; it is a restless, flowing continuum whose internal, relative motions manifest themselves to us as gravity. Mass particles appear as sources or sinks of this flowing ether."

The absorption of aether causes the density of aether to decrease (between two objects, as an example), the pressure of the ether waves will cause these objects to move toward each other.


Here is confirmation coming from another mainstream journal on physics:

Dr. Ellis:

The inertial mass of the particle modeled by the drainhole.  A "Higgsian" way of expressing this idea is to say that the drainhole 'acquires' (inertial) mass from the scalar field.



https://journals.aps.org/pra/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevA.49.678

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9069/0be66e03f535dd3b47aeb76ea36bfc3d1909.pdf

Inertia as a zero-point-field Lorentz force
Bernhard Haisch, Alfonso Rueda, and H. E. Puthoff
Phys. Rev. A 49, 678

Newtonian gravity could be interpreted as a van der Waals type of force induced by the electromagnetic fluctuations of the vacuum, the so-called zero-point fluctuations or zero-point field (ZPF). In that analysis ordinary neutral matter is treated as a collection of electromagnetically interacting polarizable particles made of charged point-mass subparticles (partons).

The parton has a charge e equal in magnitude to the electronic charge (a more general viewpoint given the fractional charges of quarks and the possible existence of further structure at the very high energies under discussion).


Parton = dextrorotatory subquark

Zero point energy = scalar field


Bernhard Haisch
Lockheed Palo Alto Research Laborator
Max-Planck-Institut fur Extraterrestrische Physik

Alfonso Rueda
Department of Electrical Engineering, California State University, Long Beach

H. E. Puthoff
Institute of Advanced Studies at Austin


Further proof that the mass of the electron must be non-electromagnetic.

http://library.uc.edu.kh/userfiles/pdf/42.What%20is%20the%20electron.pdf (pgs. 126-154)

This is discussed in the next section, where it is shown to represent about 0.1% of the total electron energy. But this leaves 99.9% unaccounted-for. There must be a non-electromagnetic mass—a new state of matter that is not observed in our familiar macroscopic world. We label it here as mechanical matter, just to give it a name. This mechanical matter is required to have several distinctive properties, which we enumerate here: (1) It forms 99.9% of the mass of the electron.


https://www.arxiv-vanity.com/papers/1004.2901/

B. Riemann stated in 1853 that "gravitational aether sinks toward massive objects where it is absorbed, at a rate proportional to their mass, and is then emitted into another spatial dimension".

Rabsorption = k x p x V, where p = y/g (since, by definition, ether/aether theory does not make use of the mass concept)


Downward motion provided by the shower of cosmic subquarks:

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'.

I. Newton

(https://i.ibb.co/2c6pHcm/an1.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/WyqxJ28/an2.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/FVzmz0w/an3.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/QP2tPkD/an4.jpg)



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 07, 2020, 06:14:56 AM
BELL'S THEOREM: ETHER FRAME OF REFERENCE

(https://i.ibb.co/0tSjzrP/bell1.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/nn3FKqz/bell2.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/7C0cnmf/bell6.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/H4Bh54m/bell7.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/Dtw4gk7/bell5.jpg)

J.S. Bell showed that real superluminal links between quantum particles explain certain experimental results. Bell's theorem suggests that after two particles interact and move apart outside the range of interaction, the particles continue to influence each other instantly via a real connection that joins them together with undiminished strength no matter how far apart the particles travel. Alain Aspect and his colleagues confirmed that the property is in fact an actual property of the real world.

The hyperspace envisioned by Dr. Bell is related to the longitudinal boson strings which propagate through transverse subquark waves.

General relativity as envisioned by Einstein is a subluminal theory. However, Newton assumed instant action-a-distance, superluminal speeds, for his gravitational theory.

In order to unify GR with QM, one needs Loop/Knot theory: left-handed antigravitons and right-handed gravitons as closed loops.

If the experiments of Aspect and Rapisarda confirm (as I believe) the predictions of quantum mechanics, we shall be obliged to drop Einstein's criterion of reality or to accept some form of action-at-a-distance.

A. Shimony (1980)

“Time is the most important and most enigmatic peroperty of nature. Time is not propagated like light waves; it appears immediately everywhere.” – Dr. Nikolai Kozyrev

http://www.chronos.msu.ru/old/RREPORTS/kozyrev_100/leivaditis_comments.pdf

http://signallake.com/innovation/Kozyrev1971.pdf

http://www.rexresearch.com/kozyrev2/kozyrev2.htm

https://web.archive.org/web/20170513130416/http://www.fountainmagazine.com/Issue/detail/revisiting-november-2014


https://arxiv.org/ftp/quant-ph/papers/0407/0407150.pdf (Bell's theorem applied to language)


http://www.duncanshaw.ca/AetherExplanationOfEntanglement.pdf


https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0807/0807.2041.pdf


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2061804#msg2061804 (quantum entanglement)

Bell's theorem is the equivalent of the Selleri Paradox/Kassner effect for the Sagnac interferometer: it guarantees superluminal speeds and a preferred/absolute frame of reference.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2058884#msg2058884 (Dynamical Maxwell equations)


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 08, 2020, 03:22:17 AM
GRAVITONS = SUBQUARKS

https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/13/643/13643701.pdf

Subquarks-Possibly the Most Fundamental Form of Matter

A model of "subquark pregeometry" in which the graviton is also a composite of a subquark-antisubquark pair: Einstein's gravity is a quantum effect of matter.

Everything is made of subquarks and every force is due to them.


https://academic.oup.com/ptp/article/64/4/1494/1924776

Magnetic Moments of Composite Leptons and Quarks in a Dynamical Subquark Model


http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,30499.msg1278981.html#msg1278981 (detection of subquarks)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 08, 2020, 04:33:46 AM
ELECTRON FRACTIONAL CHARGES = SUBQUARKS

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0960077908005419

An electron could have a hierarchical structure, consisting of quarks and infinite sub-quarks, which have fractional charge values.


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1832907#msg1832907 (fractional quantum Hall effect)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1833129#msg1833129 (electron nematicity)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 08, 2020, 05:49:58 AM
ROOM TEMPERATURE SUPERCONDUCTOR

(https://scx1.b-cdn.net/csz/news/800/2019/navyfilesfor.jpg)

https://patents.google.com/patent/US20190058105A1/en?inventor=Salvatore+Pais

The Navy’s Chief Technical Officer of the Naval Aviation Enterprise, Dr. James Sheehy, intervened on behalf of Dr. Pais at the US Patent and Trademark Office:

I am familiar with the above referenced patent application (and related amendment), as well as the development, usage and properties of the piezoelectricity-induced room temperature superconductor. That as a result of my education and career, I am regarded as a subject matter expert and can be considered “a person of ordinary skill in the art” in the subject matter of the above patent application.

That the invention described in the above referenced patent application is operable and enabled via the physics described in the patent application and the peered reviewed paper described in the Inventor Amendment.

(https://i.ibb.co/PmkqCPb/shpais.jpg)

A slight implosion of the atom takes place in the conductor whereby its atoms subdivide into groups of nine subquarks (baryon state of matter) which leads to room temperature superconductivity. The implosion is activated by the torsion field created by the e/m coil.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 08, 2020, 08:10:29 AM
BELL'S THEOREM II

Actually, J.S. Bell's theorem is contained in the passage attributed to Newton:

You sometimes speak of Gravity as essential and inherent to Matter.

It is inconceivable that inanimate Matter should, without the Mediation of something else, which is not material, operate upon, and affect other matter without mutual Contact…That Gravity should be innate, inherent and essential to Matter, so that one body may act upon another at a distance thro’ a Vacuum, without the Mediation of any thing else, by and through which their Action and Force may be conveyed from one to another, is to me so great an Absurdity that I believe no Man who has in philosophical Matters a competent Faculty of thinking can ever fall into it.

Cohen, I. B. (1978), Isaac Newton's Papers & Letters on Natural Philosophy, 2nd edition, Cambridge, Mass. and London., (pg. 298 and pgs. 302-303)

That is, action at a distance can only occur in the quantum realm.

Newton clearly makes the distinction between (inanimate) Matter and the Mediation "of something else" which is something else other than Matter.

Action at a distance = the influences between distant measurement events do not propagate continuously in space-time.

"Action at a distance is a phenomenon in which a change in intrinsic properties of one system induces a change in the intrinsic properties of a distant system, independently of the influence of any other systems on the distant system, and without there being a process that carries this influence contiguously in space and time.

In a more liberal way:

Action at a distance is a phenomenon in which a change in intrinsic properties of one system induces a change in the intrinsic properties of a distant system without there being a process that carries this influence contiguously in space and time."

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 09, 2020, 03:12:53 AM
SCHRODINGER PROOF OF NONLOCALITY

EPR-Bell-Schrodinger proof of nonlocality using
position and momentum

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1906.06687.pdf

This means that the assumption of locality is false, and thus provides us with another demonstration of quantum nonlocality that does not involve Bell’s (or any other) inequalities.


Schrodinger’s paradox and proofs of nonlocality
using only perfect correlations

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1808.01648.pdf

We discuss proofs of nonlocality based on a generalization by Erwin Schrodinger of the argument of Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen. These proofs do not appeal in any way to Bell’s inequalities. Indeed, one striking feature of the proofs is that they can be used to establish nonlocality solely on the basis of suitably robust perfect correlations.


A thorough and very careful analysis of many misunderstandings of Bell's theorem:

http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Bell%27s_theorem

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0903.2211.pdf


What Bell did

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1408/1408.1826.pdf

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1408/1408.1828.pdf

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 10, 2020, 12:52:26 AM
PLASMA COMPRESSION FUSION DEVICE III

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2232346#msg2232346 (part II)

2…. Dr. Pais is currently funded by NAWCAD [Naval Air War Center Aircraft Division] to design a test article instrumentation to demonstrate the experimental feasibility of achieving high electromagnetic (EM) field-energy and flux values… He is currently one year into the project and has already begun a series of experiments to design and demonstrate advanced High energy Density / High Power propulsion systems.

(letter dated December 15, 2017, by Dr. James Sheehy, the Chief Technology Officer for the Naval Aviation Enterprise)

(https://i.ibb.co/SrpJvmk/shpais2.jpg)

https://patents.google.com/patent/US10144532B2/en?inventor=Salvatore+Pais


https://www.scribd.com/document/408469834/High-Frequency-Gravitational-Waves-Induced-Propulsion2017

https://saemobilus.sae.org/content/2017-01-2040

"Electromagnetic (EM) radiation, caused by accelerating electrically charged objects, when passed through a static magnetic field (of constant magnetic flux density) gives rise to gravitational waves at the same frequency with the EM radiation. This phenomenon is known as the Gertsenshtein Effect.

Artificially generated, high energy, electromagnetic fields can interact strongly with the local Vacuum energy state, an aggregate/collective state comprised of the superposition of all fluctuations in the collective of quantum fields (including EM and gravitational fields, among others) permeating a given spacetime locality. According to quantum field theory, this strong interaction between the fields is based on the mechanism of transfer of vibrational energy between the fields, further inducing local fluctuations in adjacent quantum fields which permeate that spacetime locality (these fields may or may not be electromagnetic in nature).

Think of the local Vacuum energy state as the collective energy state(structure) comprised of the ground state of minimum energy (baseline fluctuations) that is the quantum vacuum, and the excited state of energy (induced fluctuations) generated by matter or any other source of energy in that spacetime locality. According to quantum field theory, matter, energy, spacetime are emergent constructs which arise out of a foundational structure, the fundamental framework which is the Vacuum energy state.

These extremely high graviton production rates further show that if multiple high power, high frequency gravitational waves were to be focused on a particular point in a spacetime locality, they can induce a spacetime curvature singularity, namely a “highly distorted and disrupted patch of spacetime fabric”."

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 10, 2020, 02:42:15 AM
BELL'S THEOREM III: INSTANTANEOUS WAVE COLLAPSE

(https://i.ibb.co/RC9NCh6/bell8.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/gmkBvdM/bell9.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/RDc1px8/bell10.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/6ygYDkZ/bell11.jpg])

(https://i.ibb.co/C1dybFK/bell16.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/QKSPcHb/bell17.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/P6M201b/bell18.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/xhbnd44/bell19.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/3Mfxgw5/bell20.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/2qFwVLV/bell21.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/NWh3q1r/bell22.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/VLC0b3b/bell23.jpg)

(https://i.ibb.co/tm65sLj/bell12.jpg)

J.S. Bell

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 10, 2020, 11:09:11 AM
FRACTAL ETHER/ONE LOOP QUANTUM GRAVITY/PYRAMIDION/RIEMANN ZETA FUNCTION WAVES

The basic building blocks of all matter are the Riemann zeta function waves and zeros generated by the subdivision of the Planck length level by using the ratios of the five elements (26.7, 53.4, 80, 136.1, 534):

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2006301#msg2006301 (mechanism of a pyramidion)

Whenever bubbles reversed direction, the tail would fade away, to
reappear on the opposite side. On the bubble's bow, small concentric
circles like shock waves formed along the surface, like a cap. Bubbles
seemed to consist of nothing but a boundary surface, with no structural
features inside. Bubbles in what to Ron was thread number two
started out as mere squiggles of energy, pointed at both ends.Then the
squiggle got fatter, turning into the stable tadpole shape.

[squiggle of energy = smallest particle of quantum mechanics]

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1774536#msg1774536 (journey inside a boson)

Let us call this smallest particle of quantum mechanics a pyramidion. The pyramidion becomes a boson or an antiboson, which in turn make up the subquarks, quarks, mesons, baryons, protons, electrons.


The proof involves something much more difficult than the Riemann hypothesis: to actually produce an algorithm for the zeta zeros, using only arithmetic.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2082278#msg2082278

It is my belief that RH is a genuinely arithmetic question that likely will not succumb to methods of analysis. Number theorists are on the right track to an eventual proof of RH, but we are still lacking many of the tools.

J. Brian Conrey


https://www.quantumgravityresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/The-Search-for-a-Hamiltonian-whose-Energy-Spectrum-08.26.16-final-RA.pdf


Riemann zeta zeros and zero-point energy

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1311.6681.pdf


The wave function ψ of the Riemann Zeta function

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/cc1d/6b4165e96bf5abe2cceef17ff0dcfd3df375.pdf



A Schrödinger Equation for Solving the Riemann Hypothesis

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/efd5/cc990304c5b5de2f236901c656c2fd9865c7.pdf


On strategies towards the Riemann Hypothesis : Fractal Supersymmetric QM and a Trace Formula

http://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin//zeta/spectralRH.pdf


Towards fractal gravity

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.01376.pdf


ON THE RIEMANN HYPOTHESIS AND TACHYONS IN DUAL STRING SCATTERING AMPLITUDES

http://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/castro2006.pdf


Fractal Fits to Riemann Zeros

https://arxiv.org/pdf/math-ph/0606005.pdf


Riemann zeros and a fractal potential

http://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin//zeta/wu_sprung93.pdf


Quantum-Mechanical Interpretation of Riemann Zeta Function Zeros

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1809.09491.pdf


Links between string theory and the Riemann’s zeta function

http://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/nardelli2010a.pdf


On SUSY-QM, fractal strings and steps towards a proof of the Riemann hypothesis

https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/0107266.pdf


The Sound of Fractal Strings and the Riemann Hypothesis

http://preprints.ihes.fr/2015/M/M-15-11.pdf


The fractal dimension of the Riemann zeta zeros

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1102.3764.pdf


A Closed String Tachyon Vacuum ?

https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/0506077.pdf



Polymeric quantum mechanics and the zeros of the Riemann zeta function

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1610.01957.pdf

https://www.quantamagazine.org/string-theory-meets-loop-quantum-gravity-20160112/

The zeros of Riemann's Function And Its Fundamental Role In Quantum Mechanics

https://vixra.org/pdf/1403.0052v1.pdf

ONE-LOOP EFFECTIVE ACTION AND THE RIEMANN ZEROS

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1405.6458.pdf

http://rantonels.github.io/the-riemann-zeta-function-the-primon-gas-and-supersymmetry/

Comments on the Riemann conjecture and index theory on Cantorian fractal space-time
 
https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/0009014.pdf

The Schrodinger Operator with Morse Potential on the Right Half Line

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0712.3238.pdf

Physics of the Riemann Hypothesis

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1101.3116.pdf

Gravity-Superconductors Interactions as a Possible Means
to Exchange Momentum with the Vacuum

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1408/1408.1636.pdf 

The vacuum state of quantum gravity contains large virtual masses

https://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0605076.pdf

Fractal spacetimes in stochastic gravity

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/880/1/012004/pdf

Loop Quantum Mechanics and the Fractal Structure of Quantum Spacetime

https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/9803229.pdf

Scale Relativity in Cantorian E (∞) Space and Average Dimensions of Our World

https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/0004152.pdf

From Veneziano to Riemann: A String Theory Statement of the Riemann Hypothesis

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1501.01975.pdf

Zero Point Energy of Renormalized Wilson Loops

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0907.4609.pdf


Quantum Gravity is not a quantization of the spacetime coordinates, metric.....If this were the case, one would have had quantized the spacetime coordinates long ago. In String Theory, from the two-dim world sheet point of view , the spacetime coordinates are nothing but a finite number of scalar fields whose quantization is essentially trivial by selecting the conformal or orthonormal gauge. The same arguments applies with the ( linearized ) spin two graviton. Quantum Gravity it is something much deeper than the naive notion of coordinates and gravitons. It is something that doesn’t need any spacetime background nor metrics whatsoever. Morever, it involves something that disposes of the ill-conceived notion of having a fixed dimension. The classical spacetime that we perceive with our senses is just a long distance averaging effect associated with a quantum network of processeses of a deeper underlying Quantum Universe. To merge Quantum Mechanics with Relativity it is necessary to enlarge the Einsteinian view of Relativity to a New Relativity Principle.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 12, 2020, 12:51:32 AM
BELL'S THEOREM IV: J.C. MAXWELL'S DYNAMICAL ETHER EQUATIONS/SUPERLUMINAL SIGNALING

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1502.05926.pdf

Maxwell’s fluid model of magnetism
Robert Brady and Ross Anderson
University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory

Using our unified model, we show that such disturbances resemble photons: they are
polarised, absorbed discretely, obey Maxwell’s full equations of electromagnetism to first order, and quantitatively reproduce the correlation that is observed in the Bell tests.


https://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2015/02/23/maxwell/


https://physicsworld.com/a/surreal-behaviour-spotted-in-photon-experiment/


http://www.duncanshaw.ca/AetherExplanationOfEntanglement.pdf


http://vis.sns.it/quantum-entanglement-for-four-photons/


https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0306/0306073.pdf

INFORMATIONAL FIELD
AND SUPERLUMINAL COMMUNICATION




Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 12, 2020, 03:53:22 AM
TACHYONS = POSITRONS: TEMPORAL DYNAMICS

http://www.ijstr.org/final-print/dec2015/Tachyons-And-Modern-Physics.pdf

Faster than light communication is possible only through positrons (laevorotatory antigravitons/subquarks).

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2203448#msg2203448 (anti-time research)

Antimatter is not missing: it has always been right in front of the quantum physicists, who are just now beginning to understand that the unification of GR with QM requires Knot Theory, right-handed spin gravitons and left-handed spin antigravitons as closed loop strings.

Mainstream quantum physicists are starting to infer that positrons and preons do not annihilate each other:

http://www.epola.co.uk/epola_org/

http://www.cartesio-episteme.net/ep8/electron_positron_sea.pdf (The Cubic Lattice Solution section, page 6)

Antimatter = antigravity = antigravitons = laevorotatory positrons/subquarks.

Photons = bosons

Antibosons = antiphotons

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 18, 2020, 02:17:02 AM
KALUZA-KLEIN PARTICLES HAVE BEEN DETECTED IN ANTARCTICA

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/bizarre-particles-keep-flying-out-of-antarcticas-ice-and-they-might-shatter-modern-physics/

ANITA is designed to hunt cosmic rays from outer space, so the high-energy neutrino community was buzzing with excitement when the instrument detected particles that seemed to be blasting up from Earth instead of zooming down from space. Because cosmic rays shouldn’t do that, scientists began to wonder whether these mysterious beams are made of particles never seen before.


Those particles cannot come from supersymmetric models:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/supersymmetry-fails-test-forcing-physics-seek-new-idea/

They cannot be tau leptons (chord lengths and column densities for AAE 061228 and AAE 141220 are simply too great to accommodate successful tau emergence from these trajectories within the SM).

They cannot be sterile neutrinos:

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/04/weird-sterile-neutrinos-may-not-exist-suggest-new-data-nuclear-reactors

https://www.livescience.com/58673-sterile-neutrino-justification-vanishes.html

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1901.07068.pdf (section 6)


There is only one possible source: dark matter.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1803.11554.pdf


Dark matter consists of Kaluza-Klein particles:

There is only one particle which fulfills the conditions set by the Kaluza-Klein electrogravitational theory: the boson.

https://www.slac.stanford.edu/pubs/slacpubs/10750/slac-pub-10882.pdf (Stanford University/Oxford University)

Published in the Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics:

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1475-7516/2005/07/001

Kaluza-Klein Dark Matter, being a boson, is not similarly suppressed and can annihilate directly to e+ e-, µ+ µ- and τ+ τ-, each of which yield a generous number of high energy electrons and positrons.

This theorized particle was of course discovered in 2008:

https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2008/19nov_cosmicrays/


The ether/subquark wave lattice can free a dextrorotatory subquark and a laevorotatory subquark, if it can absorb the required 1.02 MeV energy in any point of space.

"Absorption of this energy frees the pair out of bonds, making the freed particles appear to the detecting apparatus. When a free electron-positron pair is captured into bonds, the particles disappear from our detection, and their binding energy is emitted in at least two quanta of radiation (the bosons/photons which make up the subquarks)."

Electron = dextrorotatory subquark

Positron = laevorotatory subquark


Dark matter consists of KK particles:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0905.2801.pdf

https://archive.org/stream/arxiv-0902.0593/0902.0593#page/n0/mode/2up (published by the Fermi National Accelerator Lab)

https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-ph/0206071.pdf

Kaluza-Klein bosons:

https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0207125


The technology used to emit bosons (KK particles) directly is way beyond even what Tesla could have accomplished: the source of the emission of these particles can actually disassemble a subquark into its constituent bosons.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 18, 2020, 11:38:13 AM
QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT GRAVITY

(https://physicsworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/2018-01-15-quantum-635x461.jpg)

https://www.sciencealert.com/a-wild-new-papers-suggests-space-time-is-just-a-product-of-quantum-mechanics

"In our proposal, space-time does not pre-exist, it is the result of a physical process by which the subquantum medium goes from a chaotic state to a more organised one."

This subquantum medium is something that Castro describes as "a kind of primordial foam from where space-time itself emerges".

https://file.scirp.org/Html/11-1721242_88041.htm


https://www.quantamagazine.org/physicists-find-a-way-to-see-the-grin-of-quantum-gravity-20180306


https://s3.cern.ch/inspire-prod-files-f/f53bab12e4a2cc303dd1339c2e7cc8cd

Bell Inequality from Holographic Gravity

The Einstein-Rosen bridge uses a degenerate metric: only the Ellis ether theory can take GTR from a singularity to a drainhole aether model.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2195432#msg2195432


http://euclid.colorado.edu/~ellis/RelativityPapers/LeMiNoGeGr.pdf


Quantum entanglement gravity must propagate through Ellis ether drainholes to account for the fact that gravitational action-at-a-distance occurs at a superluminal quantum realm level.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1943625#msg1943625

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 19, 2020, 10:25:21 AM
ROTATING PYRAMIDION WORMHOLES

(https://ak.picdn.net/shutterstock/videos/1022424511/thumb/1.jpg)

Quantum entanglement is the needle that stitches together the cosmic zero point energy tapestry.

All subquarks, bosons and antibosons are connected by gray wormholes (receptive/emissive) created by the counter-rotating tetrahedrons (one is a shadow of the other) located in the center of the pyramidion.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1005.3035.pdf

Building up spacetime with quantum entanglement


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1606.08444.pdf

Recovering Geometry from Bulk Entanglement

A version of the ER=EPR conjecture is recovered, in that perturbations that entangle distant parts of the emergent geometry generate a configuration that may be considered as a highly quantum wormhole.


https://www.quantamagazine.org/black-holes-prove-that-anti-de-sitter-space-time-is-unstable-20200511/ (Horava-Lifshitz ether model wormhole requires anti de-Sitter space)


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1409.1503.pdf

Rotating Ellis Wormholes in Four Dimensions


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1309.2448.pdf

Rotating Wormholes in Five Dimensions


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.02143.pdf

Wormholes Immersed in Rotating Matter

We here add a new twist to this quest by immersing the wormhole throat inside rotating matter, which we take as composed of a complex boson field, since this allows for the possibility to impose rotation on the bosonic field by the choice of an appropriate ansatz.


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1608.05253.pdf

Geometry of Spinning Ellis Wormholes


https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0508117.pdf

Rotating Scalar Field Wormhole


https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0502099.pdf

Phantom energy traversable wormholes


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 20, 2020, 12:15:41 AM
QUARKS LINKED BY WORMHOLES: QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT GRAVITY

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1307.6850.pdf

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1307.6850v2.pdf

Holographic Schwinger effect and the geometry of entanglement

http://news.mit.edu/2013/you-cant-get-entangled-without-a-wormhole-1205

Julian Sonner, a senior postdoc in MIT’s Laboratory for Nuclear Science and Center for Theoretical Physics, has published his results in the journal Physical Review Letters, where it appears together with a related paper by Kristan Jensen of the University of Victoria and Andreas Karch of the University of Washington.

The tangled web that is gravity

He found that what emerged was a wormhole connecting the two entangled quarks, implying that the creation of quarks simultaneously creates a wormhole. More fundamentally, he says, gravity itself may be a result of entanglement. What’s more, the universe’s geometry as described by classical gravity may be a consequence of entanglement—pairs of particles strung together by tunneling wormholes.

https://www.technologyreview.com/2014/02/18/174139/quarks-linked-by-wormholes/

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2013/12/link-between-wormholes-and-quantum-entanglement

https://www.universetoday.com/106968/could-particle-spooky-action-define-the-nature-of-gravity/


https://phys.org/news/2009-05-mini-black-holes.html

Is everything made of black holes?


http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0905/0905.1667.pdf

A Scenario for Strong Gravity in Particle Physics

At the Planck scale it may well be impossible to disentangle black holes from elementary particles.

G. ‘t Hooft, On the quantum structure of a black hole, Nucl. Phys. B256 , 727 (1985)

We suggest that the behavior of these extreme dilaton black holes….can reasonably be interpreted as the holes doing their best to behave like normal elementary particles.

All particles may be varying forms of stabilized black holes.


https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/9202014.pdf

Black Holes as Elementary Particles


https://mappingignorance.org/2013/11/22/entangled-through-a-wormhole/


https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F1-4020-4339-2_6

(https://i.ibb.co/QFyXr9w/gor1.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/9w64Xzp/gor2.jpg)

(https://i.ibb.co/XCC0rLt/bowor.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/74bt82w/bowor2.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/LJwgW6w/bowor3.jpg)

Each particle has a gray wormhole in its center which explains superluminal quantum entanglement. This wormhole must be traversable: only the Ellis ether drainhole provides such a mechanism.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 21, 2020, 08:17:08 AM
QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT IN SAGNAC INTERFEROMETERS

(https://www.iqoqi-vienna.at/fileadmin/_processed_/8/2/csm_1Source1_4aa73052c0.jpg)

A source of polarization-entangled photons in a Sagnac-loop configuration. The red beams denote the paths of the entangled photon pair

https://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0509219.pdf

Phase-stable source of polarization-entangled photons using a polarization Sagnac
interferometer

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1803.00583.pdf

In-field entanglement distribution over a 96 km-long submarine optical fibre

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1007/1007.3119.pdf

Three-color Sagnac source of polarizationentangled photon pairs


Quantum entanglement is not possible without wormholes:

http://news.mit.edu/2013/you-cant-get-entangled-without-a-wormhole-1205


GR cannot explain quantum entanglement/wormholes:

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/1330/1/012001/meta

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/1330/1/012001/pdf


A traversable wormhole requires scalar fields/ether in order to function.


Photons (bosons in ether quantum mechanics) are linked by wormholes.



https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/0347/dc8586a6a0c40cb1e7d867c0455d7290a645.pdf?_ga=2.116458118.1885361626.1589464805-1655719662.1589019479

Light takes longer to travel East than West between fixed points on the surface of the Earth.

East-West c + v
West-East c - v

The superluminal speed c + v occurs through boson/photon wormholes.



Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 23, 2020, 06:11:50 AM
BOSONS LINKED BY WORMHOLES: QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT GRAVITY

(https://assets.newatlas.com/dims4/default/2434865/2147483647/strip/true/crop/767x511+42+0/resize/1200x800!/format/webp/quality/90/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fnewatlas-brightspot.s3.amazonaws.com%2F0d%2F0a%2Ff1ec79c6484aa4124727b9609329%2Fhot-quantum-entanglement.jpg)

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1307.6850.pdf

Since the particles so produced are formed from a singlet state (the vacuum) they
are necessarily entangled with one another, no matter what the actual nature of the particles, may they be electrons and positrons as in the original case, or quarks and
anti-quarks and even charged W bosons, as we shall consider in this Letter.

Alternatively we could stick with the original interpretation of pair-produced W bosons, and phrase the argument of [1] in terms of such entangled states of W± bosons.


