Universal deceleration theory

I think maybe the universe could be moving towards the earth.
This theory seems to me to be a better alternative to explain gravity, as it does not have the problem of the increase in speed of UA.
What do you think?

I think maybe the universe could be moving towards the earth.
This theory seems to me to be a better alternative to explain gravity, as it does not have the problem of the increase in speed of UA.
What do you think?

This has been studied, and it was found that the universe is expanding.  So, everything (in general) in the universe is moving away from earth, just as it is all moving away from each other.  In addition, everything is accelerating away from each other.

This is a very significant finding, as it has a huge impact on cosmology. 

The first question is what are you trying to explain with this and how?
You say a replacement for gravity.
So are you saying the universe moving towards Earth is causing us to fall?
If so, you still have the question of why does g vary?

I don't really have a problem with the concept of an infinite or near-infinite cosmic energy which powers UA.

However, UA really just says that the surface of earth is accelerating upwards, not how it is accelerated. There is a possibility of Universal Acceleration through circular centripetal motion. Under this concept UA is caused by circular centripetal force, like when you swing a bucket filled with water around and the water stays flattened against the bottom. The bottom of the bucket is accelerating against the water, causing it to flatten.



It is possible that the Earth is at the bottom of the bucket, moving at a constant speed horizontally along a large circle, with a 9.8 m/s/s imparted in g acceleration. A more realistic version might be a scenario in which the Flat Earth exists inside of the cavity of something akin to a very large spinning porous asteroid-like superstructure. The spinning of the superstructure is constant and would produce an imparted 1g of acceleration as we experience and define it.

There are number of different possibilities for the dimensions of this contraption. At omnicalculator.com a centrifugal force calculator can be found which can compute possible values for the physical dimensions of the circle of motion for a centrifugal acceleration of 1G. For the Centrifugal Acceleration field enter 1G, for the Tangential Velocity field fill in a speed value such as 10000000 km/h, and for the Mass field enter in a random value (which is required but will not affect the radius result) to get the radius of the circle, which would be 786,818,066 km for the preceding values.

If so, you still have the question of why does g vary?

It doesn't vary. The experiments which show variations are uncontrolled. There are also contradicting experiments which show no variation. Show us the experiment and I will show you the fallacy.

It doesn't vary. The experiments which show variations are uncontrolled. There are also contradicting experiments which show no variation. Show us the experiment and I will show you the fallacy.

Continually ignoring reality wont help you.
We have been over this, the atmosphere doesn't provide a significant enough effect to cause these changes.
And there are countless experiments.
e.g. here is one using variations in g to map granite deposits:
https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/gsa/gsabulletin/article-abstract/78/7/859/6209/Gravity-Investigations-of-Subsurface-Shape-and

Here is one covering a large area (but behind a paywall):
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1029/JB076i020p04855

Here is one for Canadia:
https://ostrnrcan-dostrncan.canada.ca/entities/publication/dc701d1a-870d-4f7d-b67d-929bf13d2fc1

Meanwhile, where are your contradicting experiments which show no variation?
Are you referring to ones that produce pretty images like this:

If so, they are showing variations from the ideal ellipsoid.
The fact that this isn't simply reversed to show an anomoloy of lower gravity at the poles and higher gravity at the equator, shows that there is the variation expected for the ideal ellipsoid.

You are talking about gravimeters, which has been given a FE response at depth here: https://wiki.tfes.org/Gravimetry

Gravimeters are seismometers which study an alleged byproduct of gravity in the subseismic band. There are many quotes on that page of scientists calling gravimeters seismometers.

Where is the proof that gravimeters are not seismometers?

Where is the proof that this there was actually a variation of g which was directly and empirically detected?

You have not been able to substantiate any of this, and your repeated response to the quotes are along the lines of "nuh uh, those gravimeter scientists are wrong about gravimeters." I expect that you will continue to waste our time with this underwhelming response. Alternatively, you will outright refuse to respond, creating some kind of inane argument that you don't need to read and address the material given to you, like a child.

You are supposed to have mountains of evidence for all of this. This is what you guys repeatedly claim, at least. At this point if you don't have the resources to defend and substantiate your position, then you have lost.

It doesn't vary. The experiments which show variations are uncontrolled. There are also contradicting experiments which show no variation. Show us the experiment and I will show you the fallacy.

