Advanced Flat Earth Theory

  • 651 Replies


  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4563
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #630 on: August 11, 2019, 12:57:03 AM »

General Relativity Problem of Mercury’s Perihelion Advance Revisited

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.

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:

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:

"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?



  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4563
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #631 on: August 11, 2019, 04:11:15 AM »

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

Electromagnetic and gravitational waves in a stationary magnetic field

Gravitational Hertz experiment with electromagnetic radiation in a strong magnetic field

“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

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: (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).

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.

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

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:

Particle production in a gravitational wave background

« Last Edit: August 11, 2019, 04:13:34 AM by sandokhan »



  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4563
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #632 on: August 12, 2019, 12:44:16 AM »

"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 (it includes the peer review data)

Signal Photon Flux and Background Noise in a Coupling Electromagnetic Detecting System for High Frequency Gravitational Waves,%20et%20al.%20PRD%2009-9-09%20.pdf

A New Theoretical Technique for the Measurement of High-Frequency Relic Gravitational Waves

Searching for high-frequency gravitational waves by ground high field magnetic resonant sweepings

Ultra-High-Intensity Lasers for Gravitational Wave Generation and Detection;%20HFGW%20Laser%20Generator.pdf

Why LIGO can’t detect HFGWs'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;%20HFGW%20Telecommunications.pdf

The Utilization of High-Frequency Gravitational Waves for Global Communications$/sci/pdfs/HDM219WH.pdf

High-Frequency Gravitational Wave Induced Nuclear Fusion;%20HFGW%20Nuclear%20Fusion.pdf

GASER: Gravitational-wave Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation

Can the Gertsenshtein-Zel'dovich effect be used for propulsion, as an alternative to the Biefeld-Brown effect? The answer is yes.



  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4563
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #633 on: August 12, 2019, 05:47:22 AM »

The Gertsenshtein-Zel'dovich 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.

Craft using an inertial mass reduction device

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). (Gravitational Wave Generator via Tokamak Physics) (Gravitational Wave (GW) Radiation Pattern at the Focus of a High-Frequency GW (HFGW) Generator and Aerospace Applications) (HFGW/laser plasma interaction) (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.

« Last Edit: August 12, 2019, 05:51:02 AM by sandokhan »



  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4563
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #634 on: August 13, 2019, 12:42:11 AM »

“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):

Informational field and superluminal communication

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.

The concept of Minkowski space-time is just an approximation which should be avoided in rigorous theoretical constructions.

Tunneling Times and Superluminality: a Tutorial

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

On localized “X-shaped” Superluminal solutions to Maxwell equations

Superluminal waves and objects: an overview of the relevant experiments

Revisiting the Superluminal Lorentz Transformations and Their Group-Theoretical Properties

Electrodynamics with the scalar field

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

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).



  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4563
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #635 on: August 13, 2019, 03:57:04 AM »

The Gravity of Photons and the Necessary Rectification of Einstein Equation

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

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.



  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4563
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #636 on: August 13, 2019, 06:36:45 AM »

The Necessary Existence of Gravitational Waves and the Repulsive Gravitation

Incompleteness of General Relativity, Einstein's Errors, and Related Experiments

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

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

The Repulsive Gravitation and Errors of Einstein's_Notion_of_Weak_Gravity_Einstein's_Equivalence_Principle_and_the_Absence_of_Dynamic_Solutions_for_the_1915_Einstein_Equation's_Unification's_Inverse_Square_Law_and_Unification_of_Gravitation_and_Electromagnetism_--_the_questionable_accurate_gravitational_constant_of_J_Luo_--'s_Radiation_Formula_and_Modifications_to_the_Einstein_Equation


The Question of Space-Time Singularities in General Relativity and Einstein's Errors

The American Physical Society and Errors in Gravitation

Comments on “Unification of Gravity and Electromagnetism by Mohammed A. El-Lakany” & Einstein’s Unification

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



  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4563
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #637 on: August 14, 2019, 01:16:44 AM »

The speed of gravity revisited

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:

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: (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).

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

Reviewing the Zero Point Energy

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

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,%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?

« Last Edit: August 14, 2019, 01:18:38 AM by sandokhan »



  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4563
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #638 on: August 15, 2019, 01:48:17 AM »

Quantum physics cannot explain the strong nuclear force at all (the Yukawa pion exchange proposal).

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.

"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."

The distribution of the zeros of the Riemann zeta function is related to the model of the energy levels in a heavy nucleus.

Riemann zeta function model of the boson:

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.

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:

Superluminal Whittaker waves: (Soviet scalar weapon section)

« Last Edit: August 15, 2019, 01:55:21 AM by sandokhan »



  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4563
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #639 on: August 16, 2019, 01:51:16 AM »

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

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:

Dr. Ellis also merged Weyl's affine connection with Kaluza's five-dimensional theory:


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”

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.


