What causes the tides

  • 39 Replies
  • 2979 Views
What causes the tides
« on: April 08, 2019, 06:09:34 AM »
What is causing tides if there is no gravitation and therefore no influence by the moon?
Why can we observe that the tides are influenced by the moon?

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #1 on: April 08, 2019, 06:35:10 AM »
What is causing tides if there is no gravitation and therefore no influence by the moon?
Why can we observe that the tides are influenced by the moon?
The Wiki does go this far:
Quote from: The Flat Earth Society Wiki
Gravity, TIDAL EFFECTS
In the FE universe, gravitation (not gravity) exists in other celestial bodies. The gravitational pull of the stars, for example, causes observable tidal effects on Earth
Q: Why does gravity vary with altitude?
A: The moon and stars have a slight gravitational pull.
And there might be more information in early threads on "Tides".

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 22984
  • The Most Forum Legend
Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #2 on: April 08, 2019, 06:42:48 AM »
What is causing tides if there is no gravitation and therefore no influence by the moon?
Why can we observe that the tides are influenced by the moon?

All objects push each other. Lets repeat it: All objects push each other. The exception is magnetic properties but they are not the topic.

When moon comes closer, pushes oceans and causes its overflow. That's it.


this workplace is on strike

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #3 on: April 08, 2019, 02:46:23 PM »
What is causing tides if there is no gravitation and therefore no influence by the moon?
Why can we observe that the tides are influenced by the moon?

All objects push each other. Lets repeat it: All objects push each other. The exception is magnetic properties but they are not the topic.

When moon comes closer, pushes oceans and causes its overflow. That's it.
That's funny. I thought that high tides were usually close to, or a bit east of, where the moon was overhead and also on the other side of the earth.
What cause the usual two tides per day?
There is only one moon and the highest tides are when the sun and moon are closest to each other, at the time of a new moon and also at the time of the full moon.

Are there any explanations of that?

*

Greg's Frog

  • 398
  • Area 51 Guard
Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #4 on: April 08, 2019, 07:50:01 PM »
I already have the feeling this is gonna turn into a heated topic. I made a post asking three questions, one of them being this exact one. Basically, they claim it's from the gravitation of the stars, but there is no evidence, and there's still a lot of problems with this theory.
Old Name: Unepic Globetard. Changed 5/22/2019
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=81539.0

Creeper, aw man...

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #5 on: April 08, 2019, 10:29:27 PM »
I already have the feeling this is gonna turn into a heated topic. I made a post asking three questions, one of them being this exact one. Basically, they claim it's from the gravitation of the stars, but there is no evidence, and there's still a lot of problems with this theory.
Rather than simply asking "What causes the tides" which flat earthers might answer with "celestial gravitation" it might be worth asking:
  • Why do most locations experience two high tides and two low tides per day?

  • Why is the biggest difference between high tide and low tide (Spring Tide) when the moon is at its new and at its full moon phase?
    At the new moon phase the moon is closest to the sun and at the full moon phase the moon is farthest from the sun but both experience similar large tidal ranges.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 22984
  • The Most Forum Legend
Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #6 on: April 08, 2019, 11:22:37 PM »
I already have the feeling this is gonna turn into a heated topic. I made a post asking three questions, one of them being this exact one. Basically, they claim it's from the gravitation of the stars, but there is no evidence, and there's still a lot of problems with this theory.

No, it will not turn into a heated topic. because the other persons are in my ignore list. So that, since I'll reply only you, there will be a dialogue based on respect. I have answered your question and it does not need a conspiracy about stars or anything else. I saw only one question here, sorry? Where are the other two?


this workplace is on strike

Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #7 on: April 09, 2019, 01:35:56 AM »
No, it will not turn into a heated topic. because the other persons are in my ignore list. So that, since I'll reply only you, there will be a dialogue based on respect.
Combined with you disrespecting those who have refuted you.

I have answered your question and it does not need a conspiracy about stars or anything else.
Yes it does, as it has no explanatory power. The moon magically pushing the water down doesn't match what is observed.

Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #8 on: April 09, 2019, 05:54:00 AM »
All objects push each other. Lets repeat it: All objects push each other.
That might be the single dumbest thing that I have seen posted regarding flat earth.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6585
Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #9 on: April 09, 2019, 06:14:43 AM »
Quote
All objects push each other. Lets repeat it: All objects push each other.
That might be the single dumbest thing that I have seen posted regarding flat earth.