Can you explain the Eötvös effect?

Quote from: Tom Bishop on May 26, 2024, 12:04:32 PM

It doesn't vary. The experiments which show variations are uncontrolled. There are also contradicting experiments which show no variation. Show us the experiment and I will show you the fallacy.

Can you explain the Eötvös effect?

The experiment was performed with a gravimeter, which is a seismometer. See: https://wiki.tfes.org/Gravimetry

The effect occurs when traveling in a eastwards or westwards direction in a ship. It tells us that something east-west is creating subseismic disturbances when moving with or against the noise. Ie. the movement of the stars and celestial bodies, or the movement of large underwater east-west water or magma currents further down. Since a gravimeter is a seismometer, it is not directly measuring gravity. As such, it can come under a number of interpretations on what is creating subseismic noise.

The tfes.org page on the Eötvös Effect is here -

The Eötvös Effect, named after Hungarian nobleman and physicist Baron Roland von Eötvös, is a longitudinal effect which affects gravimeters and occurs when a vessel is traveling eastwards or westwards. In the early 1900s, a German team from the Institute of Geodesy in Potsdam carried out gravity measurements on moving ships in the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific Oceans. While studying their results Eötvös noticed that the readings of the gravimeter were slightly lower when the boat moved eastwards, and slightly higher when it moved westward.

An Effect of Gravimetry

It is found that a gravimeter is a low-frequency seismometer, and that the theory of gravimetry is based on a theoretical assessment of the background noise in the subseismic band. The patterns of the tides and other phenomena can be pulled out of the background noise, and are assumed to be due to "gravity".

In connection with the above, the Eötvös Effect is an effect which adds or subtracts anthropogenic and microseismic noises to the gravimeter when a vessel moves eastwards or westwards. Although the cause of the noise is unknown, the noise may be related to the stars, tides, or even the upper flow of the 'great ocean conveyor belt', all of which make regular westwards motions across the earth. A vessel going against this noise would pick up greater noise than a vessel which goes with the noise.

Due to the nature of the gravimeter, it is suggested that this effect seen in the gravimeter should be better classified under a category of seismology.

The experiment was performed with a gravimeter, which is a seismometer. See: https://wiki.tfes.org/Gravimetry

The effect occurs when traveling in a eastwards or westwards direction in a ship. It tells us that something east-west is creating subseismic disturbances when moving with or against the noise. Ie. the movement of the stars or large underwater east-west water or magma currents further down. Since a gravimeter is a seismometer, it is not directly measuring gravity. As such, it can come under a number of interpretations on what is creating subseismic disturbances.

 
That's nice.  I don't see any other sources that concur with your TFES page saying a gravimeter is a seismometer.  Anyway, care to elaborate on the constant sub-seismic disturbance that somehow makes things lighter in one direction and heavier in the opposite direction, even when flying?  Or how the movement of stars would cause this?

Quote from: Tom Bishop on May 26, 2024, 04:54:26 PM

The experiment was performed with a gravimeter, which is a seismometer. See: https://wiki.tfes.org/Gravimetry

The effect occurs when traveling in a eastwards or westwards direction in a ship. It tells us that something east-west is creating subseismic disturbances when moving with or against the noise. Ie. the movement of the stars or large underwater east-west water or magma currents further down. Since a gravimeter is a seismometer, it is not directly measuring gravity. As such, it can come under a number of interpretations on what is creating subseismic disturbances.

 
That's nice.  I don't see any other sources that concur with your TFES page saying a gravimeter is a seismometer.  Anyway, care to elaborate on the constant sub-seismic disturbance that somehow makes things lighter in one direction and heavier in the opposite direction, even when flying?  Or how the movement of stars would cause this?

This makes sense on a rotating earth.  Traveling eastwards, the same direction as the earth's rotation, adds to the centrifugal force which would reduce the effect of gravity, while traveling westwards would reduce the rotational velocity along with the centrifugal force, increasing the effect of gravity.  This is obvious from the Equivalence Principle. 

The result will be small, but hard to deny.

You are talking about gravimeters

Yes, which you continually lie about.
Your site of lies will not help you here.
Defend your lies here or dont bother.

Gravimeters are seismometers

No they aren't.
There are many kinds of gravimeters. Including absolute ones which measure g quite directly.