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.


Quantum effects from a purely geometrical relativity theory

Cosmic acceleration, inflation, dark matter, and dark ‘energy’ in one neat package

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

What Causes the Electron to Weigh? (pgs 136-161 of the pdf document, pgs 129-154 of the treatise)

Three Logical Proofs: The Five-Dimensional Reality of Space-Time

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.

The dextrorotatory subquark (gravitational) and the laevorotatory subquark (electromagnetic). (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)



  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4563
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #640 on: August 20, 2019, 09:51:45 AM »

On the question of a dynamic solution in general relativity

Linearization of the Einstein Equation and The 1993 Press Release of the Nobel Prize in Physics

The Gravitational Wave and Einstein Equation

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:

The anti-gravitational coupling term for the Biefeld-Brown effect was derived for the first time by H. Weyl in 1917:

"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."



  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4563
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #641 on: September 12, 2019, 06:41:41 AM »

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:

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:

Russian research on the reversal of time:

A.D. Sakharov's memorable article on the relationship between vacuum quantum fluctuations and the theory of gravitation:

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.



  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4563
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #642 on: September 29, 2019, 03:42:47 AM »

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:

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:

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:


(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:

Δt =  2(V1L1 + V2L2)/c2

A generalization of the second formula derived by Tartaglia and Ruggiero (2vl/c2).

« Last Edit: September 29, 2019, 03:53:15 AM by sandokhan »



  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4563
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #643 on: October 01, 2019, 02:41:15 AM »

Using Hermann Weyl's electrovacuum solutions, Professor S.D. Majumdar found the relationship between gravitational and electrostatic forces (Biefeld-Brown effect).

The Weyl-Majumdar-Papapetrou-Ivanov solution is the exact formula for the Biefeld-Brown effect:

Weyl electrovacuum solutions and gauge invariance
Dr. B.V. Ivanov

On the gravitational field induced by static electromagnetic sources
Dr. B.V Ivanov

Nipher electrogravitational experiments:



  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4563
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #644 on: October 02, 2019, 10:26:42 PM »

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:

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).

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.

This factor of proportionality was proven, for the first time, for the LISA Space Antenna:

« Last Edit: October 06, 2019, 02:08:53 AM by sandokhan »



  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4563
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #645 on: October 03, 2019, 03:45:55 AM »

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:

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:


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:

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


2(V1L1 + V2L2)/c2

My formula is identical to (coincides with) Professor Yeh's equation:

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).

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.

« Last Edit: October 06, 2019, 02:08:04 AM by sandokhan »



  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4563
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #646 on: October 04, 2019, 12:32:20 AM »

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:

"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.

"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."

« Last Edit: October 04, 2019, 12:43:08 AM by sandokhan »



  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4563
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #647 on: October 04, 2019, 07:18:05 AM »

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:



  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4563
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #648 on: October 05, 2019, 08:48:02 AM »

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.


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.

The factor of proportionality was found to be R/L.

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:

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.

« Last Edit: October 06, 2019, 02:10:37 AM by sandokhan »



  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4563
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #649 on: October 09, 2019, 08:46:03 AM »

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."

What, then, could possibly be the cause of the excessive brightness?

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):

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.


Dr. Stuart D. Bale, UC Berkeley

« Last Edit: October 09, 2019, 12:00:41 PM by sandokhan »



  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4563
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #650 on: October 12, 2019, 12:58:28 AM »

Official chronology of history:

However, Garri Kasparov investigated the entire storyline of these events and found out that they could never have taken place at all.

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).

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.

« Last Edit: October 12, 2019, 01:01:32 AM by sandokhan »



  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4563
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #651 on: October 19, 2019, 01:53:10 AM »

"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.

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:

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.

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:

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

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).

Algebraic approach to time-delay data analysis: orbiting case
K Rajesh Nayak and J-Y Vinet

This is an IOP article, published by the prestigious journal Classic and Quantum Gravity:

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:

"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:

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.

Here is the CORIOLIS FORMULA for the MGX:


Φ = (Φ1 + Φ2)/2

Here is the SAGNAC FORMULA for the MGX:

2(V1L1 + V2L2)/c2

V1 = V0cosΦ1
V2 = V0cosΦ2
L1 = L0cosΦ1
L2 = L0cosΦ2

Let now V0 = V and L0 = L.
Let ε = sinΦ and ε1 = (cos2Φ1 + cos2Φ2)

Then, we obtain:





Exactly the form required by the application of Stokes' theorem to light interferometers.

The effect of ether on beam neutrinos experiments:

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:

Once the area of the interferometer is mentioned, one obtains the CORIOLIS EFFECT.

« Last Edit: October 19, 2019, 02:05:48 AM by sandokhan »