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1109.2920.pdf

Holographic Schwinger Effect

We study tunneling pair creation of W-Bosons by an external electric field.


"Classically, there are no traversable wormholes. This is a consequence of topological censorship, which says that if the null energy condition is satisfied, any causal curve that starts and ends at infinity can be continuously deformed to a causal curve that stays in the asymptotic region. However, it has recently been shown that quantum matter fields can provide enough negative energy to allow some wormholes to become traversable."


https://www.ifi.unicamp.br/~assis/Action-at-a-Distance-p45-56(1999).pdf


https://newatlas.com/physics/15-trillion-atoms-quantum-entanglement/

The team mixed rubidium metal with nitrogen gas, and heated it up to 176.9 °C (350.3 °F). At that temperature, the metal vaporizes, causing free rubidium atoms to float around the chamber. There they become entangled with each other, and the team can measure that entanglement by shining a laser through the gas.

The researchers observed as many as 15 trillion entangled atoms in the gas, which they say is about 100 times more than any other experiment.

“If we stop the measurement, the entanglement remains for about one millisecond, which means that 1,000 times per second a new batch of 15 trillion atoms is being entangled,” says Jia Kong, first author of the study. “And you must think that 1 ms is a very long time for the atoms, long enough for about 50 random collisions to occur. This clearly shows that the entanglement is not destroyed by these random events. This is maybe the most surprising result of the work.”


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335948238_Fractal_Composite_Quarks_and_Leptons_with_Positive_and_Negative_Mass_Components


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 25, 2020, 12:44:33 PM
QUANTUM ACOUSTIC TURBINE/ROTATING WORMHOLES TORQUE

(https://www2.caes.hku.hk/hkuscientist/files/2014/09/58525360_35e55309c4_o-454x300.jpg)

The deepest connection between gravity and quantum entanglement:

“The universality of the gravitational interaction comes directly from the universality of entanglement- it is not possible to have stress-energy that doesn’t source the gravitational field because it is not possible to have degrees of freedom that don’t contribute to entanglement entropy.”

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1405.2933.pdf

Universality of Gravity from Entanglement


All gravitons are distinct wormholes and are connected by a hyperspace which manifests itself in the very center of the gray wormhole. In the center of the wormhole is the mechanism which provides the constant torque necessary for the wormhole to rotate at very high speeds. Without that torque being applied constantly, all wormholes would collapse instantly, there would be no atoms, no visible matter. All gravitons/antigravitons consist of billions of bosons/antibosons.

The torque is being provided by the counter-rotating tetrahedrons (one is the shadow of the other) to be found in the center of the boson/antiboson:

https://www.reunitingall.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/tetaedro-estrella.gif

A constant source of acoustic power is needed to keep the counter-rotating tetrahedrons spin at a tremendous speed: each tetrahedron has imbedded in itself an acoustic turbine in the shape of a swastika. One swastika is emissive, the other one is receptive.

Acoustic turbines were introduced in the 19th century, for the first time:

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Armen_Sarvazyan/publication/46034486/figure/fig1/AS:377905155723265@1467111018623/Acoustic-turbine-of-V-Dvorak-and-A-Mayer-Koenig-1889.png

In the center of the two counter-propagating tetrahedrons we find the source of the sound which is being emitted and the connection to the hyperspace.

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/28/59/00/285900b0d511defaf3d836f31bc51c4a.jpg)

The energy levels of the boson are created by four counter-propagating Riemann zeta function waves on two single segments which are to be found to the left, respectively to the right, of the counter-rotating tetrahedrons:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2006301#msg2006301

The zeros of the zeta function constitute a fractal applied to those two segments.

At that sub Planck scale, mathematics becomes physics, and physics merges with mathematics.

In order to prove this assertion, one needs to solve a problem which is much more difficult than the Riemann hypothesis: to determine the source of the zeta zeros themselves using only arithmetic as a guide and to actually find an algorithm to obtain the precise values of the zeta zeros.

Few mathematicians realize that the Riemann hypothesis was solved in 1956 by D.H. Lehmer:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2161353#msg2161353

See also:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2139565#msg2139565

So it is only at the deepest level of quantum physics that the mystery of the distribution of the zeta zeros is solved:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2082601#msg2082601

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 28, 2020, 12:35:49 PM
KASSNER EFFECT APPLIED TO ORBITAL SAGNAC GPS LIGHT INTERFEROMETRY

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/9702042.pdf

Clock Synchronisation in the Vicinity of the Earth

The transmission time of an electromagnetic signal in the vicinity of the earth is calculated to c−2 and contains an orbital Sagnac term. On earth, the synchronisation of TCB can be realised by atomic clocks, but not the one of TCG.

From (1), we find that the velocity of light around its orbit is not c, but in first approximation c ∓ vE, when measured on earth.

So TCG has highly undesiderable properties and it is better to consider, on the moving earth, that the simultaneity is given by the coordinate synchronisation of TCB.

If R0 is parallel to vE it amounts 333 ns for a link of 1000 km.

If we use the coordinate synchronisation of TCG on earth as recommended by the IAU, the orbital Sagnac effect will not be measured immediately, but a desynchronisation of clocks will occur.

The maximum of the desynchronisation will be attained after 6 months, where the one-way velocity of light measured between the two clocks can change in 12 hours from c + vE to c − vE, if the link is parallel to the earth velocity (for a link of 1000km, ∆t amount 666 ns after 6 months if the link is parallel to the earth velocity).

The synchronisation of TCG or T T cannot be realised by atomic clocks working continuously without resynchronisation, but the synchronisation of TCB can be realised.


This is one of the main reasons why relativists are adopting the local-ether model.

https://web.archive.org/web/20170808104846/http://qem.ee.nthu.edu.tw/f1b.pdf




Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 30, 2020, 03:39:19 AM
ANTINEWTON LAW OF ANTIGRAVITY

(https://images.newscientist.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/dn14120-1_250.jpg?width=300)

Wtotal =  [-mg x g-forcematter] + [(http://www.webassign.net/images/mbarbold.gif)g x g-forceantimatter]

(http://www.webassign.net/images/mbarbold.gif)g = -ρ x V = negative density mass of antimatter

mg = ρ x V = mass density of matter


For normal matter, W = -mg x g-forcematter. The weight-force and g-force (vector acceleration) have opposite signs of direction.

For antimatter W = (http://www.webassign.net/images/mbarbold.gif)g x g-forceantimatter.

A single antigraviton completely defies the weak equivalence principle, it is immune to the effects of terrestrial gravity.

Antimatter antigravitons form strings. Matter graviton form strings. Together these strings can propagate in double torsion fashion.

As soon as an object is subjected to a very high rotational speed, the antigravitons which  are normally latent will start to activate: the stable emissive rotating Ellis wormholes will begin to emit aether. Thus, these antigravitons will align with the strings of L-subquarks which begin to form the invisibile double torsion torus around the object. At the same time, the dextrorotatory subquarks (gravitons) in the object will also align only with the D-subquarks which begin to form the double torsion torus.

Thus, the antiNewton equation will enter into play.

Wtotal = [ -mg x g-forcematter] + [(http://www.webassign.net/images/mbarbold.gif)g x g-forceantimatter]

The object will begin to acquire antigravity (activation of the negative mass density subquarks), and will start to levitate when W = 0. After that, W will be a negative quantity, as more antigravitons are activated. At the same time, the anti g-force will increase too.


On antiquarks/antiprotons:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1832438#msg1832438

Existence of gravitons/antigravitons:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2256867#msg2256867


https://phys.org/news/2017-04-physicists-negative-mass.html

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1612.04055.pdf

https://newatlas.com/negative-mass-particles/52848/

https://www.nature.com/articles/nphys4303

Even though neither case is negative mass for the purposes of the stress–energy tensor, the experiments represent an important development of the negative mass theory.


Antiphotons are bosons which produce darkness (aether). Photons are bosons which produce light (sound/ether).

Antiphoton theory has already began to be developed:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1311.3733.pdf

http://cds.cern.ch/record/403903/files/9910357.pdf


g-force measured at quantum level:

https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1992ApPhB..54..321K/abstract

https://www.nature.com/articles/23655

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1902.01318.pdf

https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02087886/document

(https://i.ibb.co/48ddLRV/gacc.jpg)


European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN)

(https://i.ibb.co/jfmcbpD/gacc2.jpg)


GR and CPT are compatible only if there is gravitational repulsion between matter and antimatter.

Gravitational repulsion is the result of an effective negative gravitational mass.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 01, 2020, 02:07:37 AM
ANTINEWTON LAW OF ANTIGRAVITY II


The matter-antimatter law of gravity/antigravity has been verified experimentally using the exact formula for g-forceantimatter for the Biefeld-Brown effect:

(https://i.ibb.co/5YW8CPH/bie1.jpg)

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0507082.pdf

Weyl electrovacuum solutions and gauge invariance
Dr. B.V. Ivanov


Wtotal =  [-mg x g-forcematter] + [(http://www.webassign.net/images/mbarbold.gif)g x g-forceantimatter]

(http://www.webassign.net/images/mbarbold.gif)g = -ρ x V = negative density mass of antimatter

mg = ρ x V = mass density of matter

There are several reasons why virtually all of the other physicists have not been able to discover the law of matter/antimatter gravity.

They wrongly believe that they are measuring the mass of the antiproton/antiquarks, when in fact the antiquarks are quarks with unusual subquark configurations:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1832438#msg1832438

Positrons (tachyons) do not have mass: the electron-positron "annihilation" means that the electron (graviton) and the positron (tachyon/antigraviton) have reentered the ether string lattice and their binding energy is emitted in two or more energy quanta.

http://www.epola.co.uk/epola_org/

The Eotvos experiment used for the detection of positrons does not take into account the fact that positrons do not obey at all the weak equivalence principle.


https://lss.fnal.gov/archive/2018/conf/fermilab-conf-18-587-cms.pdf

https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/full_html/2018/12/aa32898-18/aa32898-18.html

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1807/1807.08602.pdf

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0601/0601066.pdf

https://arxiv.org/ftp/hep-ph/papers/0505/0505188.pdf

https://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/massnegative.htm


Tachyons = positrons:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2258614#msg2258614

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 04, 2020, 02:05:15 AM
ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE ZETA ZEROS

"These zeros act like telephone poles, and the special nature of Riemann’s zeta function dictates precisely how the wire — its graph — must be strung between them.”"

If the zeros act like telephone poles, then the sacred cubit subdivision algorithm is the electricity which flows through the wire.

"If one could understand the mathematics describing the structure of the atomic nucleus in quantum physics, maybe the same math could solve the Riemann Hypothesis."

It is precisely the same math: the two counter-propagating zeta function waves provide the spectral energy levels of the atoms.


Here is the latest attempt to prove the Riemann hypothesis, almost a success:

https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2019/05/20/1902572116

Jensen polynomials for the Riemann zeta function and other sequences


As I have said before, the Riemann hypothesis was proven to be true decades ago, by D.H. Lehmer:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2161353#msg2161353

See also:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2139565#msg2139565


There is entanglement in the primes

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1403.4765.pdf


Finding zeros of the Riemann zeta function by periodic driving of cold atoms

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1411.0459.pdf


Entanglement and analytical continuation: an
intimate relation told by the Riemann zeta function

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1367-2630/15/6/063009/pdf


Zeta Function Zeros, Powers of Primes, and Quantum Chaos

https://arxiv.org/pdf/nlin/0212042.pdf


One of the best papers on the subject:

The Riemann Zeros as Spectrum and the Riemann Hypothesis

https://www.mdpi.com/2073-8994/11/4/494/htm


Physical realization for Riemann zeros from black hole physics

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0905.4939.pdf


ON THE RIEMANN HYPOTHESIS AND TACHYONS
IN DUAL STRING SCATTERING AMPLITUDES

It is the purpose of this work to pursue a novel physical interpretation of the nontrivial Riemann zeta zeros and prove why the location of these zeros zn = 1/2 + iλn corresponds physically to tachyonic-resonances/tachyonic-condensates, originating from the scattering of two on-shell tachyons in bosonic string theory. Namely, we prove that if there were nontrivial zeta zeros (violating the Riemann hypothesis) outside the critical line Real z = 1/2 (but inside the critical strip), these putative zeros do not correspond to any poles of the bosonic open string scattering (Veneziano) amplitude A(s, t, u).

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/2464/614440ff51bf02357a912e44f014a23c70c6.pdf?_ga=2.254853000.1037681890.1593690228-1199039397.1593522551


Links between string theory and the Riemann’s zeta function

https://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/nardelli2010a.pdf


Zeta Nonlocal Scalar Fields

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0804.4114.pdf


Quantization of the Riemann Zeta-Function
and Cosmology

https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/0701284.pdf


Riemann ζ function from wave-packet dynamics

http://www.iap.tu-darmstadt.de/fileadmin/tqd/Publikationsliste/Mack2010.pdf


Quantum physics on the edge of chaos

https://michaelberryphysics.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/berry165.pdf


Quantum-Mechanical Interpretation of
Riemann Zeta Function Zeros

We demonstrate that the Riemann zeta function zeros define the position and the widths of the resonances of the quantised Artin dynamical system. The Artin dynamical system is defined on the fundamental region of the modular group on the Lobachevsky plane. It has a finite volume and an infinite extension in the vertical direction that correspond to a cusp. In classical regime the geodesic flow in the fundamental region represents one of the most chaotic dynamical systems, has mixing of all orders, Lebesgue spectrum and non-zero Kolmogorov entropy. In quantum-mechanical regime the system can be associated with the narrow infinitely long waveguide stretched out to infinity along the vertical axis and a cavity resonator attached to it at the bottom. That suggests a physical interpretation of the Maass automorphic wave function in the form of an incoming plane wave of a given energy entering the resonator, bouncing inside the resonator and scattering to infinity.
As the energy of the incoming wave comes close to the eigenmodes of the cavity a pronounced resonance behaviour shows up in the scattering amplitude.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1809.09491.pdf


A quantum mechanical model of the Riemann zeros

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0712.0705.pdf


In this thread each and every mystery/important issue relating to the distribution of the zeta zeros has been answered.

Example.

(https://i.ibb.co/khMrpQJ/fluc.jpg)

This is the oscillatory part of the number of zeta zeros whose imaginary part is less than T.

It is thought that it is a manifestation of the apparent randomness of the actual location of the zeros.

However, the oscillatory formula is related directly to the values of the four main subdivision points (for each zeta zero):

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2082278#msg2082278

The five element subdivision algorithm creates the zeta zeros, which in turn are related to the distribution of the prime numbers.

"These zeros did not appear to be scattered at random. Riemann's calculations indicated that they were lining up as if along some mystical ley line running through the landscape."

The mystical ley line has been revealed here: it is the five element subdivision algorithm.


Example.

It is thought that the distribution of the zeta zeros is completely random, that the value for a zeta zero cannot be obtained from the value of the previous zeta zero.

I have proven that all of the zeta zeros are related to each other: in fact I have derived the precise values for the first eight zeta zeros, using only the sacred cubit subdivision algorithm as a guide.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2082278#msg2082278


Example.

The Riemann hypothesis now is proven directly and easily: all of the zeta zeros have to be located on the 1/2 line, since otherwise the five element subdivision algorithm would be disrupted, reverberating all the way to the first 63.6363... segment, and thus to the very value of the first zeta zero, 14.134725.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2085863#msg2085863


Example.

The sacred cubit subdivision algorithm is meant to find the values of the zeta zeros for the first segment (14.134725... to 77.7647...), so that we can infer that it is the sacred cubit subdivision points which give birth to the zeta zeros themselves. Everything we want to know about the Riemann zeta function zeros can be revealed right on the first 63.636363... units segment. To find the actual values for very large T is not necessary anymore, even though this task can now be accomplished easily using França-LeClair points (using the sacred cubit algorithm, as a Smith-Cantor set, each of the previous subdivison points cannot be used again, thus for every new 63.636363... segment we have to use new subdivision points):

França-LeClair points:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2101722#msg2101722

França-LeClair equation:

ϑ(tn) + limδ→0+ arg ζ(1/2 + δ + itn) = (n - 3/2)π


Example.

The quest for the quantum mechanical system which provides the zeta zeros.

Not only I have provided the precise algorithm for finding the zeta zeros using only arithmetic, but I have also demonstrated the mechanism of the smallest particle possible, the one which is even smaller than a boson:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2006301#msg2006301


Example.

The crucial part of the demonstration of the sacred cubit algorithm is the fact that BOTH zeta functions (positive imaginary part AND negative imaginary part) are used on a single segment: they become counter-propagating zeta waves, one is starting from the left, one is starting from the opposite direction, from the right.

This is how we obtain the upper and lower bounds of the approximations which converge to the actual zeta zero values.


Example.

The mystery of the Lehmer pairs.

π/ln2 is the sacred cubit of the Lehmer pairs.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2169318#msg2169318

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2171533#msg2171533


Example.

The mystery of the large gaps between certain values of the zeta zeros.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2109929#msg2109929

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1704.05834.pdf

On large gaps between zeros of L-functions from branches

Andre LeClair (Cornell University) proves that the normalized gaps between consecutive ordinates tn of the zeros of the Riemann zeta function on the critical line cannot be arbitrarily large.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 05, 2020, 04:15:45 AM
ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE ZETA ZEROS II: GUTZWILLER TRACE FORMULA

(https://i.stack.imgur.com/StOUP.png)

The Gutzwiller trace formula: the quantum level density (density of states) is expressed in terms of the classical periodic orbits. This formula gives a deep understanding on the origin of quantum fluctuations.

"Although the Riemann zeta-function is an analytic function with [a] deceptively simple definition, it keeps bouncing around almost randomly without settling down to some regular asymptotic pattern. The Riemann zeta-function displays the essence of chaos in quantum mechanics, analytically smooth, and yet seemingly unpredictable."

M.C. Gutzwiller

(https://i.ibb.co/Dws6s1c/gut11.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/25wDwbg/gut22.jpg)

(https://i.ibb.co/71r32sB/gut2.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/s31QkP4/gut3.jpg)

Quantum chaos, random matrix theory, and the Riemann ζ-function

http://www.bourbaphy.fr/keating.pdf


The Berry-Keating Hamiltonian:
Quantum Chaos and the Zeta Function

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/c625/358b6f8788f1c0cec3f82f947245d81ad84e.pdf

A comparison of the Riemann distribution of zero formula and the Gutzwiller trace formula (pg. 6-7).


The Riemannium

https://arxiv.org/pdf/nlin/0101014.pdf

We consider the location Eµ > 0 of the complex zeros of ζ(s) as the single-particle levels of a fermionic many-body system. In the mean field approximation, the ground-state total energy is obtained by filling the single-particle levels from the lowest Riemann zero up to a “Fermi energy” EF . We are interested in the properties of such a Fermi gas. Following nuclear physics terminology, we refer to this “element” as the Riemannium.


Statistical Properties of the Zeros of Zeta
Functions - Beyond the Riemann case

https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/25/075/25075150.pdf


The phase of the Riemann zeta function

https://www.ias.ac.in/article/fulltext/pram/048/02/0537-0553

Further, assuming that the famous Riemann hypothesis is correct, the density of zeros can be shown to obey a sum rule which is analogous to the famous Gutzwiller formula for the level density.


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242102620_Periodic_Orbit_Quantization_by_Harmonic_Inversion_of_Gutzwiller's_Recurrence_Function


http://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/mrwatkin/zeta/gutzwiller.htm

In Keating's "Physics and the queen of mathematics" he tells us that "Riemann's connection between the nontrivial zeros and the primes has a particularly interesting form: it bears a striking resemblance to the Gutzwiller formula, with the zeros behaving like energy levels and the primes labelling the periodic orbits of some chaotic classical system.


Physics of the Riemann Hypothesis

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1101.3116.pdf


Below we expound the P´olya-Hilbert conjecture. We enumerate the one-dimensional Hamiltonians proposed for which the distribution of energy eigenvalues mimic the non-trivial zeros of the Riemann zeta function and analyse their relationship with the Gutzwiller trace formula. We also examine the possible symmetries of a ‘Riemann operator’ since it partially encouraged the development of quantum mechanics with only CT or PT symmetry.

Gutzwiller’s trace formula has been explicitly mentioned, because the Riemann zeta function obeys a very similar expression. Therefore, we could compare the two formulae, (9b) and (25), and imagine what properties a quantum system might have if its spectrum mimicked the zeros of the Riemann zeta function.


Unified treatment of Explicit and Trace Formulas

https://webusers.imj-prg.fr/~ricardo.perez-marco/publications/talks/unified.pdf


Harmonic inversion as a general method for
periodic orbit quantization

https://arxiv.org/pdf/chao-dyn/9709009.pdf


The Gutzwiller Trace Formula for
Quantum Systems with Spin

https://arxiv.org/pdf/nlin/0104028.pdf


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/1780583_Do_Spectral_Trace_Formulae_Converge

We evaluate the Gutzwiller trace formula for the level density of classically chaotic systems by considering the level density in a bounded energy range and truncating its Fourier integral.


The Phase of the Riemann Zeta Function and the Inverted Harmonic Oscillator

https://arxiv.org/pdf/chao-dyn/9406006.pdf


The counter-propagating sacred cubit subdivisions give rise to the zeta zeros. The Riemann-von Mangoldt formula and the Gutzwiller trace formula represent the same phenomenon at work: at an infinitesimal level, the rotating counter-propagating Riemann zeta function waves provide the density of quantum energy states, at the macro level, the ether drift waves are actually Riemann zeta function waves as well.

The apparent randomness comes from the fact that the four main subdivision points (for each zeta zero) will always be located at a different distance from the zeta zero itself, it is this back and forth sequence of upper bounds and lower bounds approximations which is interpreted as being "random", and which is the actual Gutzwiller trace formula as well as the oscillatory part of the Riemann-von Mangoldt distribution of zeta zeros formula.

The sacred cubit subdivision algorithm unifies quantum mechanics (providing the actual quantum model) and number theory (algorithm for zeta zeros using only arithmetic).

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 07, 2020, 03:58:46 AM
DYNAMICAL MAXWELL EQUATIONS III

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2168036#msg2168036 (part II)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2058884#msg2058884 (part I)

In a significant development, a paper proving that the original J.C. Maxwell equations are invariant under Galilean transformations has been published by the IOP (Institute of Physics):

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/1141/1/012052/pdf

International Conference on Mathematical Modelling in Physical Sciences
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1141 (2018) 012052

Fundamentals of the theory of compressible oscillating ether
Dr. Nikolai Magnitskii

It is shown that the consequences of the system of these two equations are: a generalized nonlinear system of Maxwell-Lorentz equations that is invariant under Galileo transformations, the linearization of which leads to the classical system of Maxwell-Lorentz equations.

In the present paper, a complete generalized nonlinear system of Maxwell-Lorentz equations that is invariant under Galileo transformations is derived from the system of the ether equations (1.1), the linearization of which leads to the classical system of Maxwell-Lorentz equations.


Another paper published by the author, in a peer-reviewed mainstream journal:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330329175_Theory_of_compressible_oscillating_ether

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 10, 2020, 01:06:33 AM
ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE ZETA ZEROS III

Zeta zero #2 subdivision algorithm:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2082278#msg2082278

21.022... = f2(14.134725..., 63.636363...)

14.134725... = zeta zero #1 = f1(63.636363...)

Zeta zero #3 subdivision algorithm:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2082601#msg2082601

25.0108...= f3(14.134725..., 63.636363...)

Inverting the sequences, we get:

14.134725... = f2(21.022...)

14.134725... = f3(25.0108...)


f2(21.022...) = f3(25.0108...)

This means that the value of zeta zero #2 is totally related to the value of zeta zero #3, one figure depends on the value of the other.

Moreover, in order to attain the initial subdivision process, we had to carefully subdivide the entire 63.636363 units in length segment using the same ratios:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1950765#msg1950765


Therefore we have four possible situations where a zeta zero would not be part of the sacred cubit sequence of subdivisions.

1. A zeta zeta is not located on the 1/2 critical line, but is to be found in parallel with the exact location of the sacred cubit subdivision point, or the zeta zero again is not located on the 1/2 critical line but still can be linked to the previous and next zeta zero using a sacred cubit distance.

This means that at a certain point, the algorithm using sacred cubits will break down, since the distance to the zeta zero which is not on the critical line will exceed the necessary upper/lower bounds approximations which necessitate smaller and smaller distances in order to find the next decimal places of the zeta zero.

It would make no sense at all for a zeta zero to be located exactly in parallel to the correct sacred cubit point, off the critical 1/2 line.

2. A zeta zero is simply not located on the critical 1/2 line, with no possible relation to the other zeta zeros which can be obtained using the sacred cubit algorithm. See case #4.

3. A zeta zero is located on the critical line, next to the correct sacred cubit subdivision point, but can be approximated using the algorithm. Again, it would make no sense at all to have ANOTHER zeta zero, still obeying the sacred cubit distances and algorithm, when we have the correct sacred cubit location of the correct zeta zero.

4. And now the case which no one else has ever thought of: a zeta zero which is located on the 1/2 critical line but which is not part of the subdivision algorithm, a "false" zeta zero.

This zeta zero would not be related at all, then, to the next and previous zeta zeros which are obtained using the sacred cubit algorithm; no relation to the first zeta zero, 14.134725..., or to the 63.636363... segment.

Let us suppose now that zeta zero #4 is such a "false" zero, with no connection to the algorithm.

We already know that zeta zeros #1, #2 and #3 are totally related to each other, in fact in order to obtain the value of zeta zero #3, we need to know the value of zeta zero #2.

Then, zeta zero #5 would also not be a part of the sacred cubit algorithm, since it could not be connected to zeta zeros #4 (the false zero) and also to zeta zero #3 (no continuity of the sacred cubit subdivision process).

Moreover, in order to get to the four main subdivision points for zeta zero #3 and zeta zero #2, from the left to the right, and from the right to the left, we would have had to employ the correct subdivision points, using the sacred cubit ratios, a fact no longer possible given that the entire process would break down in the vicinity of the false zero (twice on the same 63.636363... segment).

That is: a false zeta zero would mean that all of the other zeta zeros would be counted as "false" zeta zeros, with no relation to the first three zeta zeros.

The value of zeta zero #3 also depends on the value of zeta zero #4, since now we have a false zeta zero, this means that the value of zeta zero #3 is incorrect, since it can no longer be obtained as a function of zeta zero #4. Consequently, even the value of the first zeta zero, 14.134725..., would also be incorrect, since it has no possible mathematical relation to zeta zero #4.

That is why the presence of a "false" zeta zero, whether on or off the 1/2 critical line is not possible: the values of zeta zeros #1, #2 and #3 would have to be modified as well, a fact which is impossible, since we already have obtained their correct values and have proven that they are related to each other.

As currrent and future mathematicians will discover, all of the zeta zeros are related to each other, so then it will not be enough to prove Riemann's hypothesis for zeros off the 1/2 critical line, but they will have to consider the cases where a zeta zero is located on the 1/2 line, but which is not connected to any of the other zeta zeros.

"Riemann showed the importance of study of [the zeta] function for a range of problems in number theory centering around the distribution of prime numbers, and he further demonstrated that many of these problems could be settled if one knew the location of the zeros of this function. In spite of continued assaults and much progress since Riemann's initial investigations this tantalizing question remains one of the major unsolved problems in mathematics."

"It has become clear that the Riemann Hypothesis, whose resolution seems to hang tantalizingly just beyond our grasp holds the key to a variety of scientific and investigations. The making and breaking of modern codes, which depend on the properties of the prime numbers, have roots in the Hypothesis. In a series of extraordinary developments during the 1970s, it emerged that even the physics of the atomic nucleus is connected in ways not yet fully understood to this strange conundrum. ...Hunting down the solution to the Riemann Hypothesis has become an obsession for many - the veritable 'great white whale' of mathematical research. Yet despite determined efforts by generations of mathematicians, the Riemann Hypothesis defies resolution."

"...in one of those unexpected connections that make theoretical physics so delightful, the quantum chaology of spectra turns out to be deeply connected to the arithmetic of prime numbers, through the celebrated zeros of the Riemann zeta function: the zeros mimic quantum energy levels of a classically chaotic system. The connections is not only deep but also tantalizing, since its basis is still obscure - though it has been fruitful for both mathematics and physics."

"Right now, when we tackle problems without knowing the truth of the Riemann hypothesis, it's as if we have a screwdriver. But when we have it, it'll be more like a bulldozer."

"Proving the Riemann hypothesis won't end the story. It will prompt a sequence of even harder, more penetrating questions. Why do the primes achieve such a delicate balance between randomness and order? And if their patterns do encode the behaviour of quantum chaotic systems, what other jewels will we uncover when we dig deeper?"

"For centuries, mathematicians had been listening to the primes and hearing only disorganised noise. These numbers were like random notes wildly dotted on a mathematical stave with no discernible tune. Now Riemann had found new ears with which to listen to these mysterious tones. The sine-like waves that Riemann had created from the zeros in his zeta landscape revealed some hidden harmonic structure."


Riemann zeta zeros and zero point energy:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258884691_Riemann_zeta_zeros_and_zero-point_energy

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1311.6681.pdf

The aether absorbed by the graviton wormholes activates the rotation of the two counterpropagating Riemann zeta function waves, which provide the weight of the particle. (m = density x volume, the density is given by the Gutzwiller trace formula which is related to the oscillatory/fluctuating series for the zeta zeros).

