free fall

  • 14 Replies
  • 2622 Views
free fall
« on: October 10, 2008, 09:40:20 PM »
FET states that the UA is constantly accelerating the earth skyward at 9.8ms^-2, and that the earth it'self shields us from it's effects. however, the hevenly bodies are not shielded because of their distance from the earth which causes the UA to flow, much like a liquid or gas, around the sides of the planet.

N.B- please say if this is not what you believe happens, but i have heard it several times.

Back to the point. There will be some transition point between not feeling the UA on Earth and the heavenly bodies feeling it, some kind of force gradient, correct (you may see this as the reduction of 'gravity' with altitude).

If this is true then at some point outside the 'atmoplane' there wil be the full effect of the UA acting on me, therefore accelerating me at 9.8ms-1. This means that i should be able to take a ship and float (no lateral velocity relative to the Earth) above the Earth without accelerating towards it.

RET says this is impossible (there is demonstratable evidence it is impossible).

How does FET respond to this.

*

Jack

  • Administrator
  • 5179
Re: free fall
« Reply #1 on: October 10, 2008, 09:48:34 PM »
the hevenly bodies are not shielded
The heavenly bodies produce their own DEF because they are obstacles to the flow of Dark Energy.

If this is true then at some point outside the 'atmoplane' there wil be the full effect of the UA acting on me, therefore accelerating me at 9.8ms-1. This means that i should be able to take a ship and float (no lateral velocity relative to the Earth) above the Earth without accelerating towards it.
If you can go pass the DEF, then yes you will be affected by the effects of Dark Energy (UA). Unfortunately, since the DEF holds the atmolayer, it pretty much can hold you too.

Re: free fall
« Reply #2 on: October 10, 2008, 09:53:26 PM »
Sorry for my ignorance but what does DEF stand for?

Re: free fall
« Reply #3 on: October 10, 2008, 09:55:22 PM »
Quote
If you can go pass the DEF, then yes you will be affected by the effects of Dark Energy (UA). Unfortunately, since the DEF holds the atmolayer, it pretty much can hold you too.

But it is possible to go past the 'atmoplane' simply by providing a constant upward acceleration. No field could possible always hold us down unless it has an escape velocity of c.

*

Jack

  • Administrator
  • 5179
Re: free fall
« Reply #4 on: October 10, 2008, 09:58:48 PM »
Sorry for my ignorance but what does DEF stand for?
Dark Energy Field, a "shield" created when there is an obstacle (FE) to the flow of Dark Energy. This is similar to the formation of a bow shock.

Quote
If you can go pass the DEF, then yes you will be affected by the effects of Dark Energy (UA). Unfortunately, since the DEF holds the atmolayer, it pretty much can hold you too.

But it is possible to go past the 'atmoplane' simply by providing a constant upward acceleration. No field could possible always hold us down unless it has an escape velocity of c.
The DEF is not gravitation.

The DEF holds our massive accelerating atmolayer in place. Thus, in order for us to fly pass the edge of the world (in this case, the DEF), we must have a mass greater than the atmolayer's while still maintaining an upward acceleration of 9.8m/s2. It is theorized that the atmolayer's mass value is the limit before a penetration of the DEF [note: this is only a theory, as the limit could be greater than the atmolayer's mass. We do not know how much mass can the DEF really hold]. The DEF is not the same as gravitation, so escape velocity does not exist.

This can also explain why direct or sustained space-flight is not possible in the FE.

Re: free fall
« Reply #5 on: October 10, 2008, 10:06:45 PM »
Quote
The DEF holds our massive accelerating atmolayer in place. Thus, in order for us to fly pass the edge of the world (in this case, the DEF), we must have a mass greater than the atmolayer's while still maintaining an upward acceleration of 9.8m/s2. It is theorized that the atmolayer's mass value is the limit before a penetration of the DEF [note: this is only a theory, as the limit could be greater than the atmolayer's mass. We do not know how much mass can the DEF really hold]. The DEF is not the same as gravitation, so escape velocity does not exist.

This can also explain why direct or sustained space-flight is not possible in the FE.


This makes no sence to me. Why should it matter what mass the object i want to send out of the DEF is. Sure, if it shot an object at the DEF and it repeled a small object but allowed a big object through then you are correct (much like creating nuclear fusion, where significant kinetic energy of a proton is needed to fuse with another). However, it doesn't matter what the mass is in this case, only it's momentum.

What i am talking about though is not a balistic object but one which is constantly accelerating, the field couldn't hold it back.

Also, i would say that light has no trouble escaping the DEF, yet this has a very small momentum.

