Advanced Flat Earth Theory

  • 651 Replies
  • 544577 Views
*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #510 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.



The real Michelson-Morley apparatus had 16 reflecting mirrors.



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)


« Last Edit: April 02, 2018, 03:44:38 AM by sandokhan »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #511 on: April 03, 2018, 12:36:01 AM »
SCHAUBERGER-DEPALMA EFFECT: JET ENGINE LEVITATION

(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

(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





"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.



(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


« Last Edit: April 03, 2018, 03:02:33 AM by sandokhan »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #512 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.



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






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




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








*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #513 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.





Tuning fork + djed + ankh = ball lightning device

« Last Edit: April 03, 2018, 09:20:24 AM by sandokhan »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #514 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



*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #515 on: April 05, 2018, 12:40:31 AM »
MENDELEEV'S ETHER PERIODIC TABLE OF ELEMENTS

Principles of Chemistry, 8th edition, 1906:



Group 0, line 0: NEWTONIUM

Group 0, line 1: CORONIUM



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.



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

« Last Edit: April 05, 2018, 12:43:17 AM by sandokhan »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #516 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)


*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #517 on: April 18, 2018, 10:28:29 PM »
MICHELSON FORMULA PROVES THAT THE EARTH IS STATIONARY



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:



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.



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:



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):



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.



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.

« Last Edit: April 18, 2018, 10:34:40 PM by sandokhan »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #518 on: April 30, 2018, 01:13:23 AM »
FIZEAU EXPERIMENT HOAX



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.

« Last Edit: May 02, 2018, 06:02:32 AM by sandokhan »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #519 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:



(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






(Dr. A.G. Kelly, Challenging Modern Physics)

The use of the relativistic composition of velocities is catastrophically flawed:

http://relativityoflight.com/Chapter29.pdf

(also discussed on the anti-relativity.com forum)

« Last Edit: May 02, 2018, 06:57:55 AM by sandokhan »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #520 on: May 03, 2018, 02:29:56 AM »
FRESNEL FORMULA HOAX II



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.'

« Last Edit: May 03, 2018, 02:33:37 AM by sandokhan »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #521 on: May 10, 2018, 01:27:26 AM »
KORONIUM



(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
« Last Edit: May 10, 2018, 02:31:33 AM by sandokhan »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #522 on: May 10, 2018, 09:31:03 PM »
KORONIUM II



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


*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #523 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.




We proceed to solve the common Maxwell’s equations (1.10) to (1.12).




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:



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:












*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #524 on: May 19, 2018, 02:56:40 AM »
SACRED CUBIT ZETA FUNCTION VI



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).





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.



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).





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).

« Last Edit: May 27, 2018, 02:39:36 AM by sandokhan »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #525 on: May 22, 2018, 08:15:43 AM »
QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT



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.





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



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

« Last Edit: May 22, 2018, 08:30:59 AM by sandokhan »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #526 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.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #527 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

« Last Edit: May 28, 2018, 01:07:07 AM by sandokhan »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #528 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:



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. 



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

« Last Edit: May 29, 2018, 06:07:51 AM by sandokhan »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #529 on: May 30, 2018, 01:18:02 AM »
KORONIUM III



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:



GDV photograph of corona discharge from human thumb, raw data.

Kirlian photography of plants:






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

« Last Edit: May 30, 2018, 01:28:09 AM by sandokhan »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #530 on: May 31, 2018, 12:40:32 AM »
NEWTONIUM



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:



(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)

« Last Edit: May 31, 2018, 12:46:29 AM by sandokhan »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #531 on: June 02, 2018, 09:01:43 AM »
NEWTONIUM II



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.



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



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).



*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #532 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.









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.


*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #533 on: June 03, 2018, 08:11:58 AM »
COMET P17/HOLMES III



Comet Hyakutake on April 17, 1996
Comet Hale - Bopp on April 8, 1997



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.



26.10.2007



27.10.2007



31.10.2007



31.10.2007



5.11.2007

« Last Edit: June 04, 2018, 10:28:31 PM by sandokhan »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #534 on: June 05, 2018, 11:45:18 AM »
INERTIAL ELECTROSTATIC CONFINEMENT OF COMETS: KORONIUM AND NEWTONIUM EFFECTS

A rare admission from modern astronomy:



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



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:



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
« Last Edit: June 05, 2018, 11:59:40 AM by sandokhan »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #535 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)



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.



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."



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.



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.



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.
« Last Edit: June 09, 2018, 01:10:41 AM by sandokhan »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #536 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).




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.




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



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.

« Last Edit: June 09, 2018, 01:08:10 AM by sandokhan »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #537 on: June 10, 2018, 06:31:24 AM »
MICHELSON-GALE FORMULA: CORIOLIS FORCE EFFECT ON THE CONVEX AND CONCAVE AREAS OF THE INTERFEROMETER



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:




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.

« Last Edit: June 10, 2018, 06:37:17 AM by sandokhan »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #538 on: June 11, 2018, 01:06:31 AM »
SAGNAC EFFECT VS CORIOLIS EFFECT MYSTERY SOLVED



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.



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.

« Last Edit: June 14, 2018, 07:54:20 AM by sandokhan »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 4411
Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory
« Reply #539 on: June 14, 2018, 12:52:06 AM »
SAGNAC EFFECT VS CORIOLIS EFFECT MYSTERY SOLVED II



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:



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:



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.



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:



v = RΩ

4πRLΩ/c^2 = 4πvL/c^2

« Last Edit: June 14, 2018, 07:01:10 AM by sandokhan »