That is, everything we see, the entirety of matter, consists of sacred cubit distances united by the zeta function waves.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 11, 2020, 12:22:52 PM
ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE ZETA ZEROS IV

The value of the second zero of the zeta function, to four decimal places accuracy, using only the five elements subdivision applied to both zeta functions as a guide, with the exact ratios.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2082278#msg2082278

T/20
T/10
3T/20
T x 0.254545454

T = 63.6363636363

63.6363636363
16.19835
9.54545454
6.36363636
3.18181818

47.43801
12.07513

35.36288
9.00146

26.361424
6.71018

19.65124
5.002134

14.64911
3.72886

10.92025
2.7797

8.14055
2.07214
1.2210825

6.06841
1.54468

4.52372
1.1515

3.37223
0.858386


3.181818
0.80997
0.47727
0.3181818
0.1591


14.134725 + 6.36363 = 20.49836

20.49836 + 0.809917 = 21.30828


2.7797

22.275274

2.07214

20.20313


Upper bound: 21.30828

Lower bound: 20.49836


1.2210825

21.05419: new upper bound


20.49836 + 0.47727 = 20.97563


2.07214 - 1.2210825 = 0.8510575

0.8510575
0.21663277
0.127658
0.08510575
0.0425528

Substracting the bottom four values successively from 21.05419:

20.837557
20.9265
20.9691
21.011637

21.011637 is the new lower bound for the entire approximation.


0.809917 - 0.47727 = 0.332697135

0.332697135
0.0846738
0.049897
0.0332647

Adding the bottom four values successively to 20.97563:

21.0603
21.025527
21.00889

21.025527 is the new upper bound for the entire approximation.


0.049897 - 0.0332647 = 0.0166232

0.0166232
0.00423376

21.00889 + 0.00423376 = 21. 013124

0.0166232 - 0.00423376 = 0.0123985

0.0123985
0.00315589

21.013124 + 0.00315589 = 21.01628

21.01628 is the new lower bound.


0.0425528
0.01083162

21.05419  - 0.01083162 = 21.043358

0.0425528 - 0.01083162 = 0.031721329

0.031721329
0.00807452

21.043358 - 0.00807452 = 21.035283

0.031721329 - 0.00807452 = 0.0236468

0.0236468
0.00601918

21.035283 - 0.00601918 = 21.029264

0.0236468 - 0.00601918 = 0.0176276

0.0176276
0.00448703

21.029264 - 0.00448703 = 21.024777

21.024777 is the new upper bound.


0.0123985 - 0.00315589= 0.00924251

0.00924251
0.00235214

21.01628 + 0.00235214 = 21.01863

0.00924251 - 0.00235214 = 0.0068899

0.0068899
0.00175378

21.01863 + 0.00175378 = 21.02038

0.0068899 - 0.00175378 = 0.00513612

0.00513612
0.00130735

21.02038 + 0.00130735= 21.021687

21.021687 is the new lower bound.

0.00513612 - 0.00130735 = 0.00382867

0.00382867
0.00097457
0.0005743005
0.000382867
0.0001914335

Adding the bottom four values successively to 21.021687:

21.02266
21.02226
21.02206987
21.0218784


0.0176276 - 0.00448703 = 0.01314057

0.01314057
0.00334487
0.00187185
0.00131457

Substracting the bottom three values successively from 21.024777:

21.021432
21.022805
21.02346


21.02266 is the new upper bound.


0.00334487 - 0.00187185= 0.00137302

0.00137302
0.000349496
0.000205953

Substracting the last two values from 21.022805:

21.0224557
21.0226

21.0224557 is the new upper bound.


Since 21.02226 is a lower value than 22.0224557, 21.02226 is the new upper bound.


0.00137302 - 0.000349496 = 0.001023524

0.001023524
0.000260533

21.0224557 - 0.000260533 =21.022195

21.022195 is the new upper bound.

0.001023524 - 0.000260533 = 0.000763

0.000763
0.000194216
0.00011444865
0.0000763
0.00003815

Already we can observe 11.444 = 2.861 x 4 and 3.815 = 6sc.

Substracting the bottom four values from 21.022195:

21.02200085
21.02208055
21.022188
21.022157

21.02200085 is the new lower bound.


The true value for the second zeta zero is:

21.022039639

Already we have obtained a five digit/three decimal place approximation:

21.0220


It is the values of the ratios that matter: they converge to the correct zeta zero value.

The oscillations of the approximations of the Riemann-Siegel asymptotic formula:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2006274#msg2006274

B. Riemann must have noticed a connection between the approximations for the first two zeta zeros: these equations are still buried in his notes. That is why he understood that all of the zeta zeros must lie on the critical 1/2 line.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 13, 2020, 11:49:01 PM
THE AHARONOV-BOHM EFFECT IS NONLOCAL

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1502.05716.pdf

Nonlocality of the Aharonov-Bohm Effect


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2161916#msg2161916 (Casimir-Aharonov-Bohm effect)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2194237#msg2194237 (gravitational Aharonov-Bohm effect)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2248541#msg2248541 (optical Aharonov-Bohm effect)


"The Berry phase for an electron in a one-dimensional box rotated around a magnetic flux line has contributions from the geometry and the magnetic flux, which gives an Aharonov-Bohm effect."

https://cds.cern.ch/record/476759/files/0011087.pdf

A new Dirac-type equation for tachyonic neutrinos

A model has recently been presented to fit the cosmic ray spectrum at E ≈ 1 − 4 PeV [1-3] using the hypothesis that the electron neutrino is a tachyon. This model yields a value for m2e) ≈ −3eV2, which is consistent with the results from recent measurements in tritium beta decay experiments [4-6]. Moreover, the muon neutrino also exhibits a negative mass-square [7].

https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-ph/0009291.pdf

An Explanation on Negative Mass-Square of Neutrinos

The square of the neutrino mass is measured in tritium beta decay experiments by fitting the shape of the beta spectrum near endpoint. In many experiments, it has been found to be negative.

https://cds.cern.ch/record/466273/files/0009291.pdf

It has been known for many years that the measured mass-square of neutrino exhibits significantly negative value.

http://fizika.hfd.hr/fizika_b/bv02/b11p049.pdf

Interesting enough, the pion decay experiment also obtained a negative value for the muon neutrinos [5], m2µ)=(−0.016 ± 0.023) MeV2.


https://cds.cern.ch/record/294413/files/SCAN-9601133.pdf (pg 29)

(https://i.ibb.co/NF5PQPR/muon.jpg)

The next equation, (36), is also negative; however, the authors have also refused to accept that the muon neutrino has negative/imaginary mass (a tachyon). Simply put, the scientists involved in the experiment refused to accept its outcome.


(https://i.ibb.co/ZfWH3VX/muon2.jpg)

https://books.google.ro/books?id=rbnnCAAAQBAJ&pg=PA116&lpg=PA116&dq=recami+causality+and+locality+in+modern+physics&source=bl&ots=SBg7aSPPIm&sig=ACfU3U1tigeNMq4GT_hDHRW3mfONQYHIBA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjCzdDLscjqAhWDtIsKHVFxB0cQ6AEwAnoECAcQAQ#v=onepage&q=recami%20causality%20and%20locality%20in%20modern%20physics&f=false

Dr. Erasmo Recami:

https://cds.cern.ch/record/160441

Classical tachyons and possible applications : a review


https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-ph/0003299.pdf (Aharonov-Bohm effect for neutrino oscillations)

This quantum-mechanical interference provides a Bohm-Aharonov type experiment able to detect a potential difference between the two “arms” of an interferometer.


http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.508.637&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Berry phase in an entangled spin-1/2 system


https://cds.cern.ch/record/379679/files/9902124.pdf

Berry phase for oscillating neutrinos

In a similar fashion, we obtain the Berry phase for the muon neutrino state. (pg 2)

Finally, we remark that the recognition of the geometric phase associated to mixed states also suggests to us that a similar geometric phase also occurs in entangled quantum states which can reveal to be relevant in completely different contexts than particle oscillations, namely in quantum computation [11].


https://arxiv.org/vc/physics/papers/0607/0607124v1.pdf

Controllable vs uncontrollable nonlocality:Is it possible to achieve superluminal communication?

Why is it that the entangled photons in the Aspect experiment cannot be used to transfer information faster than light, keeping in mind when commencing this analysis, that we are dealing with inanimate entities such as photons, electrons, etc. After all, it has been shown that nonlocal correlations exist between these photons and one would logically think that you should be able to perform this feat. The polarization correlations cannot be used to transmit information faster than light because they can only be detected when the statistics from the measurements on each side are compared in a classical fashion, which is dependent upon the efficiency of the detectors.

Biological nonlocality: Evidence for entanglement at the animate level implying
controllable superluminal communication


I feel that while the above reasoning is correct for entangled inanimate or nonliving
entities such as photons where, once a measurement has been made, the wave function
collapses and they become disentangled, the situation is much different for entangled
living entities such as human subjects .

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 24, 2020, 11:54:46 PM
REPORTS OF UFOS GO MAINSTREAM II

(https://i.ibb.co/JjLXTgx/discl.jpg)

U.S. Congress & Pentagon briefed that UFOs are not made on this earth

The New York Times has just released a bombshell article on classified UFO briefings received by members of U.S. Congress and Pentagon officials that the craft involved are “off-world vehicles not made on this earth”. The New York Times (NYT) story cites Dr. Eric Davis, a physicist currently working with the Aerospace Corporation, who gave briefings that classified corporate studies were being conducted on the “off-world vehicles” recovered and held in corporate facilities.

Dr. Davis’s testimony is important since, in 2019, a 15-page document was leaked of his conversation with a former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) in 2002. In the conversation, Vice Admiral Thomas Wilson revealed to Davis details about an incident in 1997 when he was denied access to a classified UFO program run by a major aerospace corporate contractor despite being, at the time, the Deputy Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency and Vice Director for Intelligence (VJ2) for the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Wilson appealed unsuccessfully to the Special Access Programs Oversight Committee (SAPOC) that had authority over the corporate-run program. Surprisingly, the Committee ruled in favor of the corporation that Wilson did not have a demonstrable “need to know”, and therefore he was denied access.

The fact that the New York Times has run the story involving Davis and his knowledge of the corporate-run reverse engineering company is highly significant. As the official “paper of record”, the NYT is now opening the door to mainstream media sites picking up the threads of Davis’s astounding revelations and the leaked transcript of his 2002 conversation with Vice Admiral Wilson.

The likely narrative that will be emerging from the NYT story is that classified corporate-run programs on recovered extraterrestrial craft are very real, and not the imagination of UFO conspiracy theorists. This development will astound many working professionals that have ignored decades of testimonial evidence that such programs were being secretly conducted at multiple military and corporate facilities.

https://exopolitics.org/us-congress-pentagon-briefed-that-ufos-are-not-made-on-this-earth/


https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/23/us/politics/pentagon-ufo-harry-reid-navy.html?searchResultPosition=1

https://twitter.com/MichaelSalla/status/1286838141794492416

https://twitter.com/MichaelSalla/status/1286712733056905216




No known piloted aircraft could perform the UFO’s complex aerial maneuvers:

What was strange, the pilots said, was that the video showed objects accelerating to hypersonic speed, making sudden stops and instantaneous turns — something beyond the physical limits of a human crew.


"Many reports - some of them apparently authentic - tell of UFOs suddenly appearing in the sky from nowhere and then disappearing, seemingly in an instant. The saucers must be capable of truly extraordinary acceleration. Typical of saucer reports, as they appear in the local presses throughout the world, is the object seen cruising along at a few hundred miles per hour and then, suddenly, seen to dash away at what must be thousands of miles per hour.

In addition to these extraordinary linear accelerations the saucers seem to outwit inertia in other respects. At very high speeds they appear to make perfect right right angle turns and even reversals of direction, without disastrous results to their structure or their crew.

Still another good trick they seem able to move through the atmosphere at rates of speed and at levels of air density which clearly are incompatible with any publicly known technology. As an object moves through the air the friction of the molecules striking its surface causes the material to heat. In our very fast jet interceptors cooling systems are necessary. We all know how meteors entering the earth's atmosphere, and nose cones of missiles re-entering the earth's atmosphere, heat to such a point that in many cases they disintegrate or burn up completely. Yet moving at comparable speeds in a denser atmosphere and do not seem to show these effects.

But how, you ask, does this help us explain how flying saucers fly? If the owners of the saucers have been able to devise a revolutionary means of anti-gravity, say an electro-magnetic screen which they put around their craft, this will mean that as the earth's gravity is overcome the gravity-inertia of all the rest of the universe will be overcome also. If the gravitons or ultra particles or fields which account for the gravitation of the earth are screened out the gravitational effect of the rest of the universe will be screened out also. Thus the saucers, with their anti-gravity screen, will be able to fly above the earth and they will be able to ignore the laws of inertia. They will be literally floating in a little cup or envelope where neither gravity nor inertia play any role.

This explains how the saucers can accelerate from zero to thousands of miles an hour and decelerate at the same rate, how they can engage in the dramatic maneuvers reported."


A UFO is impervious to the effects of terrestrial gravity. This means it acts like a floating gray wormhole, well beyond the physics attributed to general relativity.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on July 26, 2020, 05:21:25 AM
QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT SIGNAL-AVERAGING PHOTOGRAPH

(https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kvVbEdXuAri5ouWAWgoGhD-650-80.jpg.webp)

Recently, a group at the University of Glasgow used a sophisticated system of lasers and crystals to capture the first-ever photo of quantum entanglement violating one of what's now known as "Bell's inequalities."

This is "the pivotal test of quantum entanglement," said senior author Miles Padgett, who holds the Kelvin Chair of Natural Philosophy and is a professor of physics and astronomy at the University of Glasgow in Scotland. Though people have been using quantum entanglement and Bell's inequalities in applications such as quantum computing and cryptography, "this is the first time anyone has used a camera to confirm [it]."

https://www.livescience.com/65969-quantum-entanglement-photo.html

https://phys.org/news/2019-07-scientists-unveil-first-ever-image-quantum.html

(https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/advances/5/7/eaaw2563/F2.large.jpg?width=800&height=600&carousel=1)

Fig. 2 Full-frame images recording the violation of a Bell inequality in four images.
(A) The four coincidence counting images are presented, which correspond to images of the phase circle acquired with the four phase filters with different orientations, θ2 = {0° , 45° , 90° , 135°}, necessary to perform the Bell test.

https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/7/eaaw2563

Acquiring images of such a fundamental quantum effect is a demonstration that images can capture and exploit the essence of the quantum world. Here, we report an experiment demonstrating the violation of a Bell inequality within observed images. It is based on acquiring full-field coincidence images of a phase object probed by photons from an entangled pair source. The image exhibits a violation of a Bell inequality with S = 2.44 ± 0.04. This result both opens the way to new quantum imaging schemes based on the violation of a Bell inequality and suggests promise for quantum information schemes based on spatial variables.


Quantum entanglement is not possible without wormholes:

http://news.mit.edu/2013/you-cant-get-entangled-without-a-wormhole-1205


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 01, 2020, 05:30:12 AM
QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT: OUTSIDE OF SPACETIME

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1110.3795.pdf

Quantum nonlocality based on finite-speed causal influences
leads to superluminal signalling

Nonlocal quantum entanglement must originate outside of or beyond 4D spacetime.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 01, 2020, 07:49:34 AM
CHRIST IN CONSTANTINOPLE

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/da/Signorelli-crucifixion.jpg)

The background shows a big sea strait. However, there is another aspect to the painting by Signorelli that has never been observed by any other researcher (including A. Fomenko): the presence of the Hagia Sophia.

https://www.walmart.com/ip/Crucified-Wall-Mount-Shadow-The-Print-Mounted-Face-Mary-Installation-Luca-Signorelli-16-Included-Free-Magdalene-x-detail-Prints-Acrylic-20-Worry/119462203

(https://i5.walmartimages.com/asr/82abeca7-5c90-4f3f-900b-58ea905e42ce_1.1bdbf0da7019a878ff999ed55a4f427f.jpeg?odnHeight=450&odnWidth=450&odnBg=FFFFFF)

(https://i.ibb.co/yRDDwg8/chro3.jpg)

There is no other known castle or building, other than the Hagia Sophia, which even remotely would resemble the depiction in the painting (the dome of Florence is not located next to a large sea strait).

(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-j_Pf0qC3T2k/V6FyUj5A84I/AAAAAAAAaZ4/HsuWiikHldcaoWSjUsATqDNe-oIxbBx0QCLcB/s1600/ancient-hagia.jpg)
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcRFlFI5zVInr_rVdA_Jt0xI7HLioTIs1tVAQw&usqp=CAU)
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcSE0SAr45Kzh5XOyWFvRhV95hzoXZNzRJmYvw&usqp=CAU)
(https://hagiasophiaturkey.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/22-Detail-of-Hagia-Sophia-from-Melchior-Lorichs-1559-panoramic-of-Constantinople.png)

(http://www.irishoriginsofcivilization.com/uploads/3/1/3/5/31352851/4588652.jpg?842)

"The blatant Romanesque motifs (of archway, Corinthian pillars, fallen column and marble altar) were added by the artist to signify where the Bible story depicted was truly composed. It was not in Judea or Galilee."

(https://i.ibb.co/8DJ4gPM/1591923161940.png)

(earliest known photograph of Constantinople; the debate is still going on, whether it is a photograph or a painting)

(https://uploads7.wikiart.org/images/luca-signorelli/the-crucifixion-1505.jpg!Large.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a0/Sodoma_-_The_Crucifixion_-_1916.786_-_Cleveland_Museum_of_Art.tif/lossy-page1-800px-Sodoma_-_The_Crucifixion_-_1916.786_-_Cleveland_Museum_of_Art.tif.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d0/Albrecht_D%C3%BCrer_019.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/85/Andrea_solario%2C_crocifissione%2C_1503%2C_01.JPG)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7d/Konrad_Witz_005.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5a/De_Calvarieberg_Rijksmuseum_SK-A-4921.jpeg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b3/Giovanni_Bellini_-_The_Calvary_-_WGA1647.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/81/Boccaccio_Boccaccino_-_Christ_carrying_the_Cross_%28National_Gallery%2C_London%29.jpg/800px-Boccaccio_Boccaccino_-_Christ_carrying_the_Cross_%28National_Gallery%2C_London%29.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/87/Schw%C3%A4bisch_um_1480_-_Christus_am_Kreuz_-_3830_-_Bavarian_State_Painting_Collections.jpg)

The last painting even features a person who is wearing a turban.

All of the paintings depict a large sea strait.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1641885#msg1641885 (Christ entering Constantinople)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1673763#msg1673763 (Christ crucified next to a sea strait)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2166885#msg2166885 (the issue with Troy II)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2166245#msg2166245 (the issue with Troy I)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 02, 2020, 01:18:40 AM
CHRIST IN CONSTANTINOPLE II

(https://i5.walmartimages.com/asr/82abeca7-5c90-4f3f-900b-58ea905e42ce_1.1bdbf0da7019a878ff999ed55a4f427f.jpeg?odnHeight=450&odnWidth=450&odnBg=FFFFFF)

Could the building in the background be castle Sant'Angelo?

(https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1021/8371/products/BVM1_073_b56e23a3-442b-405f-90a8-57ba9e4ae0dd.jpg?v=1571710958)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/View_of_the_Tiber_Looking_Towards_the_Castel_Sant%27Angelo%2C_with_Saint_Peter%27s_in_the_Distance_%28adj%29.jpg)

Not while the rest of the painting features a large sea strait.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7d/Konrad_Witz_005.jpg)

As we can see, there is a large body of water right next to shoreline: it is not the sea of Galilee, nor is it the Dead Sea (these seas also do not have large fortification walls built near them).

And it is not the Tiber river.

Almost the entire width of the background is taken up by a lake; a town and a fortified castle stand on its rocky shore. They are depicted with such precision as to suggest a definite locality, but the topographical details have never been identified with any known place. However, Lake Geneva suggests itself as one possibility, since the painter spent the greater part of his life in the Swiss countryside.

The topographical details have never been identified with any known place since no one had thought to compare them with the geography of the sea of Marmara/Bosphorus strait.

And it cannot be lake Geneva (no large, extended fortification walls).

(https://i.pinimg.com/564x/cf/4e/75/cf4e7534c412300dc4e6a1e1d2b3d4e2.jpg)
(https://www.villageantiques.ch/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/ChatdeChillonFEAT.jpg)

It looks more like the strait of Bosphorus:

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fe/View_of_the_Seraglio_Point_from_Pera.jpg/300px-View_of_the_Seraglio_Point_from_Pera.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/8DJ4gPM/1591923161940.png)

The castle of Chillon was built in the 18th century:

https://www.dillum.ch/html/chillon_plan_vagina.htm

https://www.dillum.ch/html/1_chillon_burg_chateau_castle_auge_oeil_eye.htm

http://dillum.ch/html/dillum_burgen_artikel_be_so_vd_fr.htm

There is one other notable detail which must be taken into account: the Inquisition (official chronology of history). Had either Witz or Signorelli made public their respective paintings, they would have had to deal with the Inquisition the next day. Before they could have uttered a response, they would have been thrown in the dungeons; no other painter would have dared to depict a body of water next to the crucifixion site.

Dr. Anatoly Fomenko:

Incidentally it is interesting to look carefully at the representation of the crucifixion. It appears that in many paintings, icons and frescoes Christ’s crucifixion is shown with a background of either a big sea strait or a wide river. Besides the artists were painting in particular either a strait or a river, but by no means a sea. So, by depicting water, the opposite shore was always shown. As we understand it now, it could not have been otherwise, as the Beykoz mountain is situated right on the shore of the wide Bosphorus. From there can be seen very clearly the European shore of the strait, where the centre of Constantinople is situated.

Any artist, had a more or less accurate recollection of the original story, would have depicted the Bosphorus strait as a significant part of the landscape, which served as a backdrop to the site of Christ’s crucifixion.

(http://www.chronologia.org/kak_reconstruction/im/004.jpg)

Mount Beykoz, the place outside the walls of Constantinople, where Christ was crucified.

(http://www.chronologia.org/kak_reconstruction/im/005.jpg)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 02, 2020, 06:54:20 AM
CHRIST IN CONSTANTINOPLE III

(https://i2.wp.com/upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/86/Frosch_Totentafel_Leidensweg_Christi_VLM.jpg/800px-Frosch_Totentafel_Leidensweg_Christi_VLM.jpg)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/86/Frosch_Totentafel_Leidensweg_Christi_VLM.jpg

The harbor and landscape of Constantinople.


(https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/tE_wsqXpj-i6cbLej5aAhx6ayDUg_y9yajBOZjKixrNLAZv-IfTndp9dWGuE6cb0TPkHd6kiIMpcwtKWR3pEK6TGPAT3_w7IpcOTuEUGfuMfruvjVFRDpJdwipLln0d7=s800)

Jerusalem quae in Bosphorus est possidebit civitates Austri.

http://www.johncunyus.com/files/The_Book_of_Obadiah.pdf

Obadiah 1:20 "et transmigratio exercitus huius filiorum Israhel omnia Chananeorum usque ad Saraptham et transmigratio Hierusalem quae in Bosforo est possidebit civitates austri"

Jerome, author of translation of the Bible into Latin (the Vulgate) used the word Bosphorus in Obadiah 1:20.

Et transmigratio exercitus hujus Filiorum Izraelu omnia loca Chananæorum usque ad Sareptam: et transmigratio Jerozolima, quæ in Bosphoro est, possidebit civitates Austri.

The same word appears in one English translation as well ( Douay–Rheims), from 1610.

And the captivity of this host of the children of Israel, all the places of the Chanaanites even to Sarepta: and the captivity of Jerusalem that is in Bosphorus, shall possess the cities of the south.

http://www.drbo.org/chapter/36001.htm

In most later translations, the word ‘Bosphorus’ was replaced with ‘Sepharade’. It is supposedly a place of ‘uncertain location’.


(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/52/Antonello_da_Messina_026.jpg/800px-Antonello_da_Messina_026.jpg)

Only two possible locations match the landscape:

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/54/Strait_of_Messina_from_Dinnammare.jpg/1200px-Strait_of_Messina_from_Dinnammare.jpg)
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/t3eJ79qtcuzuxZPJa7HiIGh1l7AFjpijNtrvit4IfgPtZevq9R4M9e3WGDuYBA7NCgFHN9-JcfXWLfwLhcFXJz0YW3egoleZ2suE_55KYlflU2sFUJCtZPz9nuFFx4WW7BJXocrwC-GY5-9wD-1krR4LkEuku2fj9tRYGexILeHvfnvh4aTUzL1bte-frMUl2vl5dTpvoDvbLOPrkVEfQ501F0HQDxM)

Strait of Messina

(https://c8.alamy.com/comp/2A2RPGP/the-golden-horn-from-the-cemetery-of-eyoub-illustration-of-the-golden-horn-in-istanbul-from-the-19th-century-signed-wh-bartlett-h-adlard-fig-2-before-p-4-bartlett-wh-adlard-h-1839-julia-pardoe-william-henry-bartlett-the-beauties-of-the-bosphorus-vol-1-london-george-virtue-1839-2A2RPGP.jpg)

(photograph of the strait of Bosphorus, taken in 1839)

(https://c8.alamy.com/comp/CP1XC5/geography-travel-turkey-istanbul-view-over-the-golden-horn-wood-engraving-CP1XC5.jpg)

Of course, only Constantinople had the large fortification walls.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 03, 2020, 02:55:10 AM
REPORTS OF UFOS GO MAINSTREAM III

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/J7jx7KYqIZqFYIFjGQEgHAmSoYyRBqKBIbWXaBt_jPfy-D1VTyRlzZsyUTkU7kEcSAIOV9qF8Aj6b5of)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2272305#msg2272305 (part II)

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/28/insider/UFO-reporting.html

Numerous associates of the Pentagon program, with high security clearances and decades of involvement with official U.F.O. investigations, told us they were convinced such crashes have occurred, based on their access to classified information. But the retrieved materials themselves, and any data about them, are completely off-limits to anyone without clearances and a need to know.

We were provided a series of unclassified slides showing that the program took this seriously enough to include it in numerous briefings. One slide says one of the program’s tasks was to “arrange for access to data/reports/materials from crash retrievals of A.A.V.’s,” or advanced aerospace vehicles.

Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program – AATIP (cont.)

Twofold Nature of the Threat:

1. Current Threat: AAV phenomena of foreign derivation (including off-world), being globally deployed/tested, including in CONUS

2. Future Threat: Potential terrestrial adversaries achieving significant breakthroughs in the development of game-changing technologies based on evaluations of AAV phenomena from sensor data or crash/retrieved materials.

(This is an AATIP slide used over many years in many briefings for Congressional staff, aerospace executives, and DOD officials.)

"Eric W. Davis, an astrophysicist who worked as a subcontractor and then a consultant for the Pentagon U.F.O. program since 2007, said that, in some cases, examination of the materials had so far failed to determine their source and led him to conclude, “We couldn’t make it ourselves.”

Mr. Davis, who now works for Aerospace Corporation, a defense contractor, said he gave a classified briefing to a Defense Department agency as recently as March about retrievals from “off-world vehicles not made on this earth.”

Mr. Davis said he also gave classified briefings on retrievals of unexplained objects to staff members of the Senate Armed Services Committee on Oct. 21, 2019, and to staff members of the Senate Intelligence Committee two days later."

The image depicted on the Great Seal of the United States points to the year 2019 (November 2019, the transit of Mercury):

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1726000#msg1726000

A big disclosure regarding alien technology (comparable to the events in the movie Contact (1997)) will take place no latter than 2022, perhaps as early as 2021.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 10, 2020, 04:30:27 AM
ENTANGLED GRAVITONS ARE CONNECTED BY ELLIS AETHER WORMHOLES

Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet wormholes

EGB wormhole model: dilaton and electrovacuum.

The EdGB is unstable.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1804.11170.pdf

The electrovacuum has huge issues with it as well.
 
The causality constraints of higher curvature models were studied, and it was shown in
particular that a theory such as EGB has to be supplemented with massive higher-spin fields in order to be free of causality problems. Causal structure of Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet (EGB) theory has also been studied in [29,30], where different notions closely connected to causality are studied in detail, such as the relation between Killing horizons and characteristic hypersurfaces, hyperbolicity in the near horizon regions.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1204.6737.pdf


Kaluza-Klein wormholes

https://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.59.064018

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/9807086.pdf

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1309.1320.pdf

https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/9909102.pdf

Aether compactification of the Kaluza-Klein dimensions:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0802.0521.pdf

https://web.archive.org/web/20150319104103/bourabai.ru/winter/relativ.htm (Planck plasma)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1920865#msg1920865 (Kaluza-Klein particles, Planck ether, two consecutive messages)

Kaluza-Klein wormholes must use ether.


Conformal Weyl gravity wormholes

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1510.05054.pdf

https://www.arxiv-vanity.com/papers/0801.4401/

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1503.04145.pdf

Weyl ether:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2182319#msg2182319

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1608.00285.pdf

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1703.06355.pdf


Palatini f(R,T) wormholes

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0703132.pdf

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0712.1141.pdf


Cartan wormholes

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/9802046.pdf

We also discuss wormhole throats in the presence of fully antisymmetric torsion and find that the energy condition violations cannot be dumped into the torsion degrees of freedom.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/9901020.pdf

The Cartan torsion theory is a dynamical degenerate case of the more general Poincare gauge theory of gravity. The NEC would always have to be violated for such a specific torsion even in the more general Poincare gauge theory of gravity.