Let's see what Newton has to say on the subject.


http://www.orgonelab.org/newtonletter.htm (I. Newton letter to R. Boyle)

4. When two bodies moving towards one another come near together, I suppose the aether between them to grow rarer than before, and the spaces of its graduated rarity to extend further from the superficies of the bodies towards one another; and this, by reason that the aether cannot move and play up and down so freely in the strait passage between the bodies, as it could before they came so near together.

5. Now, from the fourth supposition it follows, that when two bodies approaching one another come so near together as to make the aether between them begin to rarefy, they will begin to have a reluctance from being brought nearer together, and an endeavour to recede from one another; which reluctance and endeavour will increase as they come nearer together, because thereby they cause the interjacent aether to rarefy more and more. But at length, when they come so near together that the excess of pressure of the external aether which surrounds the bodies, above that of the rarefied aether, which is between them, is so great as to overcome the reluctance which the bodies have from being brought together; then will that excess of pressure drive them with violence together, and make them adhere strongly to one another, as was said in the second supposition.


Two bodies are pulled to each other by an external pressure.

Let's see how Newton describes this force in the Principia:

“In attractions, I briefly demonstrate the thing after this manner. Suppose an obstacle is interposed to hinder the meeting of any two bodies A, B, attracting one the other: then if either body, as A, is more attracted towards the other body B, than that other body B is towards the first body A, the obstacle will be more strongly urged by the pressure of the body A than by the pressure of the body B, and therefore will not remain in equilibrium: but the stronger pressure will prevail, and will make the system of the two bodies, together with the obstacle, to move directly towards the parts on which B lies; and in free spaces, to go forwards in infinitum with a motion continually accelerated; which is absurd and contrary to the first law.”

the obstacle will be more strongly urged by the pressure of the body A

PRESSURE = PUSHING FORCE

ATTRACTION = PULLING FORCE

Newton's clear description again:

the obstacle will be more strongly urged by the pressure of the body A than by the pressure of the body B, and therefore will not remain in equilibrium: but the stronger pressure will prevail

https://books.google.ro/books?id=VW_CAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA34&lpg=PA34&dq=isaac+newton+In+attractions,+I+briefly+demonstrate+the+thing+after+this+manner.+Suppose+an+obstacle+is+interposed+to+hinder+the+meeting+of+any+two+bodies+A,+B,+attracting+one+the+other&source=bl&ots=eRsq4NaOYt&sig=ACfU3U3NMCiW4fsquNSq0t25is5H6aobrA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwipgr6fw6fgAhWnAGMBHXZMAlQQ6AEwAXoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=isaac%20newton%20In%20attractions%2C%20I%20briefly%20demonstrate%20the%20thing%20after%20this%20manner.%20Suppose%20an%20obstacle%20is%20interposed%20to%20hinder%20the%20meeting%20of%20any%20two%20bodies%20A%2C%20B%2C%20attracting%20one%20the%20other&f=false


Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #10 on: April 09, 2019, 06:41:58 AM »
Quote
All objects push each other. Lets repeat it: All objects push each other.
That might be the single dumbest thing that I have seen posted regarding flat earth.

Let's see what Newton has to say on the subject.

<quotes attributed to Newton>

Newton was wrong about that.

We remember him for the things he got right because they are useful. The things he got wrong are not so useful, so they tend to be set aside and mostly forgotten. Because those things are obscure, they take more effort to find.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6585
Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #11 on: April 09, 2019, 07:02:57 AM »
Newton was wrong about that.

But he wasn't.

What proof do you have to claim he was wrong?

None whatsoever.

If those quotes from Newton are wrong, then the entire Principia goes down the drain as well: the theoretical basis of all of the calculations in that treatise rests on those very quotes from Newton.

Here is proof to the contrary of your statement: the LAMOREAUX EFFECT.

Steve Lamoreaux proved that two plates will be pushed against each other by an outside pressure, the same force encountered in the Cavendish experiment: a force of pressure and not of attraction.