Where is the proof that gravimeters are not seismometers?

Through plenty of documents which describe their function.
Please explain how a falling ball gravimeter is a seismometer.

Where is the proof that this there was actually a variation of g which was directly and empirically detected?

Read the references I provided.

You have not been able to substantiate any of this

You mean it has been substantiated and you just dismiss it.

Do you know what hasn't been substantiated?
Your claim that all gravimeters are simply sisemometers which are measuring that rather than g.
Your claim that controlled experiments have shown no variation in g with latitude.

I expect that you will continue to waste our time with this underwhelming response.

The one wasting time here is you.
You continually dismiss things which don't match your fantasy.
You make bold claims of alleged controlled experiments, yet don't provide them.

You do whatever you can to pretend your fantasy is true, and will happily use whatever dishonest tactics you can think of.

The effect occurs when traveling in a eastwards or westwards direction in a ship. It tells us that something east-west is creating subseismic disturbances when moving with or against the noise.

Or without all the convoluted BS, it tells us that Earth is round and rotating.
Especially when it also works north and south.

Ie. the movement of the stars and celestial bodies, or the movement of large underwater east-west water or magma currents further down.

And instead of just appealing to vague BS, can you even attempt to explain how that would work?

The Eotvos effect is a proof of the existence of ether. I was the first to bring the Eotvos effect to the FES. Several kinds of the Eotvos effect.

The first one:

"In 1981 a paper was published showing that measurements of G in deep mines, boreholes, and under the sea gave values about 1% higher than that currently accepted. Furthermore, the deeper the experiment, the greater the discrepancy. However, no one took much notice of these results until 1986, when E. Fischbach and his colleagues reanalyzed the data from a series of experiments by Eötvös in the 1920s, which were supposed to have shown that gravitational acceleration is independent of the mass or composition of the attracted body. Fischbach et al. found that there was a consistent anomaly hidden in the data that had been dismissed as random error. On the basis of these laboratory results and the observations from mines, they announced that they had found evidence of a short-range, composition-dependent ‘fifth force’. Their paper caused a great deal of controversy and generated a flurry of experimental activity in physics laboratories around the world."

F.D. Stacey and G.J. Tuck, ‘Geophysical evidence for non-newtonian gravity’, Nature, v. 292, 1981, pp. 230-232.
Seven Experiments that Could Change the World, pp. 174-176; Gravitational Force of the Sun, pp. 146-147.

http://mek.oszk.hu/02000/02054/html/onehund.html (Eotvos ether effect/gravitational anomaly)


The Eotvos effect which has been mentioned here in this thread cannot be used as a proof of anything: it can take place either on a rotating Earth or the cause can be explained as the rotating ether drift (same as the Foucault pendulum, or the gyrocompass experiments).


The Eotvos experiment used for the detection of positrons does not take into account the fact that positrons do not obey at all the weak equivalence principle.


https://lss.fnal.gov/archive/2018/conf/fermilab-conf-18-587-cms.pdf

https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/full_html/2018/12/aa32898-18/aa32898-18.html

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1807/1807.08602.pdf

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0601/0601066.pdf

https://arxiv.org/ftp/hep-ph/papers/0505/0505188.pdf

https://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/massnegative.htm


The Pound-Rebka experiment is a proof of the existence of ether.

The references I have posted regarding the equivalence principle prove that it is not a universal phenomenon: its locality is again a proof of the existence of the ether.


A stationary Earth, where terrestrial gravity is explained by the ether drift, makes a lot more sense than an upward moving Earth (you can't have both dark energy and dark flow, it is either/or, a fact which has been proved recently).

The vertical Sagnac intereferometers do not register any 9.8 m/s2 acceleration upwards.

The Eotvos effect is a proof of the existence of ether.

No it isn't. Not in the slightest.
Considering gravity and a rotating round Earth explain it just fine, the best you get is an alternative explanation, not proof of your magic aether.