The resulting forces from the Einstein-Cartain torsion theory are some 27 orders of magnitude smaller than the gravitational effects of GR. Further, the EC theory applies to static field geometries around rotating objects.

Dynamical Ricci torsion is some 21 to 22 orders of magnitude larger than EC torsion.


Ricci flow wormholes

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0809.0957.pdf

Spacetime foam = zero point energy = ether

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1012/1012.5264.pdf


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1307.6850v2.pdf

Holographic Schwinger effect and the geometry of entanglement

http://news.mit.edu/2013/you-cant-get-entangled-without-a-wormhole-1205

Julian Sonner, a senior postdoc in MIT’s Laboratory for Nuclear Science and Center for Theoretical Physics, has published his results in the journal Physical Review Letters, where it appears together with a related paper by Kristan Jensen of the University of Victoria and Andreas Karch of the University of Washington.

The tangled web that is gravity

He found that what emerged was a wormhole connecting the two entangled quarks, implying that the creation of quarks simultaneously creates a wormhole. More fundamentally, he says, gravity itself may be a result of entanglement. What’s more, the universe’s geometry as described by classical gravity may be a consequence of entanglement—pairs of particles strung together by tunneling wormholes.

"We suggest that this constitutes a holographically dual realization of the creation of a Wheeler wormhole."

The Wheeler-Morris-Thorne model IS an Ellis wormhole.

https://cds.cern.ch/record/605298/files/0302049.pdf

The metric presented by Morris and Thorne already appears in 1973 in the work published by H.G. Ellis.

In fact, this model is called the Ellis-Bronnikov-Morris-Thorne wormhole model.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1905.02531.pdf

https://inspirehep.net/literature/837615

Negative energy = ether

http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/9803/9803039.pdf


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2261261#msg2261261

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2262602#msg2262602

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2263707#msg2263707

The deepest connection between gravity and quantum entanglement:

“The universality of the gravitational interaction comes directly from the universality of entanglement- it is not possible to have stress-energy that doesn’t source the gravitational field because it is not possible to have degrees of freedom that don’t contribute to entanglement entropy.”

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1405.2933.pdf

Universality of Gravity from Entanglement

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 15, 2020, 02:24:16 AM
SIZE OF THE UNIVERSE: 31 KILOMETERS

(https://i.ibb.co/0c3dbvm/31.jpg)

The calculation was carried out by Wolfgang Pauli, one of the greatest physicists of the 20th century.

"If the electromagnetic field would really have a non vanishing zero-point energy, 'the universe would not even reach to the moon'".

If the ether drift field (zero point energy, scalar waves) does exist, then the radius of curvature of the observable universe is 31 km.

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1367-2630/9/1/011/pdf

C. P. Enz, A. Thellung : Nullpunktenergie und Anordnung
nicht vertauschbarer Faktoren im Hamiltonoperator ,
Helv. Phys. Acta 33, 839–848 (1960) pg 842

https://academic.oup.com/astrogeo/article/53/1/1.24/218451

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0810.2213.pdf

Earlier, I stated that the upper bound of the distance to Sirius is less than 50 km:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1795032#msg1795032

"If the electromagnetic field would really have a non vanishing zero-point energy, the radius of the universe would then be 31 km."

This is precisely what happens in reality.

The distance from the center of the flat surface of the Earth to the top of the second dome is 31 km.

(https://i.ibb.co/mHwPVLw/311.jpg)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 19, 2020, 09:01:40 AM
MAXWELL'S ORIGINAL ETHER EQUATIONS AND MODERN SCIENCE

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1639521#msg1639521 (part I)

W. Pauli used the censored/modified Heaviside-Lorentz equations, NOT the original Maxwell ether equations:

(https://physicstoday.scitation.org/na101/home/literatum/publisher/aip/journals/content/pto/2001/pto.2001.54.issue-2/1.1359709/production/images/medium/1.1359709.figures.f6.gif)

Pauli writing the Maxwell equations in his ETH Zurich office in 1953.

NdG Tyson did the same thing:

(https://image.ibb.co/d6p7rJ/mxl1_zps4aef76b3.jpg)

(http://www.irregularwebcomic.net/annotations/annot1420a.gif)

However, much more could be accomplished using the original ether Maxwell equations, which invariant under Galilean transformations:

(https://image.ibb.co/f1Coyy/88.jpg)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 20, 2020, 02:59:21 AM
J.C. MAXWELL'S THEORY OF ETHER MOLECULAR VORTICES

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/48/Molecular_Vortex_Model.svg/300px-Molecular_Vortex_Model.svg.png)

There can be little doubt that the most significant event of the nineteenth century will be judged as Maxwell's discovery of the laws of electrodynamics.

Richard Feynman, The Feynman Lectures on Physics, vol 2

It is sometimes said, with no more than slight overstatement, that if you trace every line of modern physical research to its starting point you come back to Maxwell. Professor C. A. Coulson put it another way: 'There is scarcely a single topic that he touched upon which he did not change almost beyond recognition'.

Basil Mahon, The Man Who Changed Everything

Maxwell imagined that there is an incompressible fluid, of constant density, filling all of space. Faraday's lines of force were flows of this fluid, or flux.

He imagined that all of space is filled with tiny vortices, or spinning cells, the axis of each vortex being a tiny bar magnet with a North pole one end and a South pole the other.

    Suppose all space were filled by tiny close-packed spherical cells of very low but finite density, and that these cells could rotate. When a cell rotated, centrifugal force would make it tend to expand in the middle and contract along the spin axis, just as the earth's rotation causes it to expand at the equator and flatten at the poles. Each spinning cell would try to expand around the middle but its neighbours would press back, resisting the expansion. If all cells in a neighbourhood spun in the same direction, each would push outwards against the others: they would collectively exert a pressure at right angles to their axes of spin.
    Along the axes of spin the opposite would happen. The cells would be trying to contract in this direction and there would be a tension. So if the spin axes were aligned along the lines in space, these lines would behave like Faraday's lines of force, exerting an attraction along their length and a repulsion sideways. The faster the cells spun, the greater would be the attractive force along the lines and the repulsive force at right angles to them — in other words, the stronger the magnetic field.

Basil Mahon, The Man Who Changed Everything

To avoid the cells rubbing against one another, he tried putting even smaller spherical particles between the cells. They would act like ball bearings, or like the 'idle wheels' engineers put between two gear wheels which need to rotate in the same direction. The idea seemed crazy but James persevered and suddenly things began to fall into place. Suppose the little idle wheels were particles of electricity. In the presence of an electromotive force they would tend to move along the channels between the cells, constituting an electric current, and it would be this movement that set the cells spinning.
    But everyone knew that currents could flow only in substances which were conductors, like metals. In insulators like glass or mica, or in empty space, there could be no currents. So James proposed a second way in which the behaviour of the cells would be modified according to the type of substance which shared their space. In an insulator the cells, or perhaps local groups of cells, would hold on to their little particles so that they could rotate but not move bodily. But in a good conductor like a copper wire the particles could move bodily with very little restriction and a current would flow. In general, the lower the electrical resistance of the substance, the more freely the particles could move.
    An essential feature of James' little particles was that they had rolling contact with the cells — there was no sliding. Where the magnetic field was uniform the particles would just rotate, along with the cells. But if the particles in a conductor moved bodily without rotating, they would cause the cells on either side of the current to spin in opposite directions, exactly the condition to create a circular magnetic field around a current-carrying wire — effect 3. If the particles rotated and moved, the circular magnetic field due to their movement would be superimposed on the linear one due to their rotation.

Basil Mahon, The Man Who Changed Everything

(https://media.springernature.com/original/springer-static/image/chp%3A10.1007%2F978-981-4560-44-3_12/MediaObjects/315504_1_En_12_Fig1_HTML.gif)

According to our theory, the particles which form the partitions between the cells constitute the matter of electricity. The motion of these particles constitutes an electric current; the tangential force with which the particles are pressed by the matter of the cells is electromotive force, and the pressure of the particles on each other corresponds to the tension or potential of the electricity.

If we now explain the condition of a body with respect to the surrounding medium when it is said to be 'charged' with electricity, we shall have established a connexion between all the principal phenomena of electrical science.

James Clerk Maxwell, On Faraday's Lines of Force, 3, Cambridge Phil. Soc., 1861

James had shown how the electrical and magnetic forces which we experience could have their seat not in physical objects like magnets and wires but in energy stored in the space in and around bodies. Electrostatic energy was potential energy, like that of a spring; magnetic energy was rotational, like that in a flywheel, and both could exist in empty space. And these two forms of energy were immutably linked; a change in one was always accompanied by a change in the other. The model demonstrated how they acted together to produce all known electromagnetic phenomena.

. . . All materials that have elasticity transmit waves. James' all-pervading collection of cells was elastic, so it must be capable of carrying waves. In an insulating material, or in empty space, a twitch in one row of idle wheels would be transmitted via their parent cells to the surrounding rows of idle wheels, then to the rows surrounding them, and so on. Because the cells have inertia they would not transmit the motion instantly but only after a short delay — the twitch would spread out as a ripple. So any change in the electric field would send a wave through all space.
What is more, any twitch in a row of idle wheels would make the neighbouring cells turn a bit and so generate a twitch in the magnetic field along the cells' axes of spin. All changes in the electric field would therefore be accompanied by corresponding changes in the magnetic field, and vice versa. The waves would transmit changes in both fields; they were electromagnetic waves.

Basil Mahon, The Man Who Changed Everything


https://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Essays-Mechanics%20/%20Electrodynamics/Download/3889

Maxwell’s Original Equations

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2267461#msg2267461 (dynamical Maxwell equations)


Now, let me prove that indeed in the calculation provided by W. Pauli, the radius of curvature is equal to the radius of the circular arc to the curve.

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1367-2630/9/1/011/pdf

page 2: "radius of curvature"
page 3: W. Pauli's example, using the radius of curvature

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0810.2213.pdf

page 6: "radius of the universe"
page 7: "radius of the Einstein universe"

http://cds.cern.ch/record/398148/files/9908342.pdf

page 3: "radius of curvature"
page 5: "radius of the Einstein universe"

Both terms refer/apply to equation (2) in the paper (page 3).

Radius of curvature = radius of the universe in W. Pauli's calculation.

The curve can extend greatly to the right and to the left of the vertex.

"If the electromagnetic field would really have a non vanishing zero-point energy, the radius of the universe would then be 31 km."

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 22, 2020, 09:29:10 AM
POHER EFFECT AND EXPERIMENTS

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/3308/8096d42e5280de57b212fc7fefeb73d7e81f.pdf?_ga=2.152105658.2055427511.1597999148-2044837890.1597759402

Physical Phenomena Observed during Strong Electric Discharges into
Layered Y123 Superconducting Devices at 77 K

The propelling phenomenon we observed during these experiments seems to be tied with the inertia phenomenon acting upon very strongly accelerated electrons inside the device. However, the propelling emitter shows simultaneously an energetic behavior and diverse distant physical effects implying an interaction with an external source of energy.

More than 3500 discharges were recorded and analyzed from April 2007 to March 2011, with 130 different emitters.

The main physical effect observed was an upward propulsive momentum of the emitter, in the opposite direction to the flow of electrons. During all discharges in the layered emitter larger than 800 V, the mobile magnets of the linear alternator always jumped up.

The discharge circuit appears as a "closed system" that should not generate any external momentum. However, the reported experiments showed a huge momentum transfer and the emitter support was submitted to accelerations reaching up to ten thousands g's.


https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1408/1408.1636.pdf

Gravity-Superconductors Interactions as a Possible Means
to Exchange Momentum with the Vacuum


https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1101/1101.2419.pdf

Review of Poher experiment on fields produced by
electric discharges in a superconductor


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1312.0958.pdf

A comparison between the YBCO discharge experiments by E. Podkletnov
and C. Poher, and their theoretical interpretations

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 27, 2020, 12:00:24 PM
QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT: OUTSIDE OF SPACETIME II

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2273974#msg2273974 (part I)

http://cogsci.uci.edu/~ddhoff/HoffmanTime.pdf

The icons on the desktop of a PC allow us to use the computer without being distracted by irrelevant details about its internal structure and operation. Similarly, our perceptions allow us to act adaptively in the world while being ignorant of its true structure. Space-time is our species-specific desktop and physical objects are icons on that desktop. Space-time and physical objects are not insights into objective reality, but species-specific adaptations that allow us to survive and reproduce. This requires a radical reformulation of our notion of the nature of objective reality, and of our notion of time. In light of the evolutionary results, I propose that consciousness, rather than space-time and physical objects, is fundamental. I propose a formal model of consciousness based on a mathematical structure called conscious agents. I then propose how time and space emerge from the interactions of conscious agents.


Fundamental physics started the 20th century with the twin revolutions of relativity and quantum mechanics, and much of the second half of the century was devoted to the construction of a theoretical structure unifying these radical ideas. Yet storm clouds are gathering, which point towards a new set of revolutions on the horizon in the 21st century. Space-time is doomed—how can it emerge from more primitive building blocks?

(N. Arkani-Hamed (IAS))

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 28, 2020, 03:19:26 AM
QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT OF MORPHIC FIELDS: OUTSIDE OF SPACETIME III

https://thesecularheretic.com/fields-of-being-on-morphic-resonance/

https://www.sheldrake.org/essays/rat-learning-and-morphic-resonance

https://www.sheldrake.org/research/morphic-resonance/an-experimental-test-of-the-hypothesis-of-formative-causation

https://www.sheldrake.org/reactions/the-anti-sheldrake-phenomenon

Biology, however, has yet to experience its quantum shock. Biologists assume they have physics on their side, but physics isn't so sure. Contrary to popular belief, biologists only assume the operations of an organism are explicable according to causal mechanics. As Forgacs and Newman put it, "While it is obvious that nothing in development, or in any other domain of biology for that matter, can occur without the participation of physical mechanisms, the high degree of structural and dynamical complexity of most living systems makes it exceedingly difficult, in general, to follow the workings of basic physical principles or appreciate their roles." This becomes increasingly apparent with the emergence of complex structures such as immune, hormonal, circulatory, vascular and nervous systems.


https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1568494607001263

In this paper, we introduce the basis for this new computing paradigm and its extensions such as quantum logic and entanglement in morphic computing, morphic systems and morphic system of systems (M-SOS).


http://www.pablolinzoain.com/entangling-conscious-agents/

Scientific investigations of consciousness that seek its biological basis typically assume that objects in space-time—such as neurons—exist even if unperceived, and have causal powers. I evaluate this assumption, using evolutionary games and genetic algorithms that study perceptual evolution, and find that it is almost surely false. Our perceptions of space-time and objects are a species-specific adaptation, not an insight into objective reality. In consequence, I propose a formal theory of consciousness—the theory of “conscious agents”—that takes consciousness to be fundamental, rather than derivative from objects in space-time. I use the theory of conscious agents to solve the combination problem of consciousness, both for the combination of subjects and of experiences. I show that entanglement follows as a consequence of the combination of conscious subjects. I then discuss the relationship of these findings to the account of entanglement given by quantum-Bayesian interpretations of quantum theory.


https://arxiv.org/vc/physics/papers/0607/0607124v1.pdf

Controllable vs uncontrollable nonlocality: Is it possible to achieve superluminal communication?

Biological nonlocality: Evidence for entanglement at the animate level implying
controllable superluminal communication

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 29, 2020, 12:30:05 AM
QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT: OUTSIDE OF SPACETIME IV



Spacetime is doomed. It, and its particles, cannot be fundamental in physical theory, but must emerge from a more fundamental theory. I review the converging evidence for this claim from physics and evolution, and then propose a new way to think of spacetime: as a data-compressing and error-correcting channel for information about fitness. I propose that a theory of conscious agents is a good candidate for the more fundamental theory to replace spacetime. Spacetime then appears as one kind of interface for communication between conscious agents.


Spacetime is doomed. There is no such thing as spacetime fundamentally in the actual underlying description of the laws of physics. That's very startling, because what physics is supposed to be about is describing things as they happen in space and time. So if there is no spacetime, it's not clear what physics is about.

Nima Arkani-Hamed (Cornell Messenger Lecture 2016)
Institute of Advanced Study, Princeton

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 01, 2020, 09:26:23 AM
ZPE CASIMIR QUANTUM MOMENTUM/BIEFELD-BROWN QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0908.4390.pdf

The electromagnetic vacuum is known to have energy. It has been recently argued that the quantum vacuum can possess momentum, that adds up to the momentum of matter. This “Casimir momentum” is closely related to the Casimir effect, in which case energy is exchanged. In previous theory it was treated semi-classically. We present a non-relativistic quantum theory for the linear momentum of electromagnetic zero-point fluctuations, considering an harmonic oscillator subjectto crossed, quasi-static magnetic and electric and coupled to the quantum vacuum. We derive a contribution of the quantum vacuum to the linear pseudo-momentum and give a new estimate for the achievable speed. Our analysis show that the effect exists and that it is finite.

https://web.archive.org/web/20100105011425/http://cerncourier.com/cws/article/cern/29025


https://media.neliti.com/media/publications/237004-anomalous-effects-from-dipole-environmen-3b521a48.pdf

Anomalous effects from dipole environment - quantum entanglement

In this work, we present our experimental and theoretical investigations concerning to the existence of anomalous forces on symmetrical and asymmetrical capacitors, operating in high voltage, and on magnetic cores operating in high magnetic fields.

The BB effect is one of the anomalous effects that can be explained in this context, that is, by an unique cause that we call generalized quantum entanglements. Some current papers have shown that BB effect remains in the vacuum conditions excluding the ionic wind such as the cause of the effect. In addition, other papers indicate that even experiments related to BB effect measurement with lifters in the air pressure cannot be explained according to the usual electromagnetic theory background. These facts reinforce our hypothesis related to an nonlocal interaction, considering a preexisting state of generalized quantum entanglement between all particles.

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/c8aa/be1bd1727538e03345b62e3a2efba1f197fe.pdf

On the Anomalous Weight Losses of High Voltage Symmetrical Capacitors

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/11e4/edd2041c29b537847909b9629b04391f270a.pdf

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1611.02576.pdf
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 10, 2020, 04:26:12 AM
COSMOCHEMISTRY OF COMET ENCKE'S ENCOUNTERS WITH NIBIRU/MERCURY: FLAT EARTH THEORY PREDICTED THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC

(https://www.seti.org/sites/default/files/styles/original/public/2020-04/Panspermia-GSS-4_2020-1365px.jpg?itok=NdzUzAtR)

The lethal wave of influenza in 1918-19... was first detected on the same day in Boston and Bombay. Yet in spreading within the United States it took three weeks to go from Boston to New York. — Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe

https://www.academia.edu/42041228/Comments_on_the_Origin_and_Spread_of_the_2019_Coronavirus

https://www.panspermia.org/panfluenza.htm

https://vixra.org/pdf/2002.0118v1.pdf

https://www.panspermia.org/whatsnew99.htm#20200227

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(03)13440-X/fulltext

https://www.panspermia.org/virusesfromspace2.pdf

On October 11 2019 a meteoritic bolide (probably fragment of a comet) explodes in a brief flash in Nth East China. We think it probable that this bolide contained embedded within it a monoculture of infective nCoV-2019 virus particles that survived in the interior of the incandescent meteor.

Also well documented is that, in the winter of 1918, the disease appeared suddenly in the frozen wastes of Alaska, in villages that had been isolated for several months. Mathematical modelling of epidemics such as the one described invariably involves the ad hoc introduction of many unproven hypotheses—for example, that of the superspreader. In situations where proven infectivity is limited only to close contacts, a super-spreader is someone who can, on occasion, simultaneously infect a large number of susceptible individuals, thus causing the sporadic emergence of new clusters of disease. The recognition of a possible vertical input of external origin is conspicuously missing in such explanations.

With respect to the SARS outbreak, a prima facie case for a possible space incidence can already be made. First, the virus is unexpectedly novel, and appeared without warning in mainland China. A small amount of the culprit virus introduced into the stratosphere could make a first tentative fall out East of the great mountain range of the Himalayas, where the stratosphere is thinnest, followed by sporadic deposits in neighbouring areas. If the virus is only minimally infective, as it seems to be, the subsequent course of its global progress will depend on stratospheric transport and mixing, leading to a fall out continuing seasonally over a few years. Although all reasonable attempts to contain the infective spread of SARS should be continued, we should remain vigilant for the appearance of new foci (unconnected with infective contacts or with China) almost anywhere on the plant. New cases might continue to appear until the stratospheric supply of the causative agent becomes exhausted.

From 2000:

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/life-00d1.html

https://www.spacedaily.com/news/life-00d2.html

Our expectation is that sooner or later a really bad situation, possibly similar to that in 1918/19, will arise. This seems inevitable so long as the Government's advisors continue to prefer medical dogma to taking a closer look at the facts. Which suggest to the point of certainty that what we get from the high atmosphere, be it a virus or a genetic trigger, is significantly more dangerous than anything we may catch from other people.

To take things a step further, the curve of Figure 1 is a plot of sunspot numbers throughout the past century. Sunspot numbers give a measure of high-energy activity at the sun's surface, the peak numbers corresponding with frequent solar flares and the emissions of charged particles that reach the Earth.

Such activity on the sun is known to result in geomagnetic storms, ionospheric disturbances that interfere with radio communications, and most spectacularly the production of bright auroral displays, the latter being caused by the streaming of charged particles from the sun moving along magnetic field lines that connect the sun and the Earth.

Peaks of solar activity will undoubtedly assist in the descent of charged molecular aggregates (including viruses) from the stratosphere to ground level. Thus according to our present point of view serious influenza epidemics would follow such peaks, provided the culprit molecular aggregates were recently dispersed in the stratosphere from cometary meteor streams. With a more or less regular occurrence of such meteor showers the limiting condition may then be seen as the intensity of solar activity, leading naturally to coincidences between the timings of pandemics or major epidemics and sunspot peaks.

(https://www.spacedaily.com/images/sun-flu-chart1.gif)


https://cosmictusk.com/wickramasinghe-predicted-coronavirus-pandemic-in-november-2019/

On November 25th, 2019, Professor Chandra Wickramasinghe made the following stark warning, weeks before the coronavirus emerged.

On the basis of this data, there appears to be a prima facie case for expecting new viral strains to emerge over the coming months and so it would be prudent for Public Health Authorities the world over to be vigilant and prepared for any necessary action. We need hardly to be reminded that the spectre of the 1918 devastating influenza pandemic stares us in the face from across a century.

Chandra Wickramasinghe, Current Science, November 25, 2019


https://cosmictusk.com/wp-content/uploads/CurrentScience2020-copy.pdf

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1079424/

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326160954_Comets_and_Contagion_Evolution_Plague_and_Diseases_From_Space

http://journalofcosmology.com/Panspermia10.html

https://www.longdom.org/open-access/the-role-of-viruses-and-viral-infections-in-the-theory-of-panspermia-2332-2519.1000111.pdf


Comet Encke encounters with Mercury (both heavenly bodies are former satellites of Jupiter)

https://www.space.com/31186-mercury-may-have-meteor-showers.html

https://web.archive.org/web/20091104041757/http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2007/01oct_encke.htm

http://www.sci-news.com/astronomy/science-mercury-seasonal-meteor-showers-02350.html

https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Impact-Vaporization-as-a-Possible-Source-of-Calcium-Killen-Hahn/492b567992ce70529a28172334110740732ce288

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1002/2017JE005304

https://scitechdaily.com/messenger-reveals-possible-source-surge-calcium-mercury-exosphere/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3313725/Mercury-pummeled-meteoroids-Planet-pelted-debris-time-orbit-cross-trail-comet-Encke.html

https://m.facebook.com/bronzeagecollapse/posts/comet-enckethe-swastikaand-the-late-bronze-age-collapsea-narrativepictured-comet/563511577169249/

http://www.astro.uwo.ca/~wiegert/papers/2006Icarus.182.161.pdf

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/2015GL065361

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/mercury-gets-meteoroid-shower-from-comet-encke

https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/04/23/asteroid-flying-past-earth-looks-like-its-wearing-a-coronavirus-face-mask/

https://www.seti.org/sickness-space

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1208/1208.5035.pdf

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7340401/

Etymology of the "typhoid" and "typhus" words (connection to typhon/mercury):

https://www.etymologynerd.com/blog/typhoid-smoke
https://www.etymonline.com/word/typhus
https://www.etymonline.com/word/typhoon?ref=etymonline_crossreference


"Campester, as quoted by Lydus, was certain that should the comet Typhon again meet the earth, a four-day encounter would suffice to destroy the world."

Mercury/Typhon can activate the bosons of the subquark strings (ether) directly: earthquakes (10 on the Richter scale), hurricanes (700-1000 km/hr), and huge fires, at the end of a world age.


Covid-19 (SARS-Cov-2 - Mycobacterium avium) is connected to the 2016 Mercury solar transit/comet Encke periodic encounters in my opinion, as it takes a couple of years for the bacteria to reach the surface of the Earth from the stratosphere. The 2019 Mercury solar transit/comet Encke meteor showers relation to a future pandemic outbreak is yet to be determined.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1726000#msg1726000 (2019 prediction, November)

See also:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2097827#msg2097827

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 12, 2020, 05:21:55 AM
OUMUAMUA INTERSTELLAR PROBE II

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/rQQyqUOeI50/hqdefault.jpg)

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2122759#msg2122759 (part I)

"Astronomers and cosmologists have no issues with the ideas of dark matter and dark energy controlling the Universe, even though they still do not know what these things are made of or how they operate. But aliens – oh no, not that uncontrollable possibility."

Dr. Abraham Loeb
Harvard University

It turns out that the shape of Oumuamua must be discoidal.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1906.03696.pdf

"Here's the problem with 'Oumuamua: It moved like a comet, but didn't have the classic coma, or tail, of a comet, said astrophysicist Darryl Seligman, an author of the solid hydrogen hypothesis, who is starting a postdoctoral fellowship in astrophysics at the University of Chicago.

'Oumuamua was the first object ever seen flying into our solar system and back out again. That's opposed to most solar system objects that turn circles around the sun, never leaving the celestial neighborhood. Its journey and the fact that it was accelerating suggested 'Oumuamua, which is estimated to be about 1,300 to 2,600 feet (400 to 800 meters) long, was a comet. And yet, "there was no 'coma' or outgassing detected coming from the object," Seligman said. Normally, comets come from regions more distant from the sun than asteroids, and ice on their surface turns straight into gas as they approach the sun, leaving behind a trail of gas, or what we see as a beautiful comet tail, Seligman said.

That outgassing changes how the comet moves through space, he said. It's a bit like a very slow rocket engine: The sun strikes the comet, the warmest part of the comet bursts with gas, and that gas flowing away from the comet sends it tumbling faster and faster away from the sun.

In a paper published June 9 in The Astrophysical Journal Letters, Seligman and Yale astrophysicist Gregory Laughlin proposed that the object was a comet made up partly or entirely of molecular hydrogen — lightweight molecules composed of two hydrogen atoms (H2).

H2 gas freezes into a puffy, low-density solid only when it's very cold — minus 434.45 degrees Fahrenheit (minus 259.14 degrees Celsius, or just 14.01 degrees above absolute zero) in Earth's atmosphere. Researchers had already proposed the existence of "hydrogen icebergs" out in the very cold reaches of space, Laughlin and Seligman wrote in the study. And outgassing hydrogen wouldn't be visible from Earth — meaning it wouldn't leave behind a visible comet tail.

The numbers worked out neatly; while a few other substances (like solid neon) could potentially explain the coma-free acceleration, hydrogen was the best match for the data.

Now, in a new paper published Monday (Aug. 17) in The Astrophysical Journal Letters, Loeb and Thiem Hoang, an astrophysicist at the Korea Astronomy and Space Science Institute, argue that the hydrogen hypothesis couldn't work in the real world — which would mean that there is still hope that our neck of space was once visited by advanced aliens — and that we actually spotted their presence at the time.

But in their new paper, Hoang and Loeb respond to this idea and argue that the hydrogen iceberg explanation has a basic problem: Comets form when icy grains of dust bump into each other in space and form clumps, and then those clumps attract more dust and other clumps. And comets are like snowmen: they survive only as long as they don't melt.

The stickiness that helps form comets is similar to the stickiness of ice cubes coming straight out of a cold freezer. Leave an ice cube on the counter for a minute or two, let its surface warm up a bit, and it won't feel sticky anymore. A thin film of liquid water on its surface makes it slippery.

Hoang and Loeb argued that even starlight in the coldest parts of space would warm up small chunks of solid hydrogen before they could clump together and form a comet of 'Oumuamua's large scale. And more importantly, the trek from the nearest "giant molecular cloud" — a dusty, gassy region of space where hydrogen icebergs are thought to form — is far too long. A hydrogen iceberg travelling hundreds of millions of years through interstellar space would have fallen apart, cooked by starlight.

Seligman said that Loeb's analysis was correct that no hydrogen comet would survive such a long trip."Hydrogen icebergs don't live that long in the galaxy.," he said. "And you definitely don't have time to get all the way from [the nearest] giant molecular cloud."

The theory only works if 'Oumuamua is just 40 million years old, he said. Over that time frame, outgassing could have molded the comet's oblong shape without destroying it entirely."

""Shortening the distance that that H2 iceberg needs to travel does not solve the problems we outline in our paper, because the H2 iceberg would have formed when its parent planetary system formed, billions of years ago,” and in those eons, the iceberg would have evaporated, he told Live Science in an email.

Loeb also said that hydrogen icebergs are expected to come from giant molecular clouds, not parts of space like Carina or Columba. And he reiterated that no hydrogen iceberg could survive the trek from the nearest giant molecular cloud.