Steve Lamoreaux (Yale University): proof of the existence of negative energy (zero point vacuum energy - that is, subquark strings/telluric currents/magnetic monopoles double torsion strings):

(starts at 7:50 - Dr. Lamoreaux explains the pushing gravity experiment)

Inside this vacuum chamber are two small metal plates sitting less than the width of a human hair apart from one another.
To get them that close and not touch, the metal has to be perfectly flat, down almost to the atomic level.
The zero-point fluctuations of free space won't fit between those plates, as well, so when you bring these two plates together, there are fewer fluctuations between the plates than there are outside the plates.

The force builds up, and it actually gets stronger and stronger as the plates get closer together, and that force we refer to as arising from negative energy.
The zero-point energy fluctuations outside the plates are stronger than those between, so pressure from the outside pushes them together.

Or think of it another way.
The negative energy between the plates expands space around it.
Steve's years of meticulous labor have made him the first person on Earth to have measured a force produced by negative energy.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6585
Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #12 on: April 09, 2019, 09:11:25 AM »
Because those things are obscure, they take more effort to find.

Obscure ?!

It could not be more mainstream: the quoted passages from Newton occur RIGHT IN THE SCHOLIUM OF THE PRINCIPIA.

As a matter of fact, Newton was pressed from all sides to provide an explanation for terrestrial gravity, that is why the second edition of the Principia, in the official chronology of history, includes the essay on the CAUSE of gravity.

“In attractions, I briefly demonstrate the thing after this manner. Suppose an obstacle is interposed to hinder the meeting of any two bodies A, B, attracting one the other: then if either body, as A, is more attracted towards the other body B, than that other body B is towards the first body A, the obstacle will be more strongly urged by the pressure of the body A than by the pressure of the body B, and therefore will not remain in equilibrium: but the stronger pressure will prevail, and will make the system of the two bodies, together with the obstacle, to move directly towards the parts on which B lies; and in free spaces, to go forwards in infinitum with a motion continually accelerated; which is absurd and contrary to the first law.”

the obstacle will be more strongly urged by the pressure of the body A


Newton's clear description again:

the obstacle will be more strongly urged by the pressure of the body A than by the pressure of the body B, and therefore will not remain in equilibrium: but the stronger pressure will prevail

https://books.google.ro/books?id=VW_CAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA34&lpg=PA34&dq=isaac+newton+In+attractions,+I+briefly+demonstrate+the+thing+after+this+manner.+Suppose+an+obstacle+is+interposed+to+hinder+the+meeting+of+any+two+bodies+A,+B,+attracting+one+the+other&source=bl&ots=eRsq4NaOYt&sig=ACfU3U3NMCiW4fsquNSq0t25is5H6aobrA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwipgr6fw6fgAhWnAGMBHXZMAlQQ6AEwAXoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=isaac%20newton%20In%20attractions%2C%20I%20briefly%20demonstrate%20the%20thing%20after%20this%20manner.%20Suppose%20an%20obstacle%20is%20interposed%20to%20hinder%20the%20meeting%20of%20any%20two%20bodies%20A%2C%20B%2C%20attracting%20one%20the%20other&f=false

Right from the pages of the Principia.

ATTRACTION = PRESSURE EXERTED FROM OUTSIDE PUSHING TWO OBJECTS TOGETHER

Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #13 on: April 09, 2019, 01:07:38 PM »
Wise says all objects push each other which is total rubbish.

Then Sandokhan, Science Name-dropper, does his usual thing of posting a bunch of science-related links as if they contain information supporting Wise's dumb statement.  Which they don't.

Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #14 on: April 09, 2019, 01:15:13 PM »
But an atom cant occupy tge same space as another can it?
Then we getting into phasing and ghosting.


*

sokarul

  • 18328
  • Discount Chemist
Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #15 on: April 09, 2019, 02:00:52 PM »
Objects in free fall feel no force.

Objects in free fall feel no force.

Objects in free fall feel no force.

Objects in free fall feel no force.
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #16 on: April 09, 2019, 02:15:29 PM »
Let's see what Newton has to say on the subject.
He believed a magical aether pushed them. Not that the objects pushed each other apart.
Regardless that was all wild speculation. What was actually shown is that objects attract one another.