The first one:
"In 1981 a paper was published showing that measurements of G in deep mines, boreholes, and under the sea gave values about 1% higher than that currently accepted. Furthermore, the deeper the experiment, the greater the discrepancy. However, no one took much notice of these results until 1986, when E. Fischbach and his colleagues reanalyzed the data from a series of experiments by Eötvös in the 1920s, which were supposed to have shown that gravitational acceleration is independent of the mass or composition of the attracted body. Fischbach et al. found that there was a consistent anomaly hidden in the data that had been dismissed as random error. On the basis of these laboratory results and the observations from mines, they announced that they had found evidence of a short-range, composition-dependent ‘fifth force’. Their paper caused a great deal of controversy and generated a flurry of experimental activity in physics laboratories around the world."
F.D. Stacey and G.J. Tuck, ‘Geophysical evidence for non-newtonian gravity’, Nature, v. 292, 1981, pp. 230-232.

So you claim that Fishbach et al found the issue in an experiment by Eotvos, yet it was published by Stacey and Tuck?
Sounds like a load of pure BS.

As for the actual reference:
"While the possibilities of systematic errors in these data sets preclude a definite conclusion that Newton's law of gravity fails at short range, the strong circumstantial evidence suggests that well controlled large-scale experiments on the inverse square law are urgently required."

The Eotvos effect which has been mentioned here in this thread cannot be used as a proof of anything

So why did you start your post with the lie that it is proof of aether?
Great job showing your dishonesety yet again.

it can take place either on a rotating Earth or the cause can be explained as the rotating ether drift (same as the Foucault pendulum, or the gyrocompass experiments).

You mean not explained at all by aether and instead just handwaved away?

How about instead of just spamming a bunch of crap, you try explaining how the aether causes it?

The Pound-Rebka experiment is a proof of the existence of ether.

No it isn't.

The vertical Sagnac intereferometers do not register any 9.8 m/s2 acceleration upwards.

And you wouldn't expect it to, as already established, before you fled like the lying coward you are.

You numskull, there are TWO different Eotvos effects.

The first one, the gravitational effect, most definitely is a proof of the existence of ether.

The second one can't be a proof of anything, since it could have two different causes.

Considering gravity and a rotating round Earth explain it just fine, the best you get is an alternative explanation, not proof of your magic aether.

Then, explain to your readers how four trillion billion liters of water stay in place next to the outer surface of a geoid. Please shut the F up.

And you wouldn't expect it to, as already established, before you fled like the lying coward you are.

No, I established that you are insane: you refused to accept a reference which did provide the experimental proof that Sagnac applies to linear motion.

You numskull, there are TWO different Eotvos effects.

No, just the one.
You are the deluded fool that directly contradicted themself.
Not me. Now you are trying to hide it.
The Eotvos effect is NOT proof of aether. It works just fine on a rotating roudn Earth with gravity.

If you want to claim there are magically 2 separate ones, why don't you try explaining that instead just yet another entirely empty claim?

Then, explain to your readers how four trillion billion liters of water stay in place next to the outer surface of a geoid.

You already know the explaination. Stop spamming the same refuted BS all over the place.

Please shut the F up.

Follow your own advice.

No, I established that you are insane: you refused to accept a reference which did provide the experimental proof that Sagnac applies to linear motion.

No, you repeatedly lied about me because I epxlained how you were blatantly misrepresenting your references, clearly explaining why they do not apply to the BS you are claiming, clearly explaining how you are entirely wrong.
And then you fled, because you can't defend your BS.

Gravimeters are seismometers which study an alleged byproduct of gravity in the subseismic band.

No, gravimeters and seismometers are both types of accelerometers.  They are just optimized for measuring different forms of acceleration.  In the case of seismometers, they are optimized to measure acceleration in the form of ground vibrations.

Where is the proof that gravimeters are not seismometers?

How does one measure seismic vibrations from orbit? I'll give you a hint, it isn't with an accelerometer.
https://www.preventionweb.net/news/space-based-system-can-provide-seismic-monitoring-large-earthquakes-tsunamis

Variations in gravity, on the other hand...
https://ggos.org/item/satellite-gravimetry/

Where is the proof that this there was actually a variation of g which was directly and empirically detected?

You don't need a gravimeter to empirically detect variations in g.  All you need is a precision scale, a known reference mass and a desire to do some traveling.  Kinda like the Kern gnome.
https://www.kern-sohn.com/cgi-bin/cosmoshop/lshop.cgi?action=inline&ls=en&id=222&newsId=34&archiv=1

So the moron jackblack (who is rockseverywhere's alt, and alts are forbidden here) had no idea that there are actually TWO DIFFERENT Eotvos effect.