Asked if there is a clear leading candidate explanation for 'Oumuamua's acceleration, Loeb referred Live Science to a not-yet-released book he authored called "Extraterrestrial: The First Sign of Intelligent Life Beyond Earth," due for publication in January."

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/2041-8213/abab0c/pdf


"Using observations from NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope and ground-based observatories, an international team of scientists have confirmed Oumuamua, the first known interstellar object to travel through our solar system, got an unexpected boost in speed and shift in trajectory as it passed through the inner solar system last year.

“Our high-precision measurements of ′Oumuamua’s position revealed that there was something affecting its motion other than the gravitational forces of the Sun and planets," said Marco Micheli of ESA’s (European Space Agency) Space Situational Awareness Near-Earth Object Coordination Centre in Frascati, Italy, and lead author of a paper describing the team's findings."

However, the space object Oumuamua cannot be a comet (see part I).

And F. Whipple's outgassing theory (jets of gaseous material expelled from its surface), put forth for comet Encke, was published in order for mainstream astrophysics to save face: Encke had found that the comet’s orbital period was decreasing by about 2.5 hours every revolution and had showed that this behaviour could not be explained by gravitational perturbations (slight changes in an orbit) caused by the planets.

F. Whipple chose to disregard the clear data which proved that Encke is an electric comet.

Professor W. Stanley Jevons wrote in Nature, December 28, 1871:

“The observed regular diminution of period of Encke’s comet is still, I believe, an unexplained phenomenon for which it is necessary to invent a special hypothesis, a Deus ex machina, in the shape of an imaginary resisting medium... It is asserted by Mr. R. A. Proctor, Prof. Osborne Reynolds, and possibly others, that comets owe many of their peculiar phenomena to electric action... I merely point out that if the approach of a comet to the sun causes the development of electricity arising from the comet’s motion, a certain resistance is at once accounted for.”

Cometary charging

“It is possible, however, that there are also other, just as natural, ways of looking at the matter. It might be imagined that after great heating by direct insolation, the comet is charged negatively by cathode-rays from the sun, and that the charging reaches so high a potential that the comet discharges itself electrically, so to speak in the direction of its own shadow. These discharges may also be imagined to be due to some extent to an emission of secondary rays from the cosmic dust of the comet. I have been led to this thought by experimental analogies which will be described farther on. Answering to the idea that a comet is an accumulation of carbonaceous cosmic dust almost without atmosphere, I have carried out experiments in which the cathode in a vacuum-tube consisted of a carbonaceous material. The most recent investigations of the comet-spectrum seem to indicate that the radiation from a cornet may be compared to that from a cathode in a Crookes ‘ tube (DESLANDRES, FOWLER).”
[..]

“It would be natural, therefore, to compare the above-mentioned layers that were favorable to the development of comet ‘s tails with the pencils of the strongest and magnetically stiffest corpuscle-rays which we imagine to emanate from the region surrounding the sun-spots, and which, when they sweep past our earth, produce powerful magnetic disturbances. It may be that it is these very rays, with their abundance of energy, that can charge the comet mass to a high negative tension, and thus occasion the secondary electric discharge from the comet into space.
“One circumstance that speaks strongly in favour of a hypothesis such as this, is the greater development thought to have been found in years of sun-spot maxima than in years of sun-spot minima. This has been demonstrated, for instance, in Encke ‘s comet, by BERBERICH and BOSLER, the latter having given an exceedingly interesting graphic representation of this condition, which is reproduced here. The agreement, as will be seen, is so striking that it seems to leave little room for doubt that we here have phenomena that must be intimately connected with one another.”

(https://i.ibb.co/nnkqYnW/encke.jpg)

Birkeland’s Fig. 230. Top curve, dotted: Comet brightness Bottom curve, solid: Number of sunspots. Original chart by M. J. Bosler (1909)

M. J. Bosler, “Sur les variations d’éclat de la comète d’Encke et la période des taches solaires” FULL TEXT (1909) Comptes rendus hebdomadaires des séances de l’Académie des sciences, 1909 (T. 148). Chart: page 1740

https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k3102f/f1740.table
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 19, 2020, 12:17:17 PM
COSMOCHEMISTRY OF COMET ENCKE II: SARS-COV-3

(https://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/78/590x/coronavirus-meteor-1240664.jpg?r=1581455220038)

SARS-Cov-2 in 1915-1917:

https://academic.oup.com/jtm/advance-article/doi/10.1093/jtm/taaa206/5955501


https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(11)70151-7/fulltext

A new analysis of influenza outbreak patterns in several navies in 1918 suggests that the first and second waves of the pandemic were caused by "antigenically distinct" viruses, a conclusion that runs counter to some other recent studies.

The two waves of infection were probably caused by antigenically distinct influenza viruses—not by one virus that suddenly increased in pathogenicity between the first and second waves, says the report by G. Dennis Shanks, MD, of the Australian Army Malaria Institute, and colleagues.

"The three waves of infection are often assumed to share the same viral cause; however, little objective evidence supports this notion," the report says.

The researchers offer a different scenario. They say previous research suggests that three lines of reassortant H1N1 viruses were circulating in 1918 and were the forerunners, respectively, of all seasonal H1N1, pandemic H1N1, and typical swine flu strains since that time.

In commenting on the Lancet study, Jeffery Taubenberger, MD, PhD, senior author of the autopsy study, said in an e-mail, "The 1918 pandemic virus was clearly circulating as early as May, since we found autopsy evidence of fatal infections, and the clinical course and pathology of those cases was no different from the later fall outbreak." Taubenberger is chief of the Viral Pathogenesis and Evolution Section in the infectious diseases lab at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3310443/

The sharp contrast in the clinical expressions of infections during the first and second waves suggests that they were caused by different influenza virus strains.


The third wave pandemic was just as strong as the second wave, but the end of the war in November 1918 removed the conditions that allowed the disease to spread so far and so quickly.  Historians now believe that the fatal severity of the Spanish flu’s “second wave” was caused by a mutated virus spread by wartime troop movements.
Somewhere in Europe, a mutated strain of the Spanish flu virus had emerged.


http://journalofcosmology.com/Panspermia10.html

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1079424/

https://medium.com/@john.macy/covid-19-the-jupiter-connection-and-pandemic-management-2826b208b4c


https://web.archive.org/web/20140808042959/http://black-death-revisited.org/#

The zoologist Graham Twigg, in his book The Black Death: A Biological Reappraisal (1984), argued that plague as we know it simply can’t spread as fast as the Black Death. He proposed lung-borne anthrax as the agent of the Black Death, overlooking the fact that anthrax isn’t a lung-borne disease.

Vladimir Motin, a Russian plague expert now working at the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston, agrees that the marmot-derived strains from Central Asia are more powerful and dangerous than plague strains found elsewhere in the world.

White horse - mycobacterium avium
Red horse - civil war (usa/europe)
Black horse - second reset
Green horse - bacillus anthracis

Sequences from SARS-CoV, called SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV-3, were studied as early as 2008:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2395109/

Segments from SARS-Cov-1 found in SARS-Cov-2:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7376845/

Covid-19 was going to happen anyway, as the end of a world age approaches.

(https://i.ibb.co/GJW9tkw/typ.jpg)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 20, 2020, 07:22:26 AM
NEW RADICAL CHRONOLOGY OF COVID-19

(https://i.ibb.co/6ZtscvF/rn1.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/nPw52Pk/rn2.jpg)

K. Kuckens, The Children of Amarna

In the early stages of investigation the demography of Amarna was compared to populations that were affected by various epidemics: small pox, influenza of 1918, and the Bubonic Plague. The demographic profiles of Amarna and those affected by epidemics matched up almost exactly.

Plague at Penrith, possible cause anthrax:

http://www.northcravenheritage.org.uk/NCHT/RoyPriceArchive/PARISHREGISTERSandDATA/Tudorbirthsetc/penrith.pdf

Anthrax delivery of proteins research:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC164502/

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X05004007

https://www.jimmunol.org/content/176/3/1776.full


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342946839_Beyond_Amarna_The_Hand_of_Nergal_and_the_Plague_in_the_Levant_Ugarit_Forschungen_48_2017_223-247 (plagues brought by Nergal over the Middle East, both an epidemic and a pestilence)

Mercury is Apollo as a morning star, Hermes as an evening star.

The cosmic cataclysms involving Nibiru, Mars occurred exactly in the same period of time (some 260 years ago), and were not separated by hundreds of years, as had been described by Velikovsky. The Penrith plagues belong to the same period of time, and not some 150 years earlier.

(https://i.ibb.co/7z9V0Jz/pla.jpg)


The reason why trial subjects injected with coronavirus vaccines suddenly test positive for HIV is because, among other reasons (to ensure the stability of spike proteins), HIV is also a passenger virus.

"Duesberg, who did much of the original work on the ultra-structure of HIV was predicting this outcome right from the get go, as he felt that HIV was just a passenger virus."

Dr. Peter Duesberg, retrovirologist, UC Berkeley (in 1985 was awarded a prestigious Outstanding Investigator Grant by the NCI)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 21, 2020, 02:44:38 AM
SOUND WAVES HAVE NEGATIVE MASS

(https://www.insidescience.org/sites/default/files/2020-06/Drums_topNteaser.jpg)

https://physicsworld.com/a/calculations-provide-insight-into-why-sound-waves-carry-negative-mass/

They found that the phonons moved in upward trajectories, against gravity. Contrary to classical models of sound waves, this implied that the phonons were coupled to gravity, allowing them to carry minuscule amounts of “negative effective gravitational mass” as they travelled.

A phonon is a photon travelling through ether.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2176191-sound-waves-are-a-form-of-antigravity-because-they-have-negative-mass/

Angelo Esposito at Columbia University in New York and his colleagues calculated the relationship between sound and gravity, taking into account complicated particle interactions that had previously been ignored. They found that, although the effect is small, sound waves should have negative gravitational mass.

Oddly, the findings also suggest the pull is in the opposite direction of the gravitational pull generated by normal matter, meaning sound waves might fall up instead of down in Earth's gravitational field.

These findings not only suggest that sound has gravitational mass, but that such mass is negative. All known matter has positive gravitational mass, and such masses attract each other. However, positive gravitational mass repels negative gravitational mass instead of attracting it.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1807.08771.pdf


https://physicsworld.com/a/phonons-tunnel-across-the-vacuum/

“Phonon tunnelling” in which quantized molecular vibrations, called phonons, appear to traverse the forbidden zone.


http://ivanik3.narod.ru/Acustica/FononVacum/e166101Altfeder.pdf

Vacuum Phonon Tunneling


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1003.1408.pdf

Acoustic Phonon Tunneling and Heat Transport due to Evanescent Electric Fields


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2193463#msg2193463

Tesla sound waves in vacuum, 1896


https://teslaresearch.jimdofree.com/articles-interviews/tesla-sees-evidence-radio-and-light-are-sound-new-york-times-april-8-1934/


Sound waves travel longitudinally through ether currents. In air they will also cause ripples in the sea of ether, which in turn will displace air molecules. Since sound waves have negative mass, they can only be transmitted by laevorotatory subquarks/left-handed gravitons (antigravitons).


Oxygen and vitality globules:

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr05.htm
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on December 24, 2020, 01:22:40 AM
JACK AND THE BEANSTALK

(https://secretenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/greenland-stump.jpg)
(https://secretenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/venezuela-stump.jpg)
(https://secretenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/stump-tree-blog-3.jpg)
(https://secretenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/stump-blog-4.jpg)
(https://secretenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/stump-blog-5.jpg)

Jack and the Beanstalk is not a fairy tale. It really happened. There were giant trees whose height reached for more than six miles, all the way to the first dome.

https://secretenergy.com/are-these-giant-prehistoric-trees/

https://eden-saga.com/en/gigantic-trees.html

There are other instances where huge areas of the surface of the Earth were leveled precisely.

(https://blaschke.us/html/MonteAlban/MonteAlbanAerial.jpg)

https://www.ancient-code.com/the-mysterious-flattened-mountaintop-of-monte-alban-and-its-ancient-pyramid-city/

Monte Alban is a mountain where its top seems to have been literally cut off and leveled, to make an extremely flat tabletop mountain.
What sort of technology was used? Its builders managed somehow to flatten an area the size of more than 50 football fields, resulting in a massive plateau, eerily similar to the one found in Giza, Egypt.
Like Machu Picchu in Peru, the locals leveled an entire mountaintop to build this complex, without the use of the wheel, iron tools or pack animals.


The question that no one seems to be asking is what kind of technology was used to cut the giant trees as well as to level a whole mountain top. There is only one answer: ball lightning technology (activation of the first state of ether in objects).


The Beatles series continues:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1276587#msg1276587 (Surfs Up from the Smile album, and much more)


-------------------------------------------------------------

https://kachina2012.wordpress.com/2009/02/11/ka-and-chirality-and-chiram-abiff/ (comments: Geomagnetic
Polarity Reversal: A Theoretical Modus Operandi of
Punctuated Equilibrium Evolution

By Jay A. Yoder)
DNA mutation geomagnetic pole reversal

Discontinuities in the fossil record provide the basis
for the evolutionary theory of punctuated-equilibrium
proposed by Eldredge and Gould (1972). Their theory
suggests that the production of new species (as evidence
of evolution) occurs by rapid bursts that are delineated
by long periods (50,000 – 100,000 years in most cases) of
stasis where no apparent changes take place. This
contemporary theory of evolution, however, has not gained
widespread acceptance and remains highly controversial
(Futuyma 1986; Sober 1995). Clearly, to produce a
significant evolutionary burst of this magnitude would
require a most striking event leading to an abrupt change
in gene frequency. Of the forces that are touted to alter
gene frequency and drive evolution (inverse of Hardy-
Weinberg Law assumptions; Griffiths 1996), none appear
capable of generating such a dramatic alteration so
quickly. Though genetic drift has been invoked to explain
this anomaly, its impact, too, has been challenged
(Futuyma 1986; Sober 1995). How evolution becomes
‘punctuated’ is puzzling.

One possibility could involve magnetic (polarity)
reversal, a relatively rapid change in the polarity of
Earth’s geomagnetic field where the North Pole becomes
the south magnetic pole and vice versa (Jacobs 1984).
This theoretical force of evolution operates on Ecke et
al.’s (1995) newly-discovered relationship between chiral
symmetry ( handedness) and the orientation of the
magnetic field; spiral defect patterns displaying
distinct handedness form observed in a chaotic flow of
carbon dioxide in a Rayleigh-Benard convection broke
symmetry when the rotation about the vertical axis
(spiral analog of the magnetic field) was reversed. These
investigators concluded that the winding direction of a
spiral was analogous to a magnetic spin. That is, a
right-handed magnetic spin generates a clockwise spiral
and a left-handed magnetic spin reverses the spiral
counterclockwise.

With regard to DNA, a change in the orientation of the
magnetic field would therefore translate into a left-
handed (counterclockwise spiral) to right-hand (clockwise
spiral) switch (Z-DNA to B-DNA that can now be
transcribed) or the reverse (B-DNA to Z-DNA whose role
may be involved with regulating expression of certain
genes or in genetic recombination) (Lodish et al. 1995;
Griffiths 1996). Such changes in handedness of DNA would
lead to gene activation or deactivation (Lodish et al.
1995), differential gene expression, and a change in gene
frequency that drives evolution. Most strikingly, as is
well known to geologists, reversals in the orientation of
the Earth’s magnetic field occur every 10,000 – 100,000
years (Jacobs 1984) and thus, the pronounced bursts of
speciation associated with punctuated-equilibrium
evolution are reflected by abrupt changes in gene
frequency as a result thereof.

My theory operates on the following premises:

1.) The DNA double-helix exists in both right-handed,
clockwise spiral (B-DNA) and left-handed,
counterclockwise spiral (Z-DNA, though only in short
tracts) forms in prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells (Lodish
et al. 1995; Griffiths 1996);

2.) Only B-DNA is transcribed, whereas Z-DNA is not
(Lodish et al. 1995; Griffiths 1996);

3.) A change in magnetic field orientation affects
chirality or handedness; the winding direction of a
spiral is analogous to a magnetic spin (Ecke et al.
1995);

4.) Geomagnetic polarity reversals involve changes in the
polarity of the Earth’s magnetic field, where the North
Pole becomes the south magnetic pole and vice versa
(Jacobs 1984);

5.) Geomagnetic polarity reversals occur relatively
rapidly (Jacobs 1984);

6.) A polarity reversal occurs every 10,000 – 100,000
years (Jacobs 1984);

and on the following assumptions:

1.) A switch in the handedness of DNA (Z to B or the
reverse) is responsible for the differential gene
expression and hence, changes in gene frequency (Hardy-
Weinberg equilibrium is violated; evolution = 0) (Lodish
et al. 1995; Griffiths 1996). Short Z-DNA tracts may play
a role in the regulation of the expression of certain
genes or in genetic recombination (Lodish et al. 1995;
Griffiths 1996).

2.) The direction of winding (handedness) of DNA is
influenced by the orientation of the magnetic field, an
assumption taken from Ecke et al.’s (1995) observations.
Thus, an inversion of B-polarity causes a change in the
winding direction.

3.) Certain sequences of DNA are more labile
(‘electromagnetically vulnerable’, thus more prone to
reversal of spin) than others with regard to magnetism,
otherwise, a magnetic reversal as described would lead to
more dramatic changes in simply activating or
deactivating genes. Massive species extinction may be
expected if net Z-DNA switched to B-DNA, because the
‘blue print’ has been completely altered, not just
modified. Thus, the entire genome does not reverse spin;
a change from B-DNA to intranscribable Z-form would be
lethal to all organisms.

In accordance with this theory, variations in timing
between ‘punctuated’ peaks of speciation can be accounted
for by such natural phenomena as (Jacobs 1984; Butler
1992):

1.) Short periods of constant geometric polarity, usually
10,000 years (polarity epochs = polarity interval; the
time interval is called a magnetic epoch).

Taken together, these considerations imply that the
bursts of speciation associated with punctuated-
equilibrium evolution derive from a simple handedness-
switch from B-DNA to Z-DNA, or B to Z, in response to a
relatively rapid reversal in the orientation in Earth’s
magnetic field. For the first time, this reveals that
Earth’s magnetic field is an important natural force of
evolution.

Additionaly Considerations

Single-stranded DNA possessed by certain viruses,
prokaryotes and protists is anticipated to react to
magnetism in a like manner, because their DNA is probably
twisted in some way due to the presence of chiral centers
in nucleotides. Evolution would be expected to proceed
slowly in organisms living in certain geographic
‘islands’ that are unaffected by shifts in magnetic
field. Reversals in magnetic polarity as described may be
more likely to produce a genesis instead of evolution;
changing the ‘handedness’ of an organism’s DNA may be
expected to be completely intranscribable in many
species, and, thereby yield many ‘new’ species. The
fossil record would thus show many of the extinct species
shortly after the magnetic reversal. Reversal times may
correlate directly with bursts of speciation;
alternatively, they may be out of sync.

As a final comment, proof that the magnetic field exerts
an impact on gene expression has recently been
demonstrated Rao and Henderson (1996) reported
electromagnetic field sensitivity on regulation of the
c-fos gene that encodes the Fos protein, an important
nuclear transcription factor. Thus, there is a link
between magnetic field and gene expression.

Author’s note – The purpose of this article is to foster
discussion, with the hope that it will lead to new
research in this particular area.

Literature Cited

Butler RF. 1992. Paleomagnetism. Oxford; Blackwell
Scientific Publications.
Ecke RE, Hu Y, Mainieri R, and Ahlers G. 1995. Excitation
of spirals and chiral symmetry breaking in Rayleigh
Benard Convection. Science 269:1704-1707.
Eldredge N, and Gould SJ. 1972. Punctuated equilibria: an
alternative to phyletic gradualism. In TJM. Schopf (Ed.),
Models in paleobiology San Francisco; Freeman, Cooper and
Company pp. 82-115.
Futuyma DJ. 1986. Evolutionary Biology. Sunderland;
Sinaur.
Griffiths AJF, Miller JH, Suzuki DT, Lewontin RC, and
Gelbart WM. 1996. An introduction to Genetic Analysis.
New York; WH. Freeman.
Jacobs JA. 1994. Reversals of the Earth’s Magnetic Field.
Bristol; Adam Hilger.
Lodish H, Baltimore D, Berk A, Zipursky SL, Matsudaira P,
and Darnell J. 1995. Molecular Cell Biology. New York;
WH. Freeman.
Rao S, and Henderson AS. Regulation of c-fos is affected
by electromagnetic fields. Journal of Cellular
Biochemistry. 1996. 63:358-365.
Sober E. Conceptual Issues in Evolutionary Biology. 1995.
Cambridge; The MIT Press.

Here is a summary I found online…

First, the Earth’s magnetic field may influence the
dominant ‘handedness’ (or chirality) of DNA (basically
which direction it spirals). B-DNA (right-handed DNA) is
transcribed, while Z-DNA (left handed) is mostly unstable
and it may be used for other processes. If a magnetic
reversal were to occur, this might cause transcription of
B-DNA to cease and Z-DNA transcription to take over (at
least for certain electromagnetically sensitive genes).
Thus, under such a scenario, biological creatures would
undergo rapid mutations (or extinctions depending on the
size and scope of the genetic changes). This is
ultimately what the author believes causes the observed
punctuated equilibrium in the fossil record.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 13, 2021, 09:42:17 AM
NANOPARTICLES, HeLa CELL LINES, BROWNIAN MOTION ENTANGLEMENT

(https://i.ibb.co/f4BNXwZ/131853802-1987851354701673-4784391074294685749-o.jpg)

HeLa cell lines were first studied by Dr. Kurt Blome, in Germany, in the 1930s, using neutron radiation and dextrorotatory subquark waves. His experiments were the inspiration for Wilhelm Reich's T-Bacilli and Oranur studies. What Dr. Kurt Blome did is to connect/link the radium super charged tissues (explosion of microscopic mitosis) to the dextrorotatory subquarks waves (terrestrial gravity), the most advanced study of its kind. The uncontrollable mitosis explosion soon contaminated all of the laboratories, all over the world. These cell lines are used for all vaccine production.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3597572/

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.10.15.341537v1.full.pdf

https://www.news-medical.net/news/20201019/Design-of-an-mRNA-SARS-CoV-2-vaccine-encapsulated-in-lipid-nanoparticles.aspx

https://www.mdpi.com/2076-393X/8/1/123/htm


HeLa cell lines brownian motion:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/249997455_Intracellular_viscoelasticity_of_HeLa_cells_during_cell_division_studied_by_video_particle-tracking_microrheology

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006349514008947


http://www.ptep-online.com/2006/PP-04-07.PDF

On Nonlinear Quantum Mechanics, Brownian Motion, Weyl Geometry
and Fisher Information


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1707.08508.pdf

Hydrodynamics of Superfluid Quantum Space:
de Broglie interpretation of the quantum mechanics


https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370269318308517

Bohm's potential, classical/quantum duality and repulsive gravity


Brownian entanglement

https://cds.cern.ch/record/811651/files/0412132.pdf

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41534-020-0243-y


--------------------------------------------------------------

(https://scontent.fotp1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/207000397_3503357629767522_1724558921906754421_n.jpg?_nc_cat=101&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=r6W0nB_7OfEAX9FojOc&tn=hAyR_Jqhv9SuhrZN&_nc_ht=scontent.fotp1-2.fna&oh=0b9606870c753ef63e801d7513185dd3&oe=6146A3B6)

https://www.evolutionaryleaps.com/2012/01/magnetic-reversal-could-trigger-evolution-says-expert/

This theoretical force of evolution operates on Ecke et
al.’s newly-discovered relationship between chiral
symmetry ( handedness) and the orientation of the
magnetic field.

With regard to DNA, a change in the orientation of the
magnetic field would therefore translate into a left-
handed (counterclockwise spiral) to right-hand (clockwise
spiral) switch (Z-DNA to B-DNA that can now be
transcribed) or the reverse (B-DNA to Z-DNA whose role
may be involved with regulating expression of certain
genes or in genetic recombination).

Such changes in handedness of DNA would lead to gene
activation or deactivation… differential gene expression,
and a change in gene frequency that drives evolution.


https://kachina2012.wordpress.com/2009/02/11/ka-and-chirality-and-chiram-abiff/ (comments: Geomagnetic Polarity Reversal: A Theoretical Modus Operandi of
Punctuated Equilibrium Evolution
By Jay A. Yoder)

DNA mutation geomagnetic pole reversal

Z-RNA:

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-05-z-rna-nanoswitch-encoded-junk-dna.html

https://www.princeton.edu/news/2018/07/23/imaging-living-cells-reveals-how-junk-dna-switches-gene

https://scx1.b-cdn.net/csz/news/800a/2021/a-z-rna-nanoswitch-enc.jpg

https://phys.org/news/2020-03-left-mechanism-triggering-cell-death.html

It is believed by one researcher that DNA is itself an
electromagnetic generator with RNA as an amplifier, the
cell wall a noise filter and amino acids and enzymes as
effectors of signals

Biological and Clinical Effects of Low-Frequency Magnetic
and Electric Fields, by J. G. Llaurado

(https://i.ibb.co/TmpgBbp/zrn.jpg)
https://i.ibb.co/TmpgBbp/zrn.jpg (A change in conformation might act as a switch to trigger protein production in the cell.)

At the moment of the reversal of the magnetic poles, the mutant proteins coded by pseudouridine will be affected as well.

Bibliography:

http://www.goldenmean.info/superDNA/DNAlearn2.gif
http://www.goldenmean.info/decode/index.html prion
http://www.goldenmean.info/circularDNA/
https://web.archive.org/web/20070202221622/http://www.notahelix.com/
https://web.archive.org/web/20030613064915/http://notahelix.com/
https://web.archive.org/web/20051124033443/http://www.notahelix.com/
https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_genoma04.htm dna info
https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/archivos_pdf/revealing-world-rna-interference.pdf
https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/archivos_pdf/rna-guided-genetic-silencing-systems.pdf
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/May-Khanna/publication/12543774/figure/fig4/AS:324958560505860@1454487566389/The-structure-of-pseudouridine-is-shown-Secondary-structure-representations-of-the.png
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/12543774_Unique_structural_and_stabilizing_roles_for_the_individual_pseudouridine_residues_in_the_1920_region_of_Escherichia_coli_23S_rRNA super super
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/293682967_Post-transcriptional_nucleotide_modification_and_alternative_folding_of_RNA
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339485154_N_1-Methylpseudouridine_substitution_enhances_the_performance_of_synthetic_mRNA_switches_in_cells
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279299679_An_Atlas_of_RNA_Base_Pairs_Involving_Modified_Nucleobases_with_Optimal_Geometries_and_Accurate_Energies super super
It is interesting that, when focusing on the H-bonded
bases, the Y modification seems rather to have a
destabilizing than a stabilizing effect.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5435857/
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259474270_Structure_modulation_of_helix_69_from_Escherichia_coli_23S_ribosomal_RNA_by_pseudouridylations super super
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/John-Santalucia-2/publication/259474270/figure/fig9/AS:669637427593222@1536665412429/Local-conformations-of-structural-motifs-involved-in-E-modifications-in-NMR-structures.png
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.06.189969v1.full super
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC148599/
super super
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3269404/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5393172/
super super
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC148599/pdf/273543.pdf super super
https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_genoma03.htm super super
It is believed by one researcher that DNA is itself an
electromagnetic generator with RNA as an amplifier, the
cell wall a noise filter and amino acids and enzymes as
effectors of signals
Biological and Clinical Effects of Low-Frequency Magnetic
and Electric Fields, by J. G. Llaurado
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5507981/
DNA has evolved in a four dimensional space-time
continuum which is influenced,curved and distorted by
gravity.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0305736400912605
A change in conformation might act as a switch to trigger
protein production in the cell.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7526978/ z-
rna
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7886975/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31668857/
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2019-07/i-adg071419.php
https://researchoutreach.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Alan-Herbert.pdf
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7333576/
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0071081
Stretching DNA with Optical Tweezers, Wang
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0079610721000614?via%3Dihub
DNA phase shift mutations
RNA controls protein production in living cells.
http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/occult.pdf 312
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1703.02129.pdf dna wave
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1306.1308.pdf matter waves sagnac
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0031-8949/91/6/063007/pdf matter-wave interferometry
http://www.afscet.asso.fr/resSystemica/Paris05/mirita.pdf
https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/bioe.2020.0017
brownian dna e/m
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-20134-y dna
distortion
https://www.osapublishing.org/oe/fulltext.cfm?uri=oe-25-12-13305&id=367251 dna sagnac
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32589459/ sars adar
https://www.pnas.org/content/116/39/19727 prion
misfolding rna alterations
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4132711/ G-quadruplexes
prion
https://www.jbc.org/article/S0021-9258(20)39687-
3/fulltext prion misfolding
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7314185/
sars-cov-2 G quadruplexes
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jpclett.0c01097
sars-cov-2 G quadruplexes
https://www.mdpi.com/1420-3049/18/8/9451/htm prion
misfolding alpha beta
http://www.rowland.harvard.edu/rjf/sato/News.html
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4937326/
conformational stress in the RNA backbone  PseudoUridine
synthase Z-like step repeat  single weak van der Waals
contact
Z-RNA G-quadruplexes pseudouridine synthase
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acschembio.0c00260
https://academic.oup.com/nar/article/32/4/1422/1038444
Pseudouridine 55 synthase the molecular basis of the
conformational change super super super
https://www.pnas.org/content/101/22/8342.full prion beta
helix super super
https://www.jbc.org/article/S0021-9258(19)48156-8/fulltext ^
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006291X17301274 ^
https://www.cell.com/fulltext/S0092-8674(00)80232-9 ^
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/851493v1.full.pdf
^ super
https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/5853117/file/5853161.pdf
pseudouridine prion misfolding acidic environment
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4030982/rna2 jpg
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/268/5212/789.1
https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0111/0111093.pdf
Medical science has established that we have 2 strands of
DNA and 10 strands of 'junk' DNA.
https://www.oatext.com/A-quantum-theory-of-disease-including-cancer-and-aging.php super
https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_genoma109.htm
https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_genoma08.htm
https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/archivos_pdf/eukaryotic_noncodingDNA.pdf
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/08/180821111935.htm dna rna reversal
In humans, loss of pseudouridine synthase activity causes
dyskeratosis congenita (DC), a complex systemic disorder
characterized by cancer susceptibility, failures in
ribosome biogenesis and telomere stability, and defects
in stem cell formation.
https://febs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1742-4658.2010.07731.x
https://www.jbc.org/article/S0021-9258(18) pyrimidine
https://www.evolutionaryleaps.com/2012/01/magnetic-reversal-could-trigger-evolution-says-expert/
This theoretical force of evolution operates on Ecke et
al.’s newly-discovered relationship between chiral
symmetry ( handedness) and the orientation of the
magnetic field.
With regard to DNA, a change in the orientation of the
magnetic field would therefore translate into a left-
handed (counterclockwise spiral) to right-hand (clockwise
spiral) switch (Z-DNA to B-DNA that can now be
transcribed) or the reverse (B-DNA to Z-DNA whose role
may be involved with regulating expression of certain
genes or in genetic recombination).
Such changes in handedness of DNA would lead to gene
activation or deactivation… differential gene expression,
and a change in gene frequency that drives evolution.
https://web.archive.org/web/20120925033304/www.urzeit-
code.com/index.php?id=23
https://www.jstor.org/stable/4608441

(continued in the previous message)
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 13, 2021, 10:38:16 AM
GREATER FLAT EARTH

(https://stolenhistory.net/attachments/hyp-jpg.4061/)

Australia as part of Antarctica, North American continent as part of Asia. However, we also have this, the global Piri Reis map.