What proof do you have to claim he was wrong?
Here is proof to the contrary of your statement: the LAMOREAUX EFFECT.
That is the proof you are looking for.
The Casmir effect is fundamentally different from gravity.
The Casmir effect shows just how objects get pushed together by virtual particles.
That would be the closest you get to magical aether pushing things together.

Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #17 on: April 09, 2019, 03:33:52 PM »
Newton was wrong about that.

But he wasn't.

What proof do you have to claim he was wrong?

None whatsoever.

You're right about there not being proof. That's because proof is not possible.

Quote
If those quotes from Newton are wrong, then the entire Principia goes down the drain as well: the theoretical basis of all of the calculations in that treatise rests on those very quotes from Newton.

Parts of it are clearly wrong. Other parts form the basis for much of physics. It's not all or nothing.

Quote
Here is proof to the contrary of your statement: the LAMOREAUX EFFECT.

Steve Lamoreaux proved ...

The very fact that you keep saying you have proof of this and asking for proof of that shows how little you really know about science. This is reinforced when you make elementary blunders like misusing mass as weight, or using mass and moment of inertia interchangeably. Ducking the invitation to work through a straightforward problem like showing how the time taken for light to travel around a stationary loop is calculated further bolsters the conclusion that you're just bluffing, and have not the slightest understanding about the stuff you copy from elsewhere and post here.

Because those things are obscure, they take more effort to find.

Obscure ?!

Yes.

Quote
It could not be more mainstream: the quoted passages from Newton occur RIGHT IN THE SCHOLIUM OF THE PRINCIPIA.

Do you consider every word written in Newton's Principia to be revealed truth, like a religious text? If you do, then you're wrong, too. Some of the stuff in it is brilliant. Other stuff, not so much. Over the centuries the brilliant parts have been widely used and built upon, while the less good remains quaint and obscure. Believe it or not, most modern-day physics students don't read the Principia from cover to cover. Instead they learn the parts from it that form the foundation for classical physics, and build upon that.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #18 on: April 09, 2019, 06:28:18 PM »
Newton was wrong about that.

But he wasn't.

What proof do you have to claim he was wrong?

None whatsoever.

If those quotes from Newton are wrong, then the entire Principia goes down the drain as well: the theoretical basis of all of the calculations in that treatise rests on those very quotes from Newton.

Here is proof to the contrary of your statement: the LAMOREAUX EFFECT.

Steve Lamoreaux proved that two plates will be pushed against each other by an outside pressure,
Why do you insist on calling it the "LAMOREAUX EFFECT" when Steve Lamoreaux always calls it correctly as the "Casimir Force"?

The Casimir Force is effective only over minute distances. You might read: Demonstration of the Casimir Force in the 0.6 to 6 mm Range by S. K. Lamoreaux, which shows:

Essentially no attractive force past about 4 microns.

So the Casimir Force cannot be the cause of gravitation.

Quote from: sandokhan
the same force encountered in the Cavendish experiment: a force of pressure and not of attraction.
No way!
The "force encountered in the Cavendish experiment" and in the over 300 laboratory grade and an untold number of qualitative demonstrations is was shown to be effective over 10s on centimetres and falling off as 1/d2
not falling off as 1/d4 as in this equation from Steve Lamoreaux's own paper.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6585
Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #19 on: April 09, 2019, 10:49:10 PM »
I have already addressed the stationary loop, not once but twice:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=79637.msg2148867#msg2148867

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2153966#msg2153966

You and your pal seem to be the only ones yet to realize this fact.


The Cavendish has to be done in VACUUM, just like Dr. Lamoreaux performed his experiment.

Otherwise, one will observe statistical significant deviations in the measurements:

A superconducting gravimeter was used in a laboratory physics problem for the first time in the inverse square law of gravitation. The gravimeter test mass was used to measure the force exerted by a 325 kg source mass as a function of the separation between the masses. The results of the experiment are interpreted in terms of two models of non-Newtonian gravity, and compared to limits established by previous experiments. A statistically significant deviation at the level of 7.5 parts in 10 to the 3rd power from Newtonian behavior is observed. It does not conform to either of the non-Newtonian models….

P.V. Czipott, 1983

adsabs.Harvard.edu has deleted ALL of the experiments which contradicted the inverse square law in the Cavendish experiment:

A paper by P.V. Moore et. al. from IOP, 1994, no longer available as of 2008. A paper by J.K. Hoskins from ADS, 1981, no longer available as of 2008. A paper by Jean Sivardiere from AIP, 1997, no longer available as of 2008, entitled, "“Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking in a Cavendish Experiment”.