*

Jack

  • Administrator
  • 5179
Re: free fall
« Reply #6 on: October 10, 2008, 10:13:44 PM »
This makes no sence to me. Why should it matter what mass the object i want to send out of the DEF is. Sure, if it shot an object at the DEF and it repeled a small object but allowed a big object through then you are correct (much like creating nuclear fusion, where significant kinetic energy of a proton is needed to fuse with another).
If an object has a mass greater than the atmolayer, it will go through the DEF.

However, it doesn't matter what the mass is in this case, only it's momentum.
Except it does in this case. Bigger mass while maintaining a constant acceleration -> bigger force.

What i am talking about though is not a balistic object but one which is constantly accelerating, the field couldn't hold it back.
Read above.
« Last Edit: October 10, 2008, 10:48:16 PM by E.Jack »

Re: free fall
« Reply #7 on: October 10, 2008, 10:29:24 PM »
Quote
If an object has a mass greater than the atmolayer, it will go through the DEF.

Still doesn't make any sense, and yes, light does have a very small momentum.

Re: free fall
« Reply #8 on: October 10, 2008, 10:35:38 PM »
Quote
If an object has a mass greater than the atmolayer, it will go through the DEF.

Just had a thought. It really doesn't matter what mass you try to get to escape.

In case you haven't notticed, the atmolayer is not one big mass, It is lots of little masses. All the DEF can therefore do is stop individual particles from escaping because they have random energies and directions. So taking the atmoplane as one coherent mass is just stupid.

*

Jack

  • Administrator
  • 5179
Re: free fall
« Reply #9 on: October 10, 2008, 10:47:16 PM »
Quote
If an object has a mass greater than the atmolayer, it will go through the DEF.
Still doesn't make any sense
Nice refutation.

In case you haven't notticed, the atmolayer is not one big mass, It is lots of little masses. All the DEF can therefore do is stop individual particles from escaping because they have random energies and directions. So taking the atmoplane as one coherent mass is just stupid.
Of course it is not just one coherent mass. Ever heard of a "total atmospheric mass"?

Re: free fall
« Reply #10 on: October 10, 2008, 10:52:47 PM »
Yes i have heard of total atmospheric mass but i don't see how it applies here. The DEF doesn't need to hold the entire mass of the atmosphere in since not all of the atmosphere is trying to escape at the same time (random motion). The force required to hold the entire mass of the atmosphere in doesn't need to be very strong and so any fast moving object could easily escape.

It is the acceleration of the Earth that keeps most of the atmosphere in, your DEF force from above only needs to be strong enough to prevent the highest kinetic energy atmospheric particle from escaping, not the total mass of the atmosphere.

*

Jack

  • Administrator
  • 5179
Re: free fall
« Reply #11 on: October 11, 2008, 12:25:26 AM »
Yes i have heard of total atmospheric mass but i don't see how it applies here. The DEF doesn't need to hold the entire mass of the atmosphere in since not all of the atmosphere is trying to escape at the same time (random motion).
That doesn't make sense. Obviously, to keep it from escaping randomly, the DEF would have to hold the entire atmolayer.

The force required to hold the entire mass of the atmosphere in doesn't need to be very strong and so any fast moving object could easily escape.
When you're moving and have a mass greater than the atmolayer, you have a huge momentum (p = mv).

It is the acceleration of the Earth that keeps most of the atmosphere in, your DEF force from above only needs to be strong enough to prevent the highest kinetic energy atmospheric particle from escaping, not the total mass of the atmosphere.
No, it needs to keep the whole atmolayer from escaping, just like how "gravity" holds the RE's whole atmosphere.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42609
Re: free fall
« Reply #12 on: October 11, 2008, 07:34:11 PM »
This makes no sence to me. Why should it matter what mass the object i want to send out of the DEF is. Sure, if it shot an object at the DEF and it repeled a small object but allowed a big object through then you are correct (much like creating nuclear fusion, where significant kinetic energy of a proton is needed to fuse with another).
If an object has a mass greater than the atmolayer, it will go through the DEF.
Are you sure that "more mass" is the phrase that you want to use?  Or do you really mean "higher density"?  Honestly, I'm not sure what mass would have to do with trying to pass through the DEF.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Jack

  • Administrator
  • 5179
Re: free fall
« Reply #13 on: October 12, 2008, 04:11:52 AM »
Mass is a variable of density. If you occupy as much space as the atmolayer and you have more mass, you have higher density. Obviously, you don't have that much volume, so you could have a much higher density.

Mass still plays the bigger role because it is a variable of force, momentum, density, etc.

Also,


Don't get too influenced by the color (DEF).
« Last Edit: October 12, 2008, 04:41:40 AM by E.Jack »

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42609
Re: free fall
« Reply #14 on: October 12, 2008, 08:36:50 AM »
Very good E. Jack.  Now, could you draw that to scale?  That is, give the FE a diameter of 24,900 miles and put the sun and moon 3000 miles above it?  I would like to see how the DEF bow shock looks that way.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.