(https://stolenhistory.net/attachments/450px-sandokhan_map-png.4062/)

https://exhibits.stanford.edu/ruderman/catalog/dt157dk0184

https://i.ibb.co/BrvQf3L/clf3.jpg

https://i.ibb.co/2SR9bsr/clf.jpg

https://i.ibb.co/qCkczjp/cfl2.jpg

Radius of FE: 6363.63 km
Radius to the other territories: 12727.27 km

-------------------------------------------------

What instrument was used for land surveying (plane/geodetic) in the 18th century (official chronology of history) and during the 19th century? Exactly, the theodolite (with a reflector). In the official chronology, Cassini and Picard assumed that the Earth is a sphere (or an ellipsoid) and proceeded with the triangulation nonetheless, without having any proof of any actual curvature of the surface. What if the triangulation method used in the 18th century (official chronology of history) and the 19th century surveying methods/geodesy is wrong? What if the spherical trigonometrical methods incorporated a curvature of the Earth which did not exist in reality?

http://web.pdx.edu/~i1kc/courses/Surveying/Handouts/JGE%20Paper%201%20-%20Introduction.pdf (pg 14, curvature and refraction)

But here is something no one else has ever thought of: since there will always be some misalignment between the source and the reflector, the strings of light used by the theodolite will be subject to the influence of the Coriolis effect. That is, the path of the light strings will be deflected. This fact is not taken into consideration by land surveyors at all. Of course this effect will not be as large as that ascribed to curvature/refraction, but still it is present.

https://civilengineering-softstudies.com/2018/04/error-and-correction-for-the-curvature-of-the-earth-and-refraction-surveying.html

-------------------------------------------------

The two leading "mRNA" vaccines are cmRNA vaccines, and not mRNA vaccines.

Definition of cmRNA:

"cmRNA is mRNA that has been modified through the substitution of chemically modified bases for normal bases, such as pseudouridine for uridine."

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/mrs-advances/article/inhibition-of-bmp9-induced-bone-formation-by-salicylicacid-polymer-capping/A00A53BFC882032EBAFB859D995E4F2A/share/d9c2d7b18795cd0d4808c70566268f953409e1e8

https://stemcellsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/sctm.18-0259

The genetic code for Pfi/Mod has PSEUDOURIDINE (cmRNA) instead of URACIL (mRNA), therefore the resultant proteins will be mutant. AZ has a manufacturing error which will also produce mutant proteins.

The spike proteins will act as an amplifier/antenna for the signals sent by the bacteria (spike proteins = liquid crystals = magnetogenetics). The HeLa cells (AZ/J&J/Sputnik/Sinovac) will also act as amplifiers/antennas.

1913 Nobel Lecture, Charles Richet: theory of anaphylactic shock. Once a foreign protein (antigen) is introduced directly in the blood, the pacient becomes anaphylactized. That is, a second minute dose of the same antigen will unleash the anaphylactic shock.

https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/1913/richet/lecture/

"We are so constituted that we can never receive other
proteins into the blood than those that have been modified
by digestive juices. Every time alien protein penetrates
by effraction, the organism suffers and becomes resistant.
This resistance lies in increased sensitivity, a sort of
revolt against the second parenteral injection which would
be fatal. At the first injection, the organism was taken
by surprise and did not resist. At the second injection,
the organism mans its defences and answers by the
anaphylactic shock."

Sars-Cov-2 = M. avium (Wuhan variant)

Sars-Cov-3 = M. influenzae (Haemophillus influenzae) (Epsilon NA, lambda SA, eta Eur/ME, mu/nu AS)

Sars-Cov-1 = M. avium, however, in much less quantities than those which were present in the atmosphere in the fall of 2019 (cometary dust, comet Encke, Mercury solar transit 2016, it takes some 2-3 years for the mycobacterium to reach the surface)

Sars-Cov-3 is caused by the cometary dust of comet Encke coupled with the 2019 Mercury solar transit

In the past, at least one other powerful pathogenic agent rained down from the atmosphere, at the end of a world age (B. anthracis)

"Every year from September-November, there can be observed a broad stream of debris left by Comet Encke. The Southern Taurids are active from about September 10 to November 20, while the Northern Taurids are active from about October 20 to December 10. In 2021, the Taurid meteor shower will peak between 10 October in the Southern Hemisphere and 12 November in the Northern Hemisphere."

The first missing piece of the puzzle concerns the events described here:

https://www.highdefdigest.com/blog/x-files-1006-recap/

It is now that scientists realize that there are Watson-Crick pairs with ISOMERS (isoguanosine, isocytosine):

"Isocytosine (isoC) and isoG, the isomers of C and G, respectively, may make up a third Watson–Crick base pair."

Hachimoji DNA doubles the genetic code.

Research thoroughly "ichor", in relation to the duality of the Tree of Knowledge (Love/Pain), the PSI symbol (Pseudouridine) (double headed eagle, caduceus, ankh).

Magnetogenetics and ferritin proteins (covfefe):

https://www.pascalab.org/uploads/2/4/0/4/24040167/li_et_al_nanoletters_2019.pdf

"Given the fact that pseudouridylation endows the modified uridine with chemical properties that are distinct from those of all other known nucleotides, introducing Ψ(s) into an RNA will likely alter its function.
Therefore, Ψ has chemical properties that are distinct from that of uridine.
In sum, Ψ deposition may confer different molecular properties to the modified RNAs, which changes their fate or activity. While most recent studies are focused on Ψ modifications in mRNA, yet its role on mRNA is still unclear. Thus, further studies will be required to fully understand the molecular role of Ψ on mRNAs."

(https://scontent.fotp1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/216536529_3552087768227841_2466902109955648627_n.jpg?_nc_cat=111&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=mEluFK1YN30AX8TFpft&tn=LVAYpROqK0T0_rP0&_nc_ht=scontent.fotp1-1.fna&oh=1f5c6c59db1699e3dc727f6607dddf66&oe=614517B6)

(https://scontent.fotp1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/217406720_3551655298271088_8127193262035335684_n.jpg?_nc_cat=100&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=k4HXS0dXVZ8AX9BlbH6&_nc_ht=scontent.fotp1-2.fna&oh=6c0c481599857f5a68e58e597b731582&oe=6147C70D)

https://www.mdpi.com/2076-393X/9/7/734/htm

However, superficial application of these two criteria can lead to mistakes. I will take the CGN codon family for Arg to show an incorrect optimization of the two mRNA vaccines.
The designers of both vaccines considered CGG as the optimal codon in the CGN codon family and recoded almost all CGN codons to CGG. There are two lines of evidence suggesting that CGG is not the optimal codon. These multiple lines of evidence suggest that CGC is a better codon than CGG. The designers of the mRNA vaccines (especially mRNA-1273, Table 1) chose a wrong codon as the optimal codon.

Pfizer/BioNTech’s BNT162b2 mRNA features two consecutive UGA stop codons. Moderna’s mRNA-1273 uses all three different stop codons UGAUAAUAG. Are these the optimal arrangement?

With such a +1 frameshifting, a downstream in-frame stop codon cannot serve as a fail-safe mechanism. UGA is a poor choice of a stop codon, and UGAU in Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines could be even worse.

One caveat in the reasoning above involves the replacement of U by N1-methylpseudouridine (Ψ) in the two vaccine mRNAs.

Therefore, the stop signals are ΨGAΨGA instead of UGAUGA in Pfizer/BioNTech’s vaccine, and ΨGAΨAAΨAG instead of UGAUAAUAG in Moderna’s vaccine. As Ψ is more promiscuous in base-pairing than U and can pair with both A and G and, to a less extent, with C and U, stop codons become more prone to misreading by tRNAs. It is for this reason that both mRNA vaccines use consecutive stop codons as a fail-safe mechanism, with the hope that no frameshifting occurs when the first stop codon fails. However, UGAU is known to cause a +1 frameshifting. It is reasonable to infer that ΨGAΨ may be the same. I have mentioned before that mammalian AZ1 gene with a stop codon context UGAU is prone to polyamine-induced +1 frameshifting. Such a +1 frameshifting defeats the purpose of having multiple stop codons as a fail-safe mechanism.

-------------------------------------------------

Currently, we find ourselves under the Spartan Virus scenario (grey horse/therion).

http://cloudymediablog.com/the-truth-squad-with-cloudy-media-blog/

https://berthub.eu/articles/posts/reverse-engineering-source-code-of-the-biontech-pfizer-vaccine

mRNA for spike proteins belonging to sars-cov-2 has AGCU as a genetic code. cmRNA for spike protein being produced/created in the body has AGCΨ as a genetic code. A totally different chirality, biological/chemical functions.

https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210517/Nanopore-analysis-identifies-pseudouridine-modifications-in-SARS-CoV-2.aspx

What is most worrying right now are the vaccines with Vero e6 (HeLa cells).

https://www.academia.edu/10076102/Is_the_Ebola_virus_real

What is influenza?

In the British Medical Journal of 28 July 1900, the following editorial appeared, dealing with the role of streptococci in tuberculosis: "It is a remarkable fact that…the bulk of the disturbing and dangerous features of tuberculosis are not due to the tubercle bacillus, but to streptococci and other pyogenic organisms."

The British Medical Journal’s editorial dealing with the destructive and predominant role of streptococci in tuberculosis was further confirmed when Pandemic physician Edward Rosenow reported his findings that green-producing
Streptococcocus viridians were more constantly found and more destructive than any other organism associated with
influenza.

Von Unruh wrote: “We have in influenza the fever, malaise, loss of weight, invasion by the organism of the same anatomical structures as in tuberculosis; we have chronic cases of bronchitis in which the influenza bacillus is constantly present; and lastly, we know that typical tuberculosis often follows an attack, however mild,of influenza.”

https://www.academia.edu/35088077/The_Great_Influenza_Pandemic_What_Really_Happened_in_1918

https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.637.4817&rep=rep1&type=pdf

https://web.archive.org/web/20180508034750/http://drbroxmeyer.netfirms.com/001pdfBIRDFLUEDITORIALPUBLISHED.pdf

https://www.academia.edu/12968949/INFLUENZA_AND_THE_TUBERCULOSIS_CONNECTION_Part_1

https://www.academia.edu/12968978/INFLUENZA_AND_THE_TUBERCULOSIS_CONNECTION_Part_2

https://www.academia.edu/10076563/Bird_flu_influenza_and_1918_The_case_for_mutant_Avian_tuberculosis

https://www.academia.edu/12969247/SARS_Just_another_viral_acronym

https://www.gjenvick.com/Influenza/InfluenzaTheSphinxOfDiseases-1919-03.html

https://www.gjenvick.com/Influenza/IsTheInfluenzaAChinesePlague-1918-12.html

https://www.gjenvick.com/Influenza/TheInfluenzaMysteryDeepens-1919-02.html

More recently, in 1999, Fredj Tekaia, of the Pasteur Institute, Paris, and colleagues, looking for "overall gene similarities as signatures of common ancestry", found similar genetic profiles and sequencing for Pfeiffer's bacillus (Mycobacterium influenzae) and Mycobacterium tuberculosis, lumping them together in the same "well-defined group".
Tekaia's diagrammatic genomic tree shows the two organisms directly next to one another.This reopened the historical argument that Pfeiffer's bacillus and tuberculosis are related.

SARS-Cov-2 in 1915-1917:

https://academic.oup.com/jtm/advance-article/doi/10.1093/jtm/taaa206/5955501

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(11)70151-7/fulltext

A new analysis of influenza outbreak patterns in several navies in 1918 suggests that the first and second waves of the pandemic were caused by "antigenically distinct" viruses, a conclusion that runs counter to some other recent studies.

The two waves of infection were probably caused by antigenically distinct influenza viruses—not by one virus that suddenly increased in pathogenicity between the first and second waves, says the report by G. Dennis Shanks, MD, of the Australian Army Malaria Institute, and colleagues.

"The three waves of infection are often assumed to share the same viral cause; however, little objective evidence supports this notion," the report says.

The sharp contrast in the clinical expressions of infections during the first and second waves suggests that they were caused by different influenza virus strains.

The third wave pandemic was just as strong as the second wave, but the end of the war in November 1918 removed the conditions that allowed the disease to spread so far and so quickly.  Historians now believe that the fatal severity of the Spanish flu’s “second wave” was caused by a mutated virus spread by wartime troop movements.
Somewhere in Europe, a mutated strain of the Spanish flu virus had emerged.

-------------------------------------------------

Monoclonal antibody treatment contains HeLa cell lines, just as the HeLa cells vaccines (AZ/J&J/Novavax/Sinovac/Sputnik).

Solithromycin was never approved, nor were BCG vaccines with specific bacteriophages allowed to be produced. This means that nothing else can be done, neither for the powerful new variants, which are completely resistant to the vaccines, neither for M. influenzae, the new pathogenic agent which will arrive from the atmosphere.

A third shot will unleash antigenic sin, which means it is useless.

"More importantly, vaccination with such new vaccines will first and foremost recall Abs from previous immunization(s) (e.g., due to natural infection or vaccination with first generation vaccines). This phenomenon is known as ‘antigenic sin’ and will result in rapid exposure of variants to mismatched Abs, which, again, will promote selective immune pressure and hence, enhanced propagation and transmission of Ab-resistant variants."

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.05.21256716v1

Vaccination with both mRNA-1273 and mRNA-1273.351 boosters elicited higher neutralizing titers against the wild-type original strain and comparable titers against the B.1.351 and P.1 variants versus peak titers observed after the primary series vaccinations as measured against the wild-type virus (Figure 4E), suggesting that immune memory was induced by mRNA-1273 priming.

Neutralizing titers against the wild-type virus exceeded the peak titers measured after the primary series in separate studies (15, 16), indicating the induction of immune memory.


https://www.journalofinfection.com/article/S0163-4453(21)00392-3/fulltext

"A new study by French researchers from Aix-Marseille Université has alarmingly found that ADE or antibody dependent enhancement is indeed occurring in infections with the SAR.S-CoV-2 Delta variant. Hence antibody dependent enhancement or ADE may be a concern for people receiving vaccines based on the original Wuhan strain spike sequence (either mRNA or viral vectors)."

Spike proteins (liquid crystals) and HeLa cells will act as an antenna equipped with a performant amplifier, permitting the mycobacterium in the vaccinated people to communicate (electromagnetic copies of the cells) with the mycobacterium in the atmosphere. Should copies of the mutant proteins (coded with Pseudouridine) be sent to the mycobacterium in the atmosphere, this means that the new pathogenic agent will feature such mutant proteins as well.

What will be the effect of the reversal of the magnetic poles on DNA/RNA in living organisms?

-------------------------------------------------

Remedies for vaccines: honeysuckle (tea/extract), dandelion (tea/extract), omega-3, white pine needle (tea/extract, but only if it contains suramin)

https://www.thailandmedical.news/news/breaking-study-finds-that-n-acetylneuraminic-acid-and-its-analogs-can-be-used-to-prevent-adverse-reactions-due-to-covid-19-infection-or-vaccines

(I will be adding more information by modifying the previous message)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 16, 2023, 06:51:15 AM
STATUE OF LIBERTY - SEVEN RAYS/TEN HORNS

Revelation 13:1 And I stoode on the sea sand. And I sawe a beast rise out of the sea, hauing seuen heads, and ten hornes

Keras, horns, as in the horns of an altar:

https://www.studylight.org/encyclopedias/eng/isb/h/horn.html

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ-p_4F2Bp2dVIwhSbeCHm-o4BOzKnJfNcXAg&usqp=CAU

Kephale, head of a spear:

https://www.studylight.org/encyclopedias/eng/isb/h/head.html?hilite=kephale

And is profoundly represented by the “seven heads,” or seven rays.

https://www.peterhaas.org/what-does-the-bible-mean-when-it-says-the-husband-is-the-head-of-the-wife-ephesians-522-33/

Metaphorically, it means, “pre-immanent point,” such as, “the headwaters of the Mississippi.” Or, it could also refer to the tip/head of a spear. Thus a “spear-head” is a Kephale.

Revelation 13:1 And I stoode on the sea sand. And I sawe a beast rise out of the sea, hauing seuen spear-heads, and ten hornes

Statue of Liberty: seven spear-heads, ten horns

A Drone’s Eye View of New York | Drone photos, Lady liberty, Drone photography

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/303430093637328694/

https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/b/famous-flame-liberty-eiffel-tower-background-dramatic-sky-paris-france-europe-131681684.jpg

https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/b/replicate-flame-statue-liberty-isolated-black-background-207126119.jpg

https://www.dreamstime.com/photos-images/flame-liberty.html

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/11/13/nyregion/13Statue/Statue-facebookJumbo.jpg

https://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/0b/62/4d/34/memorial-to-lady-diana.jpg

Whoever wrote the first verse of chapter 13 of the book of Revelation, had in mind the image of the Statue of Liberty. Now, we know that the Bible was written in the period 1780-1800 AD; thus, wherever this statue might have been located, it had been built perhaps as late as 1776 AD.

There is no way that John of Patmos (in the official chronology of history) would have used the imagery of the Colossus of Rhodes (we are told that, because of the earthquake which had occurred in 226 BC, the remains lay in the open, the statue had fallen to the ground due to its weight) to describe anything at all in Revelation 13. It would have been outrageous, to say the least. Additionally, all writers, who were well versed in classical Greek literature, and who had seen the Colossus of Rhodes, would have pointed out the similarities between the two images. The Bible must have been written after the Statue of Liberty had been constructed. The "heads" and the "horns" are described using the word "and" not "with". That is, they are separate items.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 17, 2023, 11:19:44 AM
ORION PROEKT 1983

(https://st4.depositphotos.com/8687700/28202/v/600/depositphotos_282026758-stock-video-pyramids-in-silhouette-with-time.jpg)

1979

Contrary to what has been publicized in the West, there were no significant losses due to the Stinger missile in Afghanistan (see http://europauniversitypress.co.uk/auth_article416.html ).

At first glance, as described by most political analysts, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan remains a deeply puzzling event.

Most importantly, the external threat to Afghanistan was much exaggerated by the Soviets to justify their action. Prior to the invasion, the mujahidin was weak, divided, and in no position to seize control of the country, let alone expand its activities to the Soviet Central Asian republics. The suggestion that Amin was on the verge of reorienting his country towards the West is also found to be without foundation.

The action is also shown to have possessed little immediately understandable logic in the context of Moscow's dealings with the Afghan regime, while simultaneously presenting several predictable costs to both the Soviet Union's international standing and domestic affairs. Even more interesting is the finding from archival research that earlier in 1979 the CPSU Politburo had, in no uncertain terms, dismissed the option of a major deployment of Soviet troops to Afghanistan, having shown themselves to be very much alive to the high risks involved. There can be little doubt therefore that the Soviet decision to launch the invasion must be considered an extraordinary undertaking and an event meriting close study.

Since the Second World War, Soviet economic penetration of Afghanistan had grown steadily. Moscow had taken the leading role in developing the country's physical infrastructure, building up its mining industry, gas pipelines, airfields, and road network, including the Salang Tunnel through the Hindu Kush, which served as the main artery connecting Afghanistan to the Soviet Union. In total, the Soviets had already completed 71 separate projects in Afghanistan by April 1978 and another 60 had been agreed upon; Soviet-Afghan trade had come to account for 70–80 percent of the Afghan total. As Milan Hauner summarizes: “Taken together, the Soviet aid program was a carefully calibrated Soviet economic penetration of a neighboring country: long before they sent a single soldier across the Afghan border, the Soviet presence in the country was already overpowering”.

Had the Soviet Union proceeded more cautiously and not subverted what had been a highly favorable situation for them, Moscow would almost certainly have retained a leading role in Afghanistan and, via its economic and personnel investments, continued to have exerted considerable influence over any regime in Kabul.

However, instead of proceeding with its established policy of gradual integration and prudent maintenance of good relations with all Kabul regimes, Moscow adopted a bold and incredibly costly change in strategy, risking all of their slowly accumulated gains for an ally of seemingly little value. To look at it another way, having carefully consumed a sizeable piece of the Afghan cake, the Soviets attempted to gulp down the rest in a single, overzealous bite.


Why, then, would the Soviets proceed in such a manner?

Yuriy Andropov:

Would our forces really help them here? In this case, tanks and armored vehicles cannot be of assistance. I think that we should say directly to Comrade Taraki that we support all of their actions and will render the help which we have agreed today and yesterday, but in no way can we move to an introduction of forces to Afghanistan. […] To bring in troops, this means to fight against the people, to suppress the people, to shoot the people. We will look like aggressors, and we cannot allow this (Ob obostrenii, Bukovsky Archive, March 17–19, 1979, p. 16, p. 24).

On the basis of the factors discussed above, the Soviet decision to invade Afghanistan seems bewildering. In addition to being atypical of Moscow's established Third World policy and offering few apparent benefits and several obvious costs, the deployment of troops has been shown to have been firmly and repeatedly opposed by the Politburo just a matter of months earlier. One is therefore left to ponder, what could possibly have induced the Soviet leaders to perform so rapid a volte-face?

2014

Russia could have annexed Donetsk/Luhansk without problems or sanctions, but they did not, and instead chose to wait until 2022 to proceed with the incursion in Ukraine.

This is why:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cLUj7JZt6UBcHBqEL4fwWyFaA9pDLmt-/view?usp=sharing (English translation)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1M7BiGq4ojAvz6cLB5s8VamAbN3JMp_Ih/view?usp=sharing (original in Russian)

Document which had been redacted for the Politburo. The typewriter and technical typesetting belong to the 1982-1983 interval/era. It described planet Icarus, the Iron planet (comet Typhon), the initial estimates forwarded by the German scientists in the period 1939-1945 as to the arrival of Red Kachina, and much more. The astronomical setting is heliocentrical.

Summary:

https://vk.com/@thulegesselschaft-skrytyi-doklad-o-proekte-orion (translate Russian to English)

Summary in English:

https://td-osz.ru/en/success-stories/romb-orion-kgb-sssr-proekt-korablya-orion-byli-razrabotany/

On the subject of falsification of documents belonging to the USSR:



Magnetic north pole shift:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9c/North_Magnetic_Poles.svg/1200px-North_Magnetic_Poles.svg.png

https://img.jagranjosh.com/imported/images/E/Articles/Geographic-Poles-magnetic-P.jpg

The position of Earth's magnetic north pole was first precisely located in 1831. Since then, it's gradually drifted north-northwest by more than 600 miles (1,100 kilometers), and its forward speed has increased from about 10 miles (16 kilometers) per year to about 34 miles (55 kilometers) per year.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/environment/a32496561/why-magnetic-north-pole-moving/

https://web.archive.org/web/20220925093049/https://www.nature.com/articles/d43978-022-00128-8

The document is genuine, because the US Department of Defense had discovered the very same changes in the position of the magnetic north pole (Project Nanook, the scientific findings of the 46th/72nd Reconnaissance Squadron).
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 18, 2023, 10:04:45 AM
REVERSAL OF MAGNETIC POLES: VEGA - LOKI - CORONA BOREALIS - OPHIUCHUS - SPEARFINGER

(https://revistapesquisa.fapesp.br/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/012-017_Notas_277-info.jpg)

https://ia803109.us.archive.org/22/items/worldinperiltheorigin/World%20in%20Peril%20The%20Origin.pdf (World In Peril, Project Nanook)

Chapters 27-30:

https://avalonlibrary.net/ebooks/Kenneth%20White%20-%20World%20in%20Peril%20%28extracted%20pages%29.pdf

Chapter 30:

https://www.getyourfree.info/WIP-ch30.pdf

The magnetic north pole circle/circumference:

https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/tierra_hueca/tierrahueca/Chapter2.htm

The reversal of the magnetic poles and the translation/shift of the stellar dome are two distinct events.

Currently, there are some youtube channels which are following the movement of the magnetic north pole, and which at the same time are announcing that the full reversal will take place once the 40° mark is reached:

(https://i.postimg.cc/nrzpSK85/221015-Magnetic-North-Pole-Sept17-2022.jpg)

However, the issue to be resolved is this: 40° starting from where? 1812? 1859? 1862?
 As the readers of this thread know by now, the figure to be followed is 38,18°. Without the correct date for the starting point of the magnetic pole shift (certainly in the 19th century), all final figures can incur errors of as much as one year (at least). That is why only FET can be relied upon to provide the most accurate measurements when it comes to such issues.

In astrology, the magnetic north pole is represented by the star Vega. The magnetic north pole reversal had started in the constellation of Cassiopeia. If we draw a straight line from Vega to the region of the final destination of the magnetic north pole, the most obvious and powerful obstacle is represented by Corona Borealis.

1883 (The Natural Genesis by Gerald Massey):

Cancer and Capricorn were the two signs in which the end of a world was fabled to occur by a conflagration and a deluge.

https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/25/2022/06/hercules-constellation-50f84ac.jpg

http://www.fortworthastro.com/images/bigdipperdirections.gif

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/79/c3/06/79c3063687c0d8c26c94aa1ab6df6372--falling-stars-spider.jpg

https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zDHiTCNw6TDUC8XEt4GHWj-1200-80.jpg

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/12/13/14/22204410-0-image-a-3_1576248938892.jpg

https://i0.wp.com/starinastar.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/earth-map-in-the-sky-zenith-new-york-land-forms-as-constellations-no-labels.png?resize=525%2C548&ssl=1

https://www.wikihow.com/images/thumb/a/af/Spot-the-North-Star-Step-5.jpg/v4-460px-Spot-the-North-Star-Step-5.jpg.webp

https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/z/magnetic-north-pole-drift-political-map-north-magnetic-pole-earth-moves-over-time-according-to-magnetic-changes-core-213005162.jpg

https://www.facebook.com/discover.physics/photos/a.235653403129647/1199994436695534/?type=3

https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/55e85f3/2147483647/strip/true/crop/936x624+0+67/resize/840x560!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffcc-cue-exports-brightspot.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com%2Fduluthnewstribune%2Fbinary%2FAsterisms-northern-sky-summer-S_binary_6532236.jpg

90° - 23.4° = 66.6°

One version of the book of Revelation mentions the number 665: 90° - 23.5° = 66.5°

616 and 666 also refer to the appearance or image of the letters (written in Greek) which comprise the name referred to in chapter 13.

Loki is connected to the star Vega (Loki is Ophiuchus, and the daughter of Loki is Vega, also the Piscis Australis is related to Loki).

http://www.germanicmythology.com/ASTRONOMY/BLUESTARVEGA.html

http://www.germanicmythology.com/ASTRONOMY/OphiucusLokiBound.html

http://www.germanicmythology.com/ASTRONOMY/THRYMSKVIDA.html

Phaethon, the son of Eos, is Nibiru #1. Typhon/comet Encke is Nibiru #2.