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

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

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

In a world mediated by gravitational attractions of the sort Cavendish envisioned, and that the standard model accepts, this position of balance would be very difficult to find, by either computation or trial and error. Because it is an inverse square field, the field is changing quickly over very short distances, making a walk-about trial and error sort of repositioning all but impossible. But in a repulsion field created by E/M, there is no inverse square law. It is inverse square only if you are dealing with spherical fields, but we are not. And it is inverse quad only if you are dealing with both spheres and relativity, but we are not. In Cavendish we are not dealing with either spherical fields or relativity. We don’t have large distances or large velocities, so relativity is moot. And our walls and ceilings and other objects are mainly flat. This means that they will create bombarding fields that do not diminish over short distances. This makes it quite easy to move about with little rigor and still find a point of balance.

Once this point of balance is found, we simply introduce our large “attracting spheres” and await a motion. But this motion is not caused by attraction. It is caused by blocking repulsion. A gravitational field cannot be blocked, but a basic bombarding field can be blocked, no matter what it is made of. Our large ball simply gets in the way of photons being emitted by the walls. Since the smaller ball is no longer being repulsed from that direction, it moves it that direction, appearing to be attracted by the larger ball. It is that simple. A ball that is closer will block photons more effectively, as will a denser ball, as of lead. In this way, mass and distance considerations mirror those of the expectations of gravity. Move the larger ball farther away and it allows more photons to get by it from more directions. Change either its size or its density, and more photons get past it or through it."

So, BOTH THE CAVENDISH AND THE CASIMIR EXPERIMENTS will display non-Newtonian forces.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0805.1183.pdf

Abstract: We briefly review the experimental bounds on the strength of inverse square
law violating short-range interactions. The contribution of our experiment in this
direction will be presented. The future scope of our experiment to test and constrain
the predictions of fundamental theories will be discussed.

If the inverse square law violating interactions are present due to any of the scenarios mentioned in Chapter 1, they will show up as additional forces in the measurement. Thus, constraints on the strength of these interactions can be obtained by looking at the deviation of the measured Casimir force from the theoretically expected value and attributing it to Yukawa type interactions.

Here is a very precise gravitational experiment performed IN FULL VACUUM, which defies Newton's law of attractive gravitation:


http://depalma.pair.com/gyrodrop.html (experiment carried out by the team of researchers which worked with Dr. Bruce DePalma)

Gyro Drop Experiment

In this experiment a fully enclosed, electrically driven gyroscope is released to fall freely under the influence of gravity. The elapsed time taken to fall a measured distance of 10.617 feet was measured, with the rotor stopped and also with the rotor spinning at approximately 15,000 RPM.

Data was gathered on a Chronometrics Digital Elapsed Dime Clock measuring 1/10,000 second, actuated by two phototransistor sensors placed in the paths of two light beams which were consecutively interrupted by the edge of the casing of the falling gyroscope.

A fully encased, spinning gyroscope drops faster than the identical gyroscope non-spinning, when released to fall along its axis.



Runs 3-7 show clearly what is going on: the rotating gyroscope is falling faster than its non-rotating counterpart.

Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #20 on: April 10, 2019, 12:08:52 AM »
I have already addressed the stationary loop, not once but twice:
We aren't talking about Sagnac here.
And no, you haven't addressed it. You just repeatedly dismiss it as you either have no idea what you are talking about or are wilfully and knowingly lying to everyone.

The Cavendish has to be done in VACUUM
No, it works just fine in the atmosphere.


adsabs.Harvard.edu has deleted ALL of the experiments which contradicted the inverse square law in the Cavendish experiment:
They don't have the power to delete them.
All they can do is remove them from their abstract listing.
Regardless, how about you provide actual evidence, or better still, provide an explanation for the tides.

If you want to discuss the walls, how about you try showing just what effect they would produce rather than just asserting it will.
Otherwise it is just like saying Earth can't be spinning as we would all fly off, as you ignore just how tiny the force is.


Our large ball simply gets in the way of photons being emitted by the walls.
If that was the case a large light would move it the same. It doesn't.