One is gravitational, the other one applies to waves.

The first Eotvos effect is definitely a proof of the existence of ether:

"In 1981 a paper was published showing that measurements of G in deep mines, boreholes, and under the sea gave values about 1% higher than that currently accepted. Furthermore, the deeper the experiment, the greater the discrepancy. However, no one took much notice of these results until 1986, when E. Fischbach and his colleagues reanalyzed the data from a series of experiments by Eötvös in the 1920s, which were supposed to have shown that gravitational acceleration is independent of the mass or composition of the attracted body. Fischbach et al. found that there was a consistent anomaly hidden in the data that had been dismissed as random error. On the basis of these laboratory results and the observations from mines, they announced that they had found evidence of a short-range, composition-dependent ‘fifth force’. Their paper caused a great deal of controversy and generated a flurry of experimental activity in physics laboratories around the world."

F.D. Stacey and G.J. Tuck, ‘Geophysical evidence for non-newtonian gravity’, Nature, v. 292, 1981, pp. 230-232.
Seven Experiments that Could Change the World, pp. 174-176; Gravitational Force of the Sun, pp. 146-147.

http://mek.oszk.hu/02000/02054/html/onehund.html (Eotvos ether effect/gravitational anomaly)

The first Eotvos effect proves the existence of a fifth force of nature.

Now, the second Eotvos effect cannot be used to prove anything, since it can have two different causes.

So, everyone here can see now the level of your ignorance: you had no idea that there were two different Eotvos effects.


jackblack is an alt of rockseverywhere, his account should be deleted.

I think maybe the universe could be moving towards the earth.
This theory seems to me to be a better alternative to explain gravity, as it does not have the problem of the increase in speed of UA.
What do you think?

I think possibly you could be crackers.

To have a credible understanding and opinion of the nature of the cosmos requires some measurer of understanding that does not come through magic. Instead it requires years of study backed by practical observation and completion of experiments to back up what you eventually come to believe. The belief has to be based on facts. In your case it looks like your opinion has come straight out your ass.

What is your background and on what basis do you make that claim?

So the moron jackblack (who is rockseverywhere's alt, and alts are forbidden here) had no idea that there are actually TWO DIFFERENT Eotvos effect.

One is gravitational, the other one applies to waves.

The first Eotvos effect is definitely a proof of the existence of ether:

"In 1981 a paper was published showing that measurements of G in deep mines, boreholes, and under the sea gave values about 1% higher than that currently accepted. Furthermore, the deeper the experiment, the greater the discrepancy. However, no one took much notice of these results until 1986, when E. Fischbach and his colleagues reanalyzed the data from a series of experiments by Eötvös in the 1920s, which were supposed to have shown that gravitational acceleration is independent of the mass or composition of the attracted body. Fischbach et al. found that there was a consistent anomaly hidden in the data that had been dismissed as random error. On the basis of these laboratory results and the observations from mines, they announced that they had found evidence of a short-range, composition-dependent ‘fifth force’. Their paper caused a great deal of controversy and generated a flurry of experimental activity in physics laboratories around the world."

F.D. Stacey and G.J. Tuck, ‘Geophysical evidence for non-newtonian gravity’, Nature, v. 292, 1981, pp. 230-232.
Seven Experiments that Could Change the World, pp. 174-176; Gravitational Force of the Sun, pp. 146-147.

http://mek.oszk.hu/02000/02054/html/onehund.html (Eotvos ether effect/gravitational anomaly)

The first Eotvos effect proves the existence of a fifth force of nature.

Now, the second Eotvos effect cannot be used to prove anything, since it can have two different causes.

So, everyone here can see now the level of your ignorance: you had no idea that there were two different Eotvos effects.


jackblack is an alt of rockseverywhere, his account should be deleted.

Once more you pull things out your ass.

What is the point in dressing up out of date crap?

In 1889 our understanding of the fundamental forces of nature was in its infancy.

Turn the clock forward over 100 years and our understanding and the means to achieve it has expanded drastically. Constantly dredging ups old out of date and expired ideas serves no purpose.

If you really wanted to know about our current knowledge of gravity than its current research that needs to be used not some bullock from the century before last!


https://physicsworld.com/a/unifying-gravity-and-quantum-mechanics-without-the-need-for-quantum-gravity/

That is just one example of the current ideas on gravity. Back in 1889 when the electron had just been discovered and the ideas behind relativity had not yet been though our overall understanding was fairly rudimentary.