Dhruva, the north pole star was located in the Great Bear constellation. The movement was sudden (100 yojanas, 1000-1200 km).

https://www.academia.edu/7193503/Dhruva_the_Ancient_Vedic_Hindu_Pole_Star

https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.70991/page/n209/mode/1up?q=letopolis

https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.70996/page/n51/mode/1up?q=orion

https://archive.org/details/studiespresented0000egyp/page/372/mode/2up?q=wainwright

https://sites.middlebury.edu/feastsandfestivals/files/2015/09/seneca-thyestes.pdf (pg 25)

Next to the Hercules constellation, we find Ophiuchus:

https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/25/2022/06/hercules-constellation-50f84ac.jpg

The Birkeland currents between Saturn (Marduk) and the Sun:

https://web.archive.org/web/20180512121552/https://www.ucl.ac.uk/mathematical-physical-sciences/images/news/Saturn_3D_final6.jpg

Plasma Flux Transfer Events between Saturn and the Sun

A twisted magnetic field structure, previously never seen before at Saturn, has now been detected for the first time ... When the Sun’s magnetic field interacts with the Earth’s magnetic field (the magnetosphere), a complex process occurs called magnetic reconnection which can twist the field into a helical shape. These twisted helically structured magnetic fields are called flux ropes or “flux transfer events” (FTEs) and are observed at Earth and even more commonly at Mercury ...

Spearfinger (Cherokee tribe prophecy) refers to the Orion constellation, the star which has been removed (which was located below the star Rigel).

Rattlesnake is Ophiuchus, Tiamat.

Supernova candidates: Proxima Centauri, rs Ophiuchi, Barnard star, Betelgeuse.

https://www.wwu.edu/astro101/indianstarlore.shtml
https://theshamanictimes.com/cherokee-indigenous-prophecies-2012.html
https://www.sacred-texts.com/nam/cher/motc/motc066.htm
https://youaretheawakening.wordpress.com/2015/03/07/cherokee-star-constellation-prophecy/
The original Uktena was said to have transformed from a man in his unsuccessful attempt to destroy the sun.
https://indigenouspeoplenet.wordpress.com/2022/04/16/cherokee-indigenous-peoples/
http://www.native-languages.org/morelegends/stoneclad.htm
The original intention would have been ice-clad and be inreference to a god of winter, but this was changed, first through punningand later through confusion, to stone and a being altogether separate fromthe winter god appeared.
https://web.archive.org/web/20200506162330/http://www.powersource.com/cocinc/articles/tlanuhwa.htm
http://www.ewebtribe.com/NACulture/articles/Uktena/
https://www.gusd.net/cms/lib/CA01000648/Centricity/Domain/2027/AmericanIndianMythsAndLegends.pdf 40
http://judy-volker.com/StarLore/Myths/Native_American_North_America2.html
Rigel is the tip of the index finger
Spearfinger, a Cherokee legend, pointed right index finger
https://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/2009JRASC.103...65D
https://www.windows2universe.org/mythology/hand_orion.html
https://www.constellationsofwords.com/rigel/
https://web.archive.org/web/20120619111554/https://mrscienceut.net/TheHand.pdf
https://earthandstarryheaven.com/2015/02/11/rigel-the-blue-star/
https://earthandstarryheaven.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/rigel-star2.jpg?w=624
https://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1999JAVSO..27..171W
http://www.germanicmythology.com/ASTRONOMY/ScorpioVariant.html
Edda are limited to the obvious and well-known examples of Þjazi’s eyes being turned into a pair of stars, and the star “which is called ‘toe of Aurvandill’ in the same chapter, whose identity and location remain a mystery.
http://judy-volker.com/StarLore/Myths/Scorpius3.html
https://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?2010JRASC.104...46M&defaultprint=YES&filetype=.pdf
http://judy-volker.com/StarLore/Myths/MesoAmerica_SouthAmerica.html
https://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/2012JRASC.106...12M
http://www.helulf.se/Rongorongo/Objects/A/At152t16.htm
http://hans.wyrdweb.eu/about-pleiades-or-how-a-fool-destroyed-paradise/
https://www.constellationsofwords.com/ophiuchus/
https://www.constellationsofwords.com/draco/

Distances on a spherical Earth are greater than those on a flat earth:

https://web.pdx.edu/~i1kc/courses/Surveying/Handouts/JGE%20Paper%201%20-%20Introduction.pdf

https://civilengineering-softstudies.com/49-error-and-correction-for-the-curvature-of-the-earth-and-refraction-surveying.html

Heimdall, as it refers to the shift of the stellar dome, is the Great Bear constellation. As it pertains to the magnetic pole reversal, it attains the characteristics of a ram from an astrological point of view.

Also, there is difference between the time of the capture of Fenrir (Loki) and the moment of its release at Ragnarok.


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on January 21, 2023, 02:39:54 AM
PLANET VULCAN

(https://i.postimg.cc/dVz9Mcx1/fen.jpg)

https://armaghplanet.com/vulcan-the-solar-systems-ghost-planet.html

Le Verrier's original calculations stand correct, since the equations provided by GTR cannot be used to analyze dynamical systems:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2194405#msg2194405

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg769750#msg769750

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2194825#msg2194825

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2196454#msg2196454



Chariot of the Sun: Vulcan (Hephaistos) and Mercury

1861-1862

The great flood of 1861-1862 had originated with the largest volcano eruption in Africa ever recorded (May 1861, Dubbi volcano)

http://www.atmosedu.com/Geol390/articles/ComingMegaFloos4.pdf

https://cepsym.org/Sympro2012/Schick.pdf

1811-1812

Was Vulcan the great comet of 1811? We have a world war in 1811 and a huge earthquake on the New Madrid fault which had been caused by the strike of a meteor:

https://web.archive.org/web/20201125055232/https://www.earthfrenzyradio.com/conspiracies/2422-the-great-comet-quake-of-1811-a-neo-connection

https://archaeologica.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3691

Chicxulub is a super volcano and not the crater created by an asteroid:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1622182#msg1622182

https://www.sacred-texts.com/atl/rag/rag17.htm

https://www.sacred-texts.com/atl/rag/rag18.htm

https://www.sacred-texts.com/atl/rag/rag19.htm

https://www.sacred-texts.com/atl/rag/rag20.htm

Erra, Ishum, Phaethon:

https://mythopedia.info/vanderSluijs-CC9-2.pdf

https://mythopedia.info/vanderSluijs-A39.pdf

https://mythopedia.info/vanderSluijs-JANER8-2.pdf

Loki and Corona Borealis:

http://www.germanicmythology.com/ASTRONOMY/SerpensCaput.html

Comet ZTF will be passing by the Corona Borealis constellation, and in fact it will be pointing to Ursa Minor (star Pherkad) on January 27.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on May 11, 2023, 10:38:44 AM
Rθ/18 = CHRONOLOGY OF HISTORY - [9/23] {12/23} [3/24] {6/24} 9/24

Radius of FE: 6363.63 km (upper limit 10000 km)

θ = 0.959582 rad (2 x 27.49 = 54.98, 54.98° = 0.959582 rad, 1/27.49 = 0.036376864 = 0.1 - 0.063623), Tropic to Tropic (solstice to solstice)

Sun westward precessional shift: 1.5 km / year (4.2 meters / day)

Sun diameter: 636 meters (see the photos of the solar eclipse in Antarctica, november 2003)

s = r x θ

6106.4248 = 6363.63 x 0.959582

6106.4248 / 6 = 1017.73747 km, the distance alloted for each gate (six months, solstice to solstice)

The arclength for each gate (space alloted for the each of the six periods running from the winter solstice to the summer solstice, and from the summer solstice to the winter solstice) is 1017.737 km.

1017.737 / 4 = 254.434 (where 0.636363 / 25 = 0.02545454)

We must fit the solar precessional shift of 1.5 km / year into this figure of 1017.737 km.

If we divide the 1017.737 arclength by 30 (one month = thirty days), the 33.94 km figure will have been depleted in 22.5 years (solar westward shift of 1.5 km / year), and the sun would have reached the outer limit (one of the two tropics).

Therefore, the chronology of history cannot be longer than 339.24 years (508.87 / 1.5). Great Flood/Deluge to end of history = 339.24 years.

The optimum implementation uses a mobile section of 508.87 km (1017.737 / 2) which moves westward at a pace of 4.2 meters / day (1.5 km / year) at the same rate as the Sun does. That is, the Sun rises within on the six gates, and for the course of a single month uses the 508.87 km interval, where each day it shifts 4.2 meters to the west. After one year, the entire mobile section shifts itself 1.5 km to the west as well, and so on, until on the last day of history, after having shifted 508.87 km, the Sun reaches the endpoint of its alloted interval (one of the solstices).

If the maximum value of the radius of the FE is used, we get:

10000 x 0.959582 = 9595.82 km (arclength)

9595.82 / 18 = 533 years (chronology of history)

We know that the chronology of history cannot extend further in the past beyond 1643 AD:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1851060#msg1851060

No other historian, not Fomenko, not Pfister, or any other researcher in the field, has observed that the total solar eclipses which had occurred on the vernal equinox in 1643 AD and 1662 AD are the most direct proofs that the conventional chronology of history has been faked.

1682 AD - 1683 AD Jupiter - Saturn Great Conjunction

Another great historical marking point, the solar transit of Mercury in 1769 AD which references the end of the last cosmic cataclysm.

As the Sun reaches the endpoint of its journey, and rises from the West to the East, there are several possibilities (diameter of 636 meters):

1. It rises from the West as soon as it reaches the alloted interval at the end of one of the two solstices (Tropics)

2. It travels beyond the limit for 77 days (636 / 2 = 318; (1 x 0.636)/1.5), then it moves for another 77 days to reach the starting point again.

3. It travels beyond the limit for the full length of its diameter, 154.76 days, then it shifts back to the starting point for another 154.76 days.

Before the Great Flood, the westward (or most likely eastward, at that point in time) precessional shift would have been much greater, perhaps some 12.7 km / year.

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 05, 2023, 08:25:26 AM
FLAT EARTH SOLAR/LUNAR ECLIPSES: BEYOND RAHU AND KETU

(https://i.postimg.cc/KcDR4ZN5/Heimdallguardianof-Bifrost.jpg)

A more in-depth study of Vedic cosmology/mythology will reveal the following facts:

Ganesha is Ketu, and Ganesha (Ganapati) is Shiva also. Shiva attack the Sun (Surya) using the stars Mali and Kumali.

Rahu and Ketu become the Draco and Cetus constellations, respectively.

Hanuman is Phaethon who also attacks the Sun.

In the Bundahishn, Gokihar (Gohikar, Gochihr) and Mulspar (Mush Parik) are Rahu and Ketu. However, the solar/lunar eclipses are caused by the dark Mihr (Dark Sun/Mihr-i Tamig) and the dark Moon (Mah-i Gospand-Tomag).

Surtr (Nordic mythology) is Red Kachina. Blue Kachina is connected to two different stars: Spica and Betelgeuse (which is linked to Saturn). Barnard's star is also related to Blue Kachina. Another related subject, the star of Yaakov.

Loki/Fenrir is hidden in the Hoag cosmic object (Serpens Caput constellation). The Wolverine is Loks (North-American indian folklore), that is, Loki.

Arcturus and Spica form a huge horn (connection to Heimdall/Skanda), the Bootes constellation is linked to Surtr/Suttung and the Phaethon/Icarus myth.

(https://i1.sndcdn.com/artworks-Sz09BdkMgKqqnDBq-dfJpsg-t500x500.jpg)

Skanda is riding the Peacock, which is a feather from Garuda (Ophiuchus constellation).


Those who are following the youtube channels which deal with the shift of the magnetic north pole, should know that the angle which is in question is 38.19° (not 40°), and that the starting point is the year 1862 (not 1859).


The Black Sun/Star, then, seems to be the heavenly object which was described in the Book of Enoch:

https://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#Enoch_23

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on June 05, 2023, 10:23:10 AM
CAMELOPS SOFT TISSUE IS ORIGINAL BIOLOGICAL MATERIAL

(https://stolenhistory.net/attachments/092518-nhmu-camel-01-jpg.10324/)

"Some fossils look rather fresh. Part of a camel skull found near Fillmore, Utah, is a prime example.

Back in 1928, while exploring near Meadow Hot Springs, a pair of high school students found an unusual skull at the back of a lava tube. The braincase and piece of jaw didn’t seem to be from a cow, horse, or other familiar animal, and so it eventually came to the attention of University of Utah professor A.L. Mathews. Mathews, in turn, sent the news along to famed paleontologist Alfred Sherwood Romer at the University of Chicago. And what Romer saw in that skull dramatically affected what experts thought of as the timeline of Ice Age life.

Romer quickly identified the skull as that of a camel. But what species? The fact that the skull still looked relatively fresh suggested that the animal had died in the relatively recent past.

There was a possibility that the camel might have been one of the dromedaries that were introduced to the western United States as pack animals during the mid- and late-19th century. But the anatomy was all wrong. The skull, Romer concluded, must have come from an extinct North American species that paleontologists knew as Camelops and had previously been found in places like the La Brea asphalt seeps in Los Angeles, California."

(https://stolenhistory.net/attachments/092518_nhmu_camel_04-jpg.10325/)

". . . discovery in Utah of the unfossilized skull of an extinct camel, with a bit of dried flesh still clinging to the bone. The relatively fresh condition of the specimen argues that its one-time possessor died only a few centuries or millennia ago; present ideas hold that this particular sort of camel did become extinct a half-million years ago. If this camel really died so long ago, the bone should have been largely or wholly replaced by stone, and there should have been no flesh on it all."

Science Newsletter, Vol. 14, (1928), p. 81

At long last, mainstream science has to acknowledge that the cataclysmic event which put an end to the last Ice Age must have occurred at most only a few centuries ago.

Professor Alfred S. Romer of the University of Chicago who examined the skull claimed the anatomical differences between American and African or Asian camels made it clear that this skull belonged "to the genus Camelops."

Science Newsletter, Vol. 14, (1928), p. 81

"In New Mexico, in a cave, there was discovered in the late 1930s . . . evidence of lingering [survival] of certain Pleistocene animals. This cave, located in the Guadalupe Mountains near the Texas line, is a narrow cleft-like crack in the limestone . . . . The entrance is low and narrow, making it necessary for the investigator to crawl on hands and knees for several feet. Inside, however, the cave opens into a large chamber with a floor several feet below the level of the entrance passageway. The large, sunken room is almost filled with camel bones. These camels are not the present-day circus variety, but rather the small, long-necked American camels of the Pleistocene period. The bones lie in profusion, perfectly preserved as though they had piled there only a few years ago. The cave is redolent with the odor of dry dust and of the bats that hang in clusters from the ceiling. But even the extreme aridity could hardly account for the wonderful preservation of the camel remains. There is little or no accumulation on top of them. In the Abilene region of Texas, accumulations of silts on top of ancient deposits gave an indication of their comparative age. In Camel Cave, only a thin veneer of dust and bat guano covers the camel graveyard. They do not seem to be extremely ancient. From this evidence, as well as from similar signs in Gypsum Cave in Nevada [to be discussed just below], it would seem that the American camel lingered on after death had overtaken the majority of its Pleistocene contemporaries."

Hibben, The Lost Americans, p. 161

The best work which examines the glaring errors and omissions in radiocarbon dating as applied to the age of extinction of the mammoths and of the camelops (American Camel):

https://web.archive.org/web/20190101000119/https://www.immanuelvelikovsky.com/mammoth.pdf

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1640735#msg1640735 (dating methods of the past: isotopes vs. comets)

Dinosaurs Soft Tissue is Original Biological Material

https://kgov.com/dinosaur-soft-tissue-original-biological-material

https://answersingenesis.org/dinosaurs/bones/dinosaur-soft-tissue-evolutionists-problem/

https://kgov.com/list-of-not-so-old-things#amino-acids
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 09, 2023, 02:11:56 PM
THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL

In the heliocentrical setting, soon, the Earth will stop its diurnal rotation. Two conditions must be met:

1. The inner core must slow down, even stop from revolving around its own axis (conditions are being met, search with "earth core slowing down")

2. The existence of an external magnetic field (if a mass of magnetized iron particles, equal to the mass of the Earth, would come close to the Earth, it would cause the stasis of the diurnal rotation)

This is beyond a mere tilting of the axis of the Earth out of position, while the diurnal rotation would still occur.

Has this phenomenon happened in the past? According to the legends which have been recorded in the mythologies of almost all countries, it has. Of course, in the heliocentrical setting, it becomes very difficult to explain how then the Earth had resumed/renewed its diurnal rotation (not necessarily at the same speed as before). In FET, it is very easy to explain this event: the Sun simply stops in the middle of the sky, having reached the exterior limit of its alloted westward precessional shift.

All we need now is the close passage of a celestial body whose mass is nearly that of the Earth itself (again, we are talking about the heliocentrical framework). Of course, modern science would deride such a description, since it is assuming the stability of the entire solar system for eons of ages (past and future). The word "soon", in the first sentence of this post, means that the second planet, whose mass/magnetic field would cause the ceasing of the Earth's diurnal rotation, is already in an orbit close to the Earth (no need to involve a planet from the supposed Oort cloud). Then, should a comet strike that planet, at a certain time, it would set it on a collision course with the Earth (collision = close passage).

Here is a work which describes this kind of scenario:

https://www.amazon.com/Typhon-Olaf-H-Hage-III/dp/1072564807?asin=1072564807&revisionId=&format=4&depth=1


In the context of our Flat Earth calendar, the following dates are to be noted.

Elul 25 (this year it falls on 9/11)

Autumnal equinox (9/23)

Armilustrium (oct 19 to 23)

Ketu/Ganesha (oct 28)

Garuda (dec 1)

Winter solstice (12/23)

Tubilustrium (3/24)

Pegasus/Medusa (3/24)

Blue Kachina - Saturn

https://archive.org/details/RingmakersOfSaturnByNormanR.Bergrun

Spica would also be a very close choice for Blue Kachina.

The galactic wave would start in the southern sky, Argo, Centaurus (Proxima Centauri), Puppis constellations, and then reach the Orion constellation, then the Sun.

Red Kachina - most likely possibility, Mars (Morning Star, Typhon, Phaethon) with Deimos and Phobos

Garuda - Aquila constellation

https://navajostargazer.com/aquila

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 09, 2023, 10:39:13 PM
APOCALYPSE 9:7-9:10

Here is the description:

http://www.oldebible.com/geneva-bible/revelation-9.asp

One might think that this represents John of Patmos' prophetic vision. Not so. Here is an exact visual match (Mesopotamian border stone) for the quote from the book of Revelation:

https://axismundi.blog/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/26696498_10213523945485921_1959966338_n.jpg

(Reproduction of Sagittarius, as depicted on the Mesopotamian border stones. Notice the scorpion tail. This icon returns identical in the Apocalypse to describe the grasshopper-men.)

Question: why would John of Patmos use this Mesopotamian/Babylonian inscription as a visual reference? How is it possible that no historian or scholar had mentioned this fact in the context of the research which has been done in the field?

Let us remember that the author of the book of Revelation did the same thing with another well-known passage:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2391983#msg2391983

The only excuse would be to say that he had used an image for some constellations (seven stars with ten stars in the form of a torch right above them, such as Corona Borealis or Coma Berenices). Of course, it would have been out of place, not to mention bizarre, for John of Patmos to have borrowed such imagery from astrology, and later scholars would have mentioned this fact. It seems that the book of Revelation was written by a high level initiate (or even several such initiates).

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 19, 2023, 11:52:27 AM
RA-HARAKHTE, HE RISETH FROM THE WEST

(https://i.postimg.cc/65GWZrP5/strange.jpg)

"The Hour will not be established till the sun rises from the west"

We know from the book of Enoch that the Sun rises from the East, sets beyond Antarctica and then rises again to reach its initial point of departure:

https://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html#Enoch_71

Before the Deluge, both Saturn (Blue Kachina) and Mars (Red Kachina) were seen in the sky emitting more light than the Sun, the view of Mars might have looked like this:

(https://www.godkingscenario.com/images/re_re_horakhty_horus.jpg)

https://archive.org/details/BreastedJ.H.AncientRecordsEgyptAll5Vols1906/page/n861/mode/1up?q=harakhte

Harakhte is the Egyptian name for the western sun.

Ra-Horakhty is Aten, associated with Akhenaten (represented by planet Mars). Thor is actually Mars, while Tyr is Polaris (the North Star). Odin is Saturn.

The year of 360 days was used in conjunction with the 12 constellations, and five days were added. The calendar described in the book of Enoch has 364 days, where one such day is some four minutes longer than our present day. The calendar of the Gizeh pyramid, based on echinoxes/solstices, has not changed at all after the Deluge or any other cosmic conflagration: while the Earth is undergoing a magnetic pole reversal it is still stationary (the stellar Dome also shifts).

The astral body which will be seen risinig from the West will be either Blue Kachina or Red Kachina.


We know for sure that the radius of the Piri Reis map is 6,363.63 km, Charles Hapgood proved that fact while he had consulted with several noted mathematicians to help him out decipher the map (the circumference of the Earth (Flat or Globe); it must give the same value in both versions).

https://archive.org/details/HapgoodCharlesHutchinsMapsOfTheAncientSeaKings/page/n27/mode/1up?view=theater (page 33 - the relationship between the value attributed to Erathosthenes and the radius of Piri Reis' map)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 21, 2023, 02:34:05 AM
GOCHIHR AND MUSHPAR

Mushpar

(https://i.postimg.cc/hGKkB7m1/perseus-stars-1.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/D0cC5xjV/cetus-ketu-1-1.jpg)

Rahu, or ra's al-tinnin, and Ketu, or danab al-tinnin

https://pdfcoffee.com/the-dragon-in-medieval-east-christian-and-islamic-art-pdf-free.html

https://archive.org/details/themarsmysterybygrahamhancock/page/n3/mode/1up?view=theater (pages 197-198, 201-205)

Gochihr

(https://i.postimg.cc/gjwJH7kj/garuda.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/bwS5f9dn/navajo-star-gazer-fajanda-butte-altair-drawing-stevie-begaye-nov-17.jpg)

https://navajostargazer.com/aquila


(https://i.postimg.cc/yNBypmRs/rhkt.jpg)

Vasuki becomes Rahu and Ketu, in the Vedic cosmology. However, Vasuki resembles the Hydra constellation to a greater degree.





Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 21, 2023, 07:52:21 AM
SHIFT OF THE ASTROLOGICAL DOME: ARCTURUS

(https://i.postimg.cc/zGFZTDNv/Ursa-Major-041407-1024x685.jpg)

When Arcturus (alpha Bootis, supposed to be an archer, Ursa Major being his bow) shoots down the North Nail with his arrow on the last day, the heaven will fall, crushing the earth and setting fire to everything [n1 U. Holmberg, Finno-Ugric and Siberian Mythology (1964), p. 221. See the drawing made by J. Turi in Das Buch des Lappen Turi (1912), plate XIV: Arc­turus = Favtna, Polaris/North Nail = Boaje-naste, or Bohinavlle.].

In fact, it is noted in Turi's Book Of Lapland that the three stars which make up the belt of Orion are also hunting for the North Star. And the Blue Kachina image looks like one of those stars:

http://www.jedisimon.com/articles/kachina/Blue%20star_kachina.jpg

Arcturus (in constellation Bootes). This particularly bright star (Alpha Bootis) is Icarius.

It is stated this Icarius, became Arcturus, while his dog, Maira, became Canicula (Procyon).

ARCTURUS.  The English word translated "Arcturus" is from Latin, and probably is Greek in origin.  In Hebrew, the word translated "Arcturus" is 'ayish or 'ash, which seems to be the old Hebrew word for the red planet.


FET: all of the stars which make up the twelve zodiacs signs are to be found about at the same distance from the surface of the Earth, and are ball lightning toruses.

In the Vedic cosmology/astrology, Abhijit is Vega and represents the magnetic north pole. Researchers could not explain why or how both Abhijit (magnetic pole) and Dhruva (North Star) could leave their place at the same time in the sky: the two stars signify two different phenomena which are linked by the end of a world age/epoch.
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 23, 2023, 12:30:07 PM
FENRIS THE WOLF: GLEIPNIR/HERCULES-CORONA BOREALIS GREAT WALL

(https://i.postimg.cc/QxBvJzrP/fenris.jpg)

The largest object in the Universe, according to modern astronomy, is the Hercules-Corona Borealis Great Wall, assumed to exist at a distance of some 10 billion light years. These astronomers seem to forget the calculation which had been carried out by none other than Wolfgang Pauli who stated that if the zero-point energy field does exist, then the radius of curvature of the universe measures only 31 km:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2276922#msg2276922

The red shift function is a measure of the density of the ether field.

Fenris is Gochihr (Rahu/Draco). Garm and Cerberus are also derived from Fenris (as is Orthrus, which is another description of Cerberus).

(https://nordicperspective.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/fenrir_by_istrandar_deviantart-1024x512.jpg)

The older drawings of the Hercules constellation show Cerberus being held in a tight grip:

http://www.ianridpath.com/startales/images/hevelius-cerberus-480.webp

https://www.e-rara.ch/zut/content/zoom/77445

Originally, Orthrus had two heads:

https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/mythology/images/1/1a/Orthrus.jpg

https://www.theoi.com/image/M24.2Ladon_sm.jpg

Draco constellation features a flying serpent with a dragon's head: in some mythologies, Ursa Minor and Ursa Major were the wings of the dragon, while in others the head was that of a bear or of a wolf. Cerberus also has many serpents and the tail of a snake (very similar to Hydra, as an example).

http://www.ianridpath.com/startales/cerberus.html

The Hercules-Corona Borealis Great Wall is Gleipnir, the rope that holds Fenris in place:

https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:800/1*c4ocaKvcKByX7VBqqWW3Mg.png

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1510.01933.pdf

The GRB cluster at z = 2 appears to identify the presence of a larger angular structure that covers almost one-eighth of the sky. This encompasses half of the constellations of Bootes, Draco, and Lyra, and all of the constellations of Hercules and Corona Borealis.

https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-W4qNQvD7uUI/VyIx5SlNBmI/AAAAAAAAAyI/AVYSupScInIKjU1HxkUFT5vX0GLqXQwegCLcB/s1600/Nearsc.gif

The Hercules–Corona Borealis Great Wall, the largest known structure in the universe, covers a part of the southern region of Draco.

https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ugqC5g3dcMxZdv28HJyvXg.jpg

https://images.fineartamerica.com/images/artworkimages/mediumlarge/1/celestial-map-constellations-ursa-major-draco-cepheus-andromeda-illustrated-map-of-the-sky-studio-grafiikka.jpg

(https://i.postimg.cc/DyX432Tc/piscesfenriscetus.jpg)

Fenris with Tyr as Aries (Tyr was also depicted as Polaris). Cetus is Midgard.

(https://i.postimg.cc/Dz9ygGWk/dration.jpg)

Hoag's object (Serpens Caput constellation) and Loki:

https://i.postimg.cc/4xh3hwdb/hoagserp.png

https://i.postimg.cc/WzB19JYJ/hoagcaputdraco.jpg


https://stephenbax.net/wp-content/uploads/astrolabe.jpg

https://stephenbax.net/wp-content/uploads/liber_floridus.jpg


The Hyades constellation was thought to be another image of Fenris:

https://ofwolfandmanbook.wordpress.com/2018/02/07/wolf-jaw-of-ragnarok/


The signs that Gleipnir no longer can hold Fenris:

AT2018cow erupted in or near a galaxy known as CGCG 137-068, which is located about 200 million light-years away from Earth in the constellation Hercules.

On June 17, astronomers at the University of Hawaii’s Institute of Astronomy twin Asteroid Terrestrial-impact Last Alert System (ATLAS) telescopes discovered an enormous, unprecedented bright flash in space that had just appeared in the heavens.
Supernovae typically take several weeks to develop but this flash, 10 to 100 times brighter than an average supernova, appeared in a region of space the astronomers had checked only two days before.

“It really just appeared out of nowhere,” said Kate Maguire at Queen’s University Belfast, part of the ATLAS team, to New Scientist.

https://skyandtelescope.org/wp-content/uploads/Nova-Her-2021-map.jpg

The flares from Barnard's star (Ophiuchus constellation), 1998, 2005, 2019, almost the start of a supernova.


(image copyright: 1. Chris Johnsen 2. Istrander 3. Chris Johnsen)

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 24, 2023, 06:35:39 AM
MIDGARD

(https://i.postimg.cc/wvFWcXv0/midgard.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/kg9jVM7n/cetusfenris.jpg)

Midgard is Eridanus (Cetus) while Hel, the third offspring of Loki, is the Hydra constellation.

Before the fight between the Olympians and the Titans (Giants), which was won by the Titans (Ouranus was actually Zeus, and the same legend was repeated for Cronos, after the Deluge), there were no zodiacal constellations in the sky: the struggle between Scorpius and the Hunter, Midgard and Orion, Leo and Hydra, Hercules and Draco was enshrined in the form of star signs (ball lightning toruses) by the beings who had the supernatural power to accomplish this task (they could only access the first layer of the stars, the so-called zodiacal signs).

Sidereal zodiac dates:

https://i.postimg.cc/C1svV97H/sidereal.jpg


https://www.astro.com/astrology/in_vedic2_e.htm

https://westernsiderealastrology.wordpress.com/western-sidereal-astrology-is-real-astrology/

https://web.archive.org/web/20110126062745/http://www.ips-planetarium.org/planetarian/articles/realconstellations_zodiac.html

https://web.archive.org/web/20230223234459/https://mysticmedusa.com/planets-in-astrology/the-real-southern-hemisphere-astrology/

https://vijayajyoti.com/sidereal-and-tropical-zodiac/

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 26, 2023, 02:47:19 AM
LOKASENNA

(https://orig00.deviantart.net/2edf/f/2015/267/9/7/fenrir_wolf_of_the_apocalypse_by_meave456-d9at6zu.jpg)

In an older version of Ragnarok, in the epic Lokasenna, it is Thor who will fight Fenris:

You will not be so brave when you fight the wolf Stanza 58

https://sacred-texts.com/neu/poe/poe10.htm

Another author writes:

Stanza 58. Here it appears that Thor was on his way to fight against the Fenris Wolf, as is also indicated in Voluspa stanza 56.