Now stop just copying and pasting crap and actually deal with the topic at hand:
What causes the tides?

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 22984
  • The Most Forum Legend
Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #21 on: April 10, 2019, 12:28:22 AM »
All objects push each other. Lets repeat it: All objects push each other.
That might be the single dumbest thing that I have seen posted regarding flat earth.

You've lost your chance with this post by not adding the ignore list.

This is not relevant with flat earth but a general rule of phsics. Because, today majority of phsicians say we are not touching the glass when we are holding it, but the atoms push each other. There is no touch, no connection but pushing. You are not only denying the science, you are doing it by disrespecting, by insulting. Why? because you want to continue get salary. So, are they deny to give you salary without insulting me? Shame on you. You've been ignored and maskdowned.


this workplace is on strike

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6585
Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #22 on: April 10, 2019, 12:47:40 AM »
Only the scientifically illiterate RE can claim that the Casimir force is valid only over small distances.

Obviously they have never heard of the CASIMIR-AHARONOV-BOHM effect:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2161916#msg2161916

One of the greatest experimental physicists of the 20th century, and certainly the best materials science physicist in the world at the present time, Dr. Eugene Podkletnov has proven the LONG RANGE CASIMIR FORCE EFFECT.

Dr. Podkletnov published his paper in the highest rated journal of physics, Physica C.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/092145349290055H



"In 1995, the Max Planck Institute of Physics did a follow up study, and was able to confirm the results."




https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/9505094.pdf


Impulse Gravity Generator Based on Charged Y Ba2Cu3O7-y Superconductor with Composite Crystal Structure

https://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0108005.pdf

The observed phenomenon appears to be absolutely new and unprecedented in the
literature. It cannot be understood in the framework of general relativity.


Weak gravitation shielding properties of composite bulk Y Ba2Cu3O7-x superconductor
below 70 K under e.m. field

https://arxiv.org/pdf/cond-mat/9701074.pdf

A toroidal disk with an outer diameter of 275 mm and a thickness of 10 mm was prepared using conventional ceramic technology in combination with melt-texture growth. Two solenoids were placed around the disk in order to initiate the current inside it and to rotate the disk about its central axis. Samples placed over the rotating disk initially demonstrated a weight loss of 0.3-0.5%. When the rotation speed was slowly reduced by changing the current in the solenoids, the shielding effect became considerably higher and reached 1.9-2.1% at maximum.


Study of Light Interaction with Gravity Impulses and Measurements of the Speed of Gravity Impulses

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281440634_Study_of_Light_Interaction_with_Gravity_Impulses_and_Measurements_of_the_Speed_of_Gravity_Impulses

An attempt has been made in this work to study the scattering of laser light by the gravity-like impulse produced in an impulse gravity generator (IGG) and also an experiment has been conducted in order to determine the propagation speed of the gravity impulse. The light attenuation was found to last between 34 and 48 ns and to increase with voltage, up to a maximum of 7% at 2000 kV. The propagation time of the pulse over a distance of 1211 m was measured recording the response of two identical piezoelectric sensors connected to two synchronized rubidium atomic clocks. The delay was 63±1 ns, corresponding to a propagation speed of 64c.


"Dr. Podkletnov also describes his “force beam generator” experiment in detail, and provides insights into improvements that he’s made over the last decade to increase the force produced by this experimental gravity-beam. The force beam is generated by passing a high-voltage discharge from a Marx-generator through a YBCO emitter suspended in a magnetic field, and Podkletnov has described it as being powerful enough to knock over objects in the lab, as well as capable of being tuned by even punch holes in solid materials.

Podkletnov maintains that a laboratory installation in Russia has already demonstrated the 4in (10cm) wide beam’s ability to repel objects a kilometre away and that it exhibits negligible power loss at distances of up to 200km."