Though it makes me laugh to see a bunch of idiots arguing about the nature of gravity when none of you have either the means or intellect to do so.

In the end you are all either relying on what you have read or as some people are doing just pulling it out their asses.

So the moron jackblack (who is rockseverywhere's alt, and alts are forbidden here) had no idea that there are actually TWO DIFFERENT Eotvos effect.

No, the intelligent jackblack, that you need to dismiss as a moron, can clearly see through your BS and expose for the liar you are.

This is what you said:

The Eotvos effect is a proof of the existence of ether.
...
The Eotvos effect which has been mentioned here in this thread cannot be used as a proof of anything

Calling it THE Eotvos effect implies there is one.

All the reliables sources only show one.

Spouting the same BS wont help you.

One is gravitational

So you accept gravity is real?

"In 1981 a paper was published showing that measurements of G in deep mines

Has aboslutely nothing to do with the Eotvos effect.
An experiment by Eotvos does not make it the Eotvos effect.

You are literally taking something with no connection to it at all, and boldly proclaiming that it is the Eotvos effect.

So, everyone here can see now the level of your ignorance: you had no idea that there were two different Eotvos effects.

Because there is only one, and no amount of lying will save you.

jackblack is an alt of rockseverywhere, his account should be deleted.

Lying about me wont make them delete my account.
No matter how much you lie by claiming I am an alt.

Now instead of spouting more dishonest delusional BS, why don't you try defending it.

How does aether magically cause the Eotvos effect?

Nobody's lying about you, you filth. You are rockseverywhere's alt. Alt accounts are deleted.

Within practically the same month, you had created two accounts. Your requests/comments are virtually THE SAME as rockseverywhere.

You are a coward, hiding behind an alt. Now that I know who you really are, it is no wonder you had no idea that two different Eotvos effects were in place, only someone as dumb as rockseverywhere could not make the distinction.

You thought that you could hide who you really are? You were a total failure as rockseverywhere, so you created this alt thinking the substitution would work. It doesn't. Everyone here thinks that you are insane.

Nobody's lying about you, you filth. You are rockseverywhere's alt.

You say no one lying about me, and then proceed to directly lie about me.

Your position is so pathetic, you feel the need to resort to these lies to try to get me banned because you can't refute what I say.
Truly pathetic.

How about you stop with the pathetic lies and instead try defending your BS?

no wonder you had no idea that two different Eotvos effects

You mean no wonder you are so desperate you need to resort to blatantly lying to pretend there are two Eotvos effects, rather than just 1?


Again, stop with the deflection and explain how aether magically causes the Eotvos effect.

No lies on my part. Most definitely you are rockseverywhere, your present account is an alt you had created back in November 2016, after your thread (I have a degree...) got demolished.

rockseverywhere, you can no longer hide behind your alt. Jane's account was deleted, and that user wrote very nice messages, but since it was an alt it had to be gone.

So you are rocksweverywhere the dumbell who didn't know dick about geology or science. You miserable filth, hiding behind an alt.

No lies on my part.

Saying they aren't lies doesn't mean they aren't lies.
You have nothing to support your allegeation. You are just desperately looking for a way out.
Look at how you still desperately cling to this BS, while refusing to justify your isane claims.

Again, stop with the BS, explain how your magic aether causes the Eotvos effect.
If you can't just admit you can't and move on.

But I do, see here:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=92537.0

Both accounts had been created basically in the same month interval. Both you and rockseverywhere are using the same requests/comments/manner of speaking. You thought that I'd never figure it out, who you really are? Use your real account, rockseverywhere, to continue the debate, not this alt. Alt accounts are deleted and ignored. Why this cowardice on your part? Is it because you knew you could not engage in a meaningful debate as rockseverywhere?

But I do, see here:

You don't.
You have baseless allegations, and claims which make no sense, which don't even remain consistent.

Why this cowardice on your part? Is it because you knew you could not engage in a meaningful debate as rockseverywhere?

Says the coward who is refusing to address the issue and instead hiding behind these pathetic lies?

Again, stop with the BS, explain how your magic aether causes the Eotvos effect.
If you can't just admit you can't and move on.