Tyr, as Polaris, takes part in the binding of Fenris with Gleipnir episode. Tyr, as Mars, will fight Garm (who is actually Fenris). But Thor is Mars. Vidar (Vitharr) has the same powers as Thundarr (Thor). So Fenris will fight twice: Odin first, and then Thor, two distinct events (which are separated by several months it seems).

https://i.postimg.cc/DyX432Tc/piscesfenriscetus.jpg

https://i.postimg.cc/kG2S4QM1/sider2.jpg

Tartaros is Antarctica.

Thor already had fought Midgard before:

http://www.germanicmythology.com/ASTRONOMY3/ThorGoesFishing.html


With regard to the vision of the Scorpion-Men by John of Patmos, here are more images:

https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/imagenes_sumeranu/sumeranu94_02_small.jpg

https://i.postimg.cc/Jh5m8XyL/1511303.jpg

They are also mentioned in the Epic of Gilgamesh. Why in the world would John of Patmos mention, make use of, the Epic of Gilgamesh (of all possible things)?

http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm

https://endtimesforecaster.blogspot.com/2023/08/will-it-be-2027-or-2028.html?showComment=1691963037096#c7561400688762249373

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 26, 2023, 11:18:12 AM
LOKASENNA II

(https://i.postimg.cc/QMh7yYKr/daciano.jpg)

(https://gangleri.nl/articles/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2021/03/voluspa5447.jpg)

(https://i.postimg.cc/jd6dFxHL/regius.jpg)

https://gangleri.nl/articles/1088/comparing-voluspas/

In the original source for Ragnarok, Codex Regius, Thor will fight Fenris the Wolf; it is only later that in the Hauksbok manuscript Fenris is replaced by Midgard (orm instead of ulf). This happened most likely because of the fact that Fenris has a serpent body with a wolf's head in many instances:

(https://i.postimg.cc/zGsKypxH/regius2.jpg)

https://throwbackthorsday.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/gosforth_cross_monsters.jpg?w=1024

Ragnarok and the Trojan War:

https://i.postimg.cc/QtcRdtx7/troyragna.jpg


Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on August 28, 2023, 08:49:20 AM
LOKABRENNA: SIRIUS AND THE SERPENT WOLF

(https://i.postimg.cc/nVmY45Zp/lokabrenna.jpg)

The Lakota Indians mythology describes Sirius as being part of a Snake constellation:

http://judy-volker.com/StarLore/Myths/Sioux.html

http://judy-volker.com/StarLore/Myths/Native_American_North_America1.html#CMA

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50052416021_94ffe87958_o.jpg

It starts with Columba and Puppis, and ends in the Canis Major constellation.

Most of the legends ascribed to Sirius actually involve Procyon (Canis Minor).

http://www.ianridpath.com/startales/canisminor.html

https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Gazetteer/Topics/astronomy/_Texts/secondary/ALLSTA/Canis_Minor*.html

http://www.archaeoastronomy.it/Sirius.htmhttp://www.archaeoastronomy.it/Sirius.htm

Procyon is Horus.

Rudra, in the Vedic cosmology is Betelgeuse (Orion constellation) and not Sirius.

In the Norse mythology, Sirius is Lokabrenna, or Loki's torch.

https://wyrddesigns.wordpress.com/2022/04/01/cultic-worship-to-loki/

https://wyrddesigns.wordpress.com/2022/01/27/could-jormungand-be-connected-to-the-milky-way/

https://otterskin.tumblr.com/post/639367618269200384/lokabrenna-loki-fire-swords-part-2

It is well-known that the Ouroboros symbol in astrology is exemplifed by the Ophiuchus constellation, however there seems to be another such symbol in the Canis Major constellation:

(https://wyrddesigns.files.wordpress.com/2022/01/sirius.jpg?w=473)

Both are related to the Galactic Center (Golden Gate) and respectively to the Galactic Anti-Center (Silver Gate).

The symbol of the Wolf biting its own tail:

Because the star Polaris is the tail of Ursa Minor, it depicts the tail of the Slavic wolf, attached to the hub of the heavens.

Sirius is also linked to Astraeus the Starry One:

https://www.theoi.com/Titan/AsterSeirios.html

(dog-star (kynos astraios) )

https://www.theoi.com/Titan/TitanAstraios.html

But planet Astra was located between Mars and Jupiter (Tiamat -> Rahu/Ketu).


Garuda is Anzu.

Ishum (Issum) is the Hyades constellation (it assists Erra/Mars/Sekhmet).

And there are two Rattlesnake constellations (one of them is well-known as the Pleiades, however the other one is not):

https://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?2010JRASC.104...46M&defaultprint=YES&filetype=.pdf (page 5)

https://misfitsandheroes.wordpress.com/tag/celestial-bird
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 04, 2023, 11:11:22 AM
ROLE OF THE PRECESSION RATE PARAMETER IN DETERMINING THE FIRST AND LAST COSMIC CONFLAGRATIONS


Radius of the FE: 6,363.63 km
Angle between the two Tropics: 0.959582 rad

However, in order to determine the entire length in years of world history we need to know the precession rate of the Sun (the value of which is a variable).

https://image.ibb.co/i6AbDn/pre1.jpg

Currently, it is assumed that this rate is 50.29 arc seconds per year. However, using the orbital variance theory, this rate can have a value of between 49 arc seconds and 50.26 arc seconds per year. This is the reason why I chose the value of 0.0136111° for the precession (expressed in degrees):

https://www.xconvert.com/unit-converter/arcseconds-to-degrees

This gives us a total of 336.56 years (1687 AD to present). By modifying the 49 arc seconds value slightly we can also arrive at the estimate of 339.25 years.

With 50.26 arc seconds, we get a total of 328.17 years (1695 AD).

Vedic cosmology uses 54 arc seconds:

https://www.academia.edu/47853142/Siddhantic_Concept_of_Precession_of_Equinoxes_New_Revelations

https://jayasreesaranathan.blogspot.com/2021/02/suns-movement-determinant-of-precession.html

Tnen, the total will be 305.44 years (1717 AD).

Here are the references that must guide us to arrive at the correct result:

-the 52 x 5 Round Mayan Calendar (260 years); this calendar is based on the Great Conjunctions between Jupiter and Saturn, where the starting and closing dates must be very near to the date of the solstices/equinoxes:

https://www.academia.edu/3275004/The_Prometheus_Code_I_IV_

Then, 1762 + 260 = 2022. That is, we must go back at least to 1762 AD (March 18, 1762 and December 20, 2020 Great Conjunctions).

-the fact that on 800+ maps California is depicted as an island, up to the period 1802-1822 (thereafter, California is a peninsula).

https://searchworks.stanford.edu/catalog?f%5Bcollection%5D%5B%5D=zb871zd0767

https://searchworks.stanford.edu/?f%5Bcollection%5D%5B%5D=zb871zd0767&page=2

Modern astronomy tells that the Great Comet of 1811 was the C/1811 F1 comet.

Not a chance.

https://web.archive.org/web/20070204020916/http://www.datasync.com/~rsf1/1811.htm

On November 4, [William J.] Burchell (near the Vaal River about 50 miles west of present day Kimberly, South Africa) wrote, "as I lay waiting for sleep, and amusing myself in observing the constellations above my head, I noticed a faint nebulous star of the third magnitude, which I had not been used to see in that part of the heavens. Looking at it more attentively, it appeared plainly to be a comet." He said it was located in the tail of Aquila and formed a right triangle with Alpha Cygni and Alpha Lyrae.

(https://web.archive.org/web/20070204020916im_/http://www.datasync.com/~rsf1/1811sa-05.jpg)

"Note that Burchell's 04 Nov 1811 magnitude 3 comet in the tail of Aquila is approximately 35 degrees SSE from the ephemeris position for C/1811 F1 on the same date."

The C/1811 F1 comet was used a cover story for the planetary body which sprang forth and was first seen in the Aquila (Garuda) constellation.

Let us go back to the Navajo Indian mythology:

https://navajostargazer.com/aquila

https://i0.wp.com/navajostargazer.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/navajo_star_gazer_fajanda_butte_altair_drawing_stevie_begaye_nov_17.jpg?w=1080

Garuda is Anzu, or Mushpar, perhaps it is even related to planet Vulcan:

Muspar (a fiery comet that loiters around the sun)

In the period 1811-1812 we had: a world war, two huge earthquakes (New Madrid and Ventura, CA), and thereafter the eruption of the Tambora volcano.

This author believes that the New Madrid earthquake was caused by a meteor strike from the Great Comet of 1811:

https://web.archive.org/web/20201125055232/https://www.earthfrenzyradio.com/conspiracies/2422-the-great-comet-quake-of-1811-a-neo-connection

https://archaeologica.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3691

He also says that the Carolina Bays were caused by the same comet. However, in the official time chronology of geology, the Carolina Bays were formed some 9,000 to 10,000 years ago. Some authors also link the sinking of Atlantis (island next to Cuba) to the same period of time.

Did the island of California realign itself with the continent in 1811-1812? The maps certainly seem to indicate so.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2169555#msg2169555

Then, the Deluge and the myth of Phaethon coincide and did occur in the same interval of time.

The only problem with the Flood having occurred in 1811-1812 is the fact that the Deluge is linked to a Great Conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn (the closest dates are 1802 and 1821).
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 07, 2023, 04:43:34 AM

The only other significant sacred cubit figure between 339.25 and 254.43 is 286.1 (the displacement factor of the Gizeh pyramid).

286.1 x 1.5 = 429.15


1738
         24   
1762       63 km  2.59 km/year (83.9 arcseconds of precession)
         50
1812       190.73 km 2.59 km/ year (83.9 arcseconds)
         212
2024       509.8 km 1.5 km/ year (48.6 arcseconds)


1738 - 1762 24 year period
1762 - 1812 50 year period
1812 - 2024 212 year period

24 years with a precessional shift of 2.59 km/ year (83.9 arcseconds) - a total of 62.16 km (arclength)

50 years with a precessional shift of 2.59 km/ year (83.9 arcseconds) - a total of 129.5 km (arclength)

Total: 62.16 + 129.5 = 191.66 km

Most likely the figures are 63 km and 127.3, respectively (total of 190.3 km): it is a matter of simply counting the months also.

212 years with a precessional shift of 1.5 km/ year (48.9 arcseconds) - a total of 318 km (arclength).

24 + 50 + 212 = 286 years

212 = 636/3

318.1 = 500 sc (sacred cubits)

127.132 = 200 sc

63 = 100 sc

509.8 = 800 sc


1762  63
              127.1
1812  190.6
              318
2024  509.8

Between 1738 and 1812, the precessional shift must have been much higher than today, at a rate of some 2.59 km/ year (83.9 arcseconds, where 83.9 sc = 53.4)

As another example, for a total of 261.8 years, the shift would measure 63 arcseconds; for a total of 260 years, the precession would amount to 63.63 arcseconds.

1738 age of Adam

1762 first great conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn, Olympians vs Titans (epic fight on Earth and in the zodiacal constellations; Olympians: Draco/Fenrir, Loki, Sirius, Chimera (Hydra + Leo), Cetus, Crab, Scorpius, Mushpar/Garuda - Titans: Orion, Apollo, Hyades, Pleiades, Hercules, Mars, Sagittarius, Gemini, Aquarius)

1776 -1812 rule of the Titans, the Olympians are banished to Tartaros (Antarctica)

1812 great Deluge/Phaethon

A total of 286 years of history.


509.8 km - corresponding angle of 4.58333° (0.08 radians)

55° total angle of the solar orbit (27.5 x 2), solstice to solstice (Tropic to Tropic)

55° = 0.959931 radians

0.959931/11 = 0.08726646 = 0.2617994/3

318 km ~- corresponding angle of 2.861° ( for 317.8 km, believe it or not) (radius = 6,363.63 km as always)

4.58333 - 2.861 = 1.722

1.722/2 = 0.861
1.722 = 1.361 + 0.361
5.34 - 1.722 = 3.61767

63 km - corresponding angle of 0.567285° (~2.861/5)

127.3 km - corresponding angle of 1.1463° (2.861 x 4 = 11.444)


Gizeh pyramid: length of one half of a side of the base perimeter = 116.712 meters

With an angle of 27.5°, the opposing side will measure 53.4 meters.

Gizeh pyramid: length of one half of the diagonal of the base = 165.05 meters

With r = 165.05 we get very good results for each of the following angles: 4.58333°, 2.861°, 1.1463° and 0.567285° (direct relationships with the sacred cubit constants).


An illustration of the importance of the measure of the precessional shift (in arcseconds).

Let us suppose that this shift is equal to 53.4 arcseconds. This would correspond to an arclength of 349.266 km. Yes, 1/2.861 = 0.34953. However, the rate would measure 1.6475 km /year. So, we would have to find some kind of an explanation, such as invoking terrestrial refraction in order to modify the total angle (since the radius of 6,363.63 km is fixed and cannot be modified further) of 55°. Then, of course, the total length of chronological history would increase as well.

These kinds of calculations have never been done before, since almost no one believes that the surface of the Earth is flat, let alone someone having knowledge of the new radical chronology of history theory. Perhaps even Fomenko would look with disdain at these computations, since he believes that the entire history is some 1,000 years old; the only historian who would approve of these facts is Christoph Pfister, who did verify for himself that before 1700 AD there was no human presence on the territory of Switzerland and that the printing press was invented well after 1730 AD.

Why would the precessional shift (measured in arcseconds) come up to a value of some 48.9 arcseconds/year, instead of 50.2 arcseconds/year?

Because of the orbital variance theory:

https://web.archive.org/web/20170817094738/http://www.aloha.net/~johnboy/orbitalV.htg/variance.htm (uses the heliocentrical system as a context)

The 3 . 14 seconds is the mean deviation.  The actual deviation, over time, is from 3.11 seconds to 3.17 seconds daily. In other words, the TIME required for the Earth to complete one orbit around the Sun (a year) decreases daily by the rate of 3.14 seconds (of time) and accumulates, annually, to approximately 18 minutes .

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 07, 2023, 02:17:09 PM
THUBAN - THE NORTH POLE STAR

(https://pictures.abebooks.com/inventory/31016548963.jpg)

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/75/Planisph%C3%A6ri_c%C5%93leste.jpg)

Both celestial charts feature Thuban (Alpha Draconis) as the Pole Star. In the official chronology of history and also in modern astronomy, Thuban was the Pole Star some four thousand years ago. Both maps do not make any sense at all, given the period in which they had been created (Renaissance), where Polaris was the North Star. Why would both Hondius and De Wit use Thuban as the Pole Star? Where is the outcry from the other astronomers of the day?

The maps by De Wit or Hondius (till 1640 at least) are accompanied by a stellar chart, where Thuban of Draco is the pole star. The changing of the place of the East and the reversing of the maps happened before Polaris of the Little Dipper became the pole star.


Earlier we have seen how the Great Bear came "bowing down" and was replaced by Polaris as the Pole Star.

Thuban -> Dhruva (Great Bear)
Dhruva -> Polaris


With respect to the previous message, even the figure of 2.12° (0.037 radians) is related to sacred cubit constants.

2.12° - 235.46 km (arclength)

381/235.46 = 1.618


There are two Kalki Avatar characters: Krishna/Skanda (Mars, Thor) and Thule/Vril.

http://www.skandagurunatha.org/oracles/skanda-chap1.asp

https://stotranidhi.com/en/srimad-bhagavadgita-chapter-10-in-english/

https://esamskriti.com/essays/bg-ch-10.pdf

https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/does-kalki-really-come-as-skanda.214979/

https://www.krishna.com/will-krishna-appear-earth-again

https://www.theanswerblog.com/post/will-krishna-come-again

https://www.articlepark.org/post/template-how-to-write-a-tips-blog-post

But when Lord Shri Krishna will incarnate as Kalki, then only he will return the gem of Ashwathama after ending Kalyug. And Ashwathama will also help Lord Kalki in establishing Dharma.

https://indiansocialscience.in/how-will-krishna-come-again-in-kalyug/

Some prophecies suggest that Krishna will appear as Kalki, the final avatar of Vishnu, riding a white horse to bring an end to darkness and restore righteousness.

https://www.webnovel.com/book/the-uncovered-mysteries_17104961906613705/kalki-myth-or-messiah_45935991990582616


India, photographs in Calcutta taken in 1863 AD:

https://www.stolenhistory.org/articles/abandoned-1860s-india-by-uap.117/

https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8451483d.r
Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 08, 2023, 04:24:58 AM
THUBAN - THE NORTH POLE STAR II

(https://i.postimg.cc/254QCRFX/aratus.jpg)
(https://uploads5.wikiart.org/images/albrecht-durer/map-of-the-northern-sky-with-representations-of-the-constellations-decorated-with-clockwise-the-1515.jpg!Large.jpg)
(https://images.fineartamerica.com/images/artworkimages/mediumlarge/2/boreal-constellations-a-map-of-the-sky-1661-andreas-cellarius.jpg)

Star charts (Aratus, Durer, Cellarius)

Even more examples here:

https://press.uchicago.edu/books/HOC/HOC_V3_Pt1/HOC_VOLUME3_Part1_chapter4.pdf (pg 5 9 14)

Dhruva was the constellation Shisumara (Draco). And the Great Bear came "bowing down" together with this star, and was not the Pole Star.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344773813_Sacred_Alignment_of_Religious_Structures_to_North_Star

Location of Pole star (Dhruva) appears to have changed from earlier Puranic reference from tail of Shishumara (Draco) to tail of Ursa Minor (Current Polaris) and this supported Meru concept instead of Shishumara as hub of cosmos.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343695710_Mythology_of_Nakshatras

https://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1998JBAA..108...79R pg 84

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283894340_Sisumara_the_forgotten_Constellation_of_Ancient_Indian_Astronomy_Invited_Conference_Talk

https://www.tifr.res.in/~vahia/saptarshi.pdf

https://www.academia.edu/7193503/Dhruva_the_Ancient_Vedic_Hindu_Pole_Star

Saturn (Kewan) fought against the general of the generals, the Pole Star.

Therefore, we can simplify even further the succession of events as they relate to the Pole Star:

Thuban -> Polaris (most probably during the Deluge)

The most renowned stellar chart makers did identify Thuban as the Pole Star during the Renaissance, it is only that the Renaissance occurred some 200 years later in time (18th century).

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on September 09, 2023, 08:43:45 AM
ROCK MORPHING TECHNOLOGY


(https://web.archive.org/web/20220516121251/http://198.46.190.126/images/sphinx1.jpg)

Here is the video taken in May of 2022:

https://web.archive.org/web/20220605055555/http://194.233.91.97/videos/sphinx.mp4 (the video is not fake, the effects of the ringtone can be observed at 1:16 - 1:23; it was seen by perhaps a few dozen people and was forgotten the very next day - after a few hours, the Sphinx did open its eyes as before)

The entire episode might be a reference to W.B. Yeats' poem The Second Birth (The Second Coming).


Armilustrium (end of October)

Galactic Gate #1 (12/1 - 12/21)

Tubilustrium (end of March)

Galactic Gate #2 (6/1 - 6/21)

The first three events have been described in Egyptian texts and are synonymous with the Orion Nebula, Sagittarius A and the Cygnus constellation. A cosmic occurrence which takes place during Armilustrium means that it will not arise in the time of Tubilustrium (if it does come about in the midst of Tubilustrium, it will not happen at Armilustrium). Example: if Blue Kachina is seen during the autumn of some year, and nothing happens on Armilustrium then Red Kachina will appear during Tubilustrium.


https://web.archive.org/web/20170422063040/http://s8int.com/phile/dinolit57.html

https://www.genesispark.com/exhibits/evidence/historical/ancient/dinosaur/

https://books.google.ro/books?id=gx5aVytf69MC&printsec=frontcover&hl=ro#v=onepage&q&f=false

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 12, 2023, 03:27:19 PM
NEW WEIGHT FORMULA: W = VΔ, WHERE Δ = 9.86 x d (d = density) -  9 DEXTROROTATORY SUBQUARKS AND 1.36sc DENSITY OF CONNECTING LINES

Take a bag (container/bottle) with holes, filled with water, and drop it in free fall. The water will stop pouring out of the holes. Therefore, the conventional weight formula, W = mg is totally false (not to mention disingenuous). The weight of an object, in FET, is given totally by the absorbing vortices of the dextrorotatory subquarks of an atom, there are nine dextrorotatory subquarks which make up a single electron (graviton). An object at rest is no longer influenced by the downward cosmic rays (subquarks), its weight a wholly a measure of the absorbing vortices of the dextrorotatory subquarks.

Mass, as in the definition of the visible amount of matter, is an antigravitational property: it is the laevorotatory subquarks which provide the mass itself, they are totally antigravitational, they have emissive vortices. The dark matter, the hidden dextrorotatory subquarks provide the weight of the object. The positrons do not contribute to the weight of an object, only the gravitons do so (electron = graviton).

Weight is measured in kg (kilograms) for an object at rest, NOT in newtons.

Why then does the acceleration of the downward cosmic rays (subquarks) equals exactly the true density (pi squared or 9.86 as a value) figure? During free fall, the object weighs nothing at all: the dextrorotatory subquarks no longer absorb aether, therefore the density becomes normal again (d instead of Δ, where Δ = 9.86d) so these cosmic rays which penetrate matter will provide that necessary figure of 9.86 during the free fall. As soon as the object is at rest, the density of the subquarks reasserts itself, while the object is no longer subject to the influence of the cosmic rays, weight is then measured in kilograms (or grams). Starting from atomic mass and atomic density, using Avogrado's number, we can incorporate the 9.86 figure into the final formula.

The units of weight for an object at rest are kilograms not newtons. The downward cosmic rays will penetrate the falling object to provide immediately the Δ figure of 9.86 (the dextrorotatory subquarks of the object will align themselves vertically with the cosmic rays).

Neutrons and protons/electrons from a subquark point of view:

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr02.htm

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/4234/why-is-the-relationship-between-atomic-number-and-density-not-linear

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_density

can weight be defined in terms of avogadro number

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rsta.2011.0176

The atomic mass unit (amu or simply u) is the 1/12 of the mass of a 12C atom. Avogadro's number (NA=6.022×10^23) is the number of atoms contained in 12 g of 12C.

https://www.thoughtco.com/avogadros-number-example-chemistry-problem-609541

https://bio.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Microbiology/Microbiology_(Boundless)/02%3A_Chemistry/2.02%3A_Chemical_Bonds/2.2.04%3A_Avogadro's_Number_and_the_Mole

Another property of Avogadro’s number is that the mass of one mole of a substance is equal to that substance’s molecular weight.

The mass of an atom is determined by the number of protons and neutrons in the nucleus. It is usually expressed in atomic mass units (amu).

The atomic number density (N; atoms/cm3) is the number of atoms of a given type per unit volume (V; cm3) of the material.

The atomic weight of a helium atom (4.002) is approximately four times that of an individual hydrogen atom (1.007), but since gaseous hydrogen is a diatomic molecule containing two hydrogen atoms (H2), helium gas is only twice as heavy as hydrogen gas.

The value of the mass number of hydrogen is 1, while the mass number of the helium is 4. Considering the mass number, the helium is four times heavier than that of the hydrogen element.
A helium atom is two times heavier than a hydrogen molecule.

A light interferometer is actually a display of the existence of gravitational waves since the Coriolis effect is connected to terrestrial gravity, and the electromagnetic light waves and the gravitational waves travel in double fashion: a deflection of the gravitational waves will show up as the deflection of the light beam. The Sagnac effect, by contrast, is totally an electromagnetic effect, related to the speed of the velocity of the light beams.

https://www.ias.ac.in/article/fulltext/pram/087/05/0071
https://www.gsjournal.net/books/THIERRYDEMEES-2012-12-30-Coriolis-Gravity-Theory.pdf
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1367-2630/ab73c5/pdf

Physics of the barometer tube:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2037796#msg2037796

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2080914#msg2080914

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 12, 2023, 11:45:26 PM
NEW WEIGHT FORMULA: W = VΔ, WHERE Δ = 9.86 x d (d = density) -  9 DEXTROROTATORY SUBQUARKS AND 1.36sc DENSITY OF CONNECTING LINES II

The formula W=mg is always wrong. An object in free fall registers no weight at all, yet it is at that very point that the g force is active upon the object. An object at rest is not subject to the g force, g = 0, and yet the full weight would be registered by a scale.

The correct formula is:

W = VΔ, WHERE Δ = 9.86 x d (d = density), V is the volume

The density is actually 9.86 x d, since we have nine dextrorotatory subquarks which make up the electron (graviton) and there are also connecting tubes:

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr02.htm

Let us remember that the weight of a column of air of one square meter would register 100,000 newtons on a scale. All scales would be destroyed, no one would be able to breathe at all. Here all factors are taken into consideration (the air beneath the scale, the pressure in the lungs):

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2037796#msg2037796

In FET theory we have the following figures:

Weight of a subquark (electron) with dextrorotatory receptive vortex:

9.06 x 10-31 kg

Weight of an antiboson:

6.36 x 10-41 kg

Radius of a boson:

3.39 x 10-35 m

Radius of the aparabindu:

5.34 x 10-38 m

Strings are to be found at the Planck level (strings are made up of bosons and antibosons). Below the Planck scale, we have the smallest particles: the aparabindu and the parabindu.

In this paper, where they went all the way to the 10-48 m scale, they are using the wrong formula for the distance Earth -  GRB 041219A galaxy; the distance is actually some 25-30 km (let us remember Pauli's calculation for the radius of curvature of the Universe at 31 km, if ether does exist):

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1106.1068.pdf (the grains are the bosons and antibosons)

The aparabindu looks like this:

https://files.builder.nu/e4/d0/e4d09227-a5eb-41a4-a38a-f85df1df0378.jpeg

The amount of aether being absorbed by a boson/subquark depends on the size of the square shaft of the subterranean chamber:

https://files.builder.nu/6d/a3/6da3affd-1a9a-4820-965c-682913b33864.png (those are royal cubits, not sacred cubits)

https://khufupyramid.dk/inside-dimensions/the-subterranean-chamber

Title: Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
Post by: sandokhan on November 13, 2023, 08:06:15 AM
NEW WEIGHT FORMULA: W = VΔ, WHERE Δ = 9.86 x d (d = density) -  9 DEXTROROTATORY SUBQUARKS AND 1.36sc DENSITY OF CONNECTING LINES III

There are 14 billion bosons (photons, bubbles of light) in a subquark. The number of the antibosons (bosons which produce more darkness/aether/stillness instead of light/ether/sound) is six times as much.

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/chaptr01.htm

"The six little bodies are arranged in two sets of three, forming two triangles that are not interchangeable. The lines in the diagram of the atom on the gaseous sub-plane, Fig. 1. are not lines of force, but show the two triangles; on a plane surface the interpenetration of the triangles cannot be clearly indicated. "

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/oc/fig001.gif

Those are 30 - 60 - 90 triangles (ratio of the sides 1 - √3 - 2).

The atomic density number must be multiplied by π2: nine subquarks and the connecting tubes.

π2 - 9 = 0.8696, for a sacred cubit of 0.63662 units.

With a sacred cubit of 0.63673 unit we get π2 - 9  = √3/2 ~= 1.361sc.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1774536#msg1774536

"Estimating the distance between successive bubbles as about six times the width of a bubble..."

14 x 6 = 84 billion antibosons per subquark

84 is our old friend: 84sc = 53.4

Total density: π2

84 x √3/2 = 72.746, which is quite amazing.

The missing apex of the Gizeh pyramid measures exactly 286.1 sacred inches, or 7.27 meters.

Those additional 72.7 billion antibosons form the sides (tubes) of the triangles connecting the subquarks of the hydrogen atom.

2y + √3y + y = 72.7/2

y = 7.68

√3y = 26.6/2, where of course we recognize the five sacred ratios: 26.7 - 53.4 - 80 - 136.1 - 534.

Now we know where the √3/2 figure contribution to the 9.86 total density number comes from.

No one has ever asked a FE this question about the g-force: if you agree that the object placed on a flat surface is not subject to the g-force, then where does the 9.86 discrepancy figure come from? Now, this question can be answered.


Garuda, the Firebird, the only planet/comet which can orbit the Sun very closely:

https://zetatalk.com/teams/tteam34s.htm

https://zetatalk.com/index/sign1083.jpg

https://zetatalk.com/newsletr/issue737.jpg
The 3:18 image captured the Winged Disc, the prior and later images did not have this rare capture. Per Skymap, only the planet Mercury should be in the four o'clock position on that day, to the right of the Sun.

This is not Nibiru. Nibiru is associated with Canopus, Saturn (in Aquarius/Cygnus) and Mars.

Garuda of great splendour, enkindling all the points of the universe, that mighty being endued with strength, that bird capable of assuming at will any form, of going at will everywhere, and of calling to his aid at will any measure of energy. Effulgent like a heap of fire, he shone terribly. Of lustre equal to that of the fire at the end of the Yuga, his eyes were bright like the lightning-flash. And soon after birth, that bird grew in size and increasing his body ascended the skies. Fierce and vehemently roaring, he looked as terrible as second Ocean-fire. (Mahabharata)

In the Persian mythology, Garuda is Muespar.

Muspar (a fiery comet that loiters around the sun)