LONG RANGE CASIMIR FORCE PODKLETNOV EFFECT

Dr. Giovanni Modanese

PhD, Theoretical Physics, University of Pisa
Post-doctoral research at MIT
Post-doctoral research at the Max Planck Institute

Author of papers published in the best journals in the world:

Modanese, G., Ultra-light and strong: The massless harmonic oscillator and its singular path integral (2017) International Journal of Geometric Methods in Modern Physics, 14 (1), art. no. 1750010
Modanese, G., Oscillating dipole with fractional quantum source in Aharonov-Bohm electrodynamics (2017) Results in Physics, 7, pp. 480-481.
G. Modanese, Electromagnetic coupling of strongly non-local quantum mechanics, Physica B 524C (2017) pp. 81-84
Modanese, G., Generalized Maxwell equations and charge conservation censorship (2017) Modern Physics Letters B, 31 (6), art. no. 1750052

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1408/1408.1636.pdf

The reality of vacuum fluctuations is demonstrated by the Casimir effect in quantum
electrodynamics, yet vacuum forces are usually very small, and the principles of
thermodynamics limit the use of the Casimir effect for energy extraction from the vacuum [20].

The vacuum fluctuations that appear in our model, however, are of a novel kind, are peculiar of gravity and act on a far larger scale. This is why we think they can lead to macroscopic effect when coupled to macroscopic quantum objects like superconductors.


Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #23 on: April 10, 2019, 01:53:15 AM »
Because, today majority of phsicians say we are not touching the glass when we are holding it, but the atoms push each other. There is no touch, no connection but pushing.
No, they don't. That is what touching is.
The electrons in the atoms repel when you get close enough.

You are not only denying the science, you are doing it by disrespecting, by insulting. Why? because you want to continue get salary. So, are they deny to give you salary without insulting me? Shame on you. You've been ignored and maskdowned.
No. That is still you being disrespectful, because you are blatantly lying when you claim things only push each other.
If things would only push each other no object would have any tensile strength.

And to top it all off, you lie by insult those who call you out.

Now again, do you have an explanation for the tides?

Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #24 on: April 10, 2019, 01:54:34 AM »
Only the scientifically illiterate RE can claim that the Casimir force is valid only over small distances.
You mean only the scientifically illiterate FEers can claim that the Casmir force magically has a significant effect at large distances?

Stop just spamming crap you clearly don't understand and deal with the topic at hand:
What causes the tides?

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6585
Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #25 on: April 10, 2019, 02:04:59 AM »
The long range Casimir effect has been proven by Dr. Eugene Podkletnov: the paper was published in the Physica C journal.

It is being studied at the highest levels of science with new results forthcoming from the Max Planck Institute for Physics:

LONG RANGE CASIMIR FORCE PODKLETNOV EFFECT

Dr. Giovanni Modanese

PhD, Theoretical Physics, University of Pisa
Post-doctoral research at MIT
Post-doctoral research at the Max Planck Institute

Author of papers published in the best journals in the world:

Modanese, G., Ultra-light and strong: The massless harmonic oscillator and its singular path integral (2017) International Journal of Geometric Methods in Modern Physics, 14 (1), art. no. 1750010
Modanese, G., Oscillating dipole with fractional quantum source in Aharonov-Bohm electrodynamics (2017) Results in Physics, 7, pp. 480-481.
G. Modanese, Electromagnetic coupling of strongly non-local quantum mechanics, Physica B 524C (2017) pp. 81-84
Modanese, G., Generalized Maxwell equations and charge conservation censorship (2017) Modern Physics Letters B, 31 (6), art. no. 1750052

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1408/1408.1636.pdf

The reality of vacuum fluctuations is demonstrated by the Casimir effect in quantum
electrodynamics, yet vacuum forces are usually very small, and the principles of
thermodynamics limit the use of the Casimir effect for energy extraction from the vacuum [20].

The vacuum fluctuations that appear in our model, however, are of a novel kind, are peculiar of gravity and act on a far larger scale. This is why we think they can lead to macroscopic effect when coupled to macroscopic quantum objects like superconductors.


No one can explain the tides, certainly not the RE.

That is why, eventually, all of them have to use my AFET to find the correct explanations.

Here is the total demolition of the RE theory of tides:

http://immanuelvelikovsky.com/NewtonEinstein&Veli.pdf (pages 9-24)

The CORRECT theory of tides on a flat earth:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1486127#msg1486127

Barometer pressure paradox:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1707294#msg1707294

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #26 on: April 10, 2019, 03:24:39 AM »

The Cavendish has to be done in VACUUM, just like Dr. Lamoreaux performed his experiment.

Otherwise, one will observe statistical significant deviations in the measurements:
No, Cavendish type experiments do not have to be performed in a vacuum but doing so does remove any chance of air currents causing random deviations.
Many have been performed quite successfully in air but, of course in closed chambers or rooms.
Cavendish himself observe the experiment from a distance with a telescope.

Here are the results of 61 such experiments from Cavendish's till 2000:

       



These 61 sets of "Cavendish" type measurements (on the left) from 1798 to 2000 give close to the currently accepted value.

Even the very first, by Henry Cavendish himself,
      gave the value of G = 6.74 x 10-11 m3 kg-1 s-2
      compared to the ‎CODATA Value of G = 6.674 x 10-11 m3 kg-1 s-2.
Not too bad for 220 years ago.

Most of those were done in air but this one from
Puzzling Measurement of "Big G" Gravitational Constant Ignites Debate
was done in vacuum:


*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #27 on: April 10, 2019, 03:43:23 AM »
Only the scientifically illiterate RE can claim that the Casimir force is valid only over small distances.
And can the self-claimed scientifically literate FEer demonstrate how this "long range" might have a range sufficient to cause gravitation or,
more to the point, how it might answer "What causes the tides?"

By the way you claim that the sun is only 600 m in diameter and about 15 km above the earth but we know that sun also significantly affects the tides.
But how could such a sun, so close to the earth, affect the tides on the other side of the earth.


Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #28 on: April 10, 2019, 04:34:42 AM »
The long range Casimir effect has been proven by Dr. Eugene Podkletnov: the paper was published in the Physica C journal.
Stop lying.
No where in your little paper does he claim the Caimir effect is long range.


Now can you try and explain the tides?
Not just link to some crap, actually explain it here?

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6585
Re: What causes the tides
« Reply #29 on: April 10, 2019, 05:35:38 AM »
No where in your little paper does he claim the Caimir effect is long range.


The scientific illiteracy of the RE is beyond belief.

Here is the celebrated paper published in 1992 by Dr. Eugene Podkletnov in the best scientific journal in the world, Physica C:

https://www.scribd.com/doc/39625078/Eugene-Podkletnov-Physica-C-1992

The levitating superconducting disk was found to rise by up to 7 mm when its rotation moment increased.

Then, Dr. Modanese clearly describes this gravitational effect in terms of the long range Casimir force, based upon Dr. Podkletnov's multiple experiments:

Dr. Giovanni Modanese

PhD, Theoretical Physics, University of Pisa
Post-doctoral research at MIT
Post-doctoral research at the Max Planck Institute

Author of papers published in the best journals in the world:

Modanese, G., Ultra-light and strong: The massless harmonic oscillator and its singular path integral (2017) International Journal of Geometric Methods in Modern Physics, 14 (1), art. no. 1750010
Modanese, G., Oscillating dipole with fractional quantum source in Aharonov-Bohm electrodynamics (2017) Results in Physics, 7, pp. 480-481.
G. Modanese, Electromagnetic coupling of strongly non-local quantum mechanics, Physica B 524C (2017) pp. 81-84
Modanese, G., Generalized Maxwell equations and charge conservation censorship (2017) Modern Physics Letters B, 31 (6), art. no. 1750052

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1408/1408.1636.pdf

The reality of vacuum fluctuations is demonstrated by the Casimir effect in quantum
electrodynamics, yet vacuum forces are usually very small, and the principles of
thermodynamics limit the use of the Casimir effect for energy extraction from the vacuum [20].

The vacuum fluctuations that appear in our model, however, are of a novel kind, are peculiar of gravity and act on a far larger scale. This is why we think they can lead to macroscopic effect when coupled to macroscopic quantum objects like superconductors.

"Dr. Podkletnov also describes his “force beam generator” experiment in detail, and provides insights into improvements that he’s made over the last decade to increase the force produced by this experimental gravity-beam. The force beam is generated by passing a high-voltage discharge from a Marx-generator through a YBCO emitter suspended in a magnetic field, and Podkletnov has described it as being powerful enough to knock over objects in the lab, as well as capable of being tuned by even punch holes in solid materials.

Podkletnov maintains that a laboratory installation in Russia has already demonstrated the 4in (10cm) wide beam’s ability to repel objects a kilometre away and that it exhibits negligible power loss at distances of up to 200km."