It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by Flux8
What would you think he would need to do to make it any more clear? If someone is interested enough to care, they should likely read at least the first 2-3 pages, right?
Originally posted by Flux8
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by Flux8
What would you think he would need to do to make it any more clear? If someone is interested enough to care, they should likely read at least the first 2-3 pages, right?
I did read the whole thread. The first and only time that he has said that his theory is a continuation of Ed's was his last response to me, on page 21. It shouldn't take 21 pages (almost 2 months) to admit that.
And if you care to read, take a gander at the T&C in regards to plagiarism... www.abovetopsecret.com...
Originally posted by Flux8
reply to post by Promecus
You're right, it's not worth debating my issue on here. Nothing will come of it, and I don't have the time to prove my point. Moving on...
Promecus, I can't help but look at Ed's castle, the fact that he alone built it, tore it down and moved it ~10 miles north, rebuilt it, using nothing but 3-5 ton chain and 2 telephone pole tripod pulleys in it's construction.
Furthermore, he wrote several articles outlining experiments that anyone can do that shows there is more going on with magnetism/electricity than academia (at least in his day) understood. I know this is all anecdotal evidence, BUT, what if... WHAT IF he actually did know something that has been overlooked all these decades? Something that he found from observational evidence from his own experiments. Something in the configuration...
I have my own garage inventor theory that actually includes a critical component that Ed didn't mention, well sorta. I'll just put a couple of hints out there for those who haven't guessed yet. Ed's sweet sixteen wasn't Agnes. It wasn't a girl at all. His sweet sixteen was a mechanical solution that can be associated with some of Tesla's work/findings. And it can definitely affect matter at the sub-atomic scale, through all of the scales in fact.
Originally posted by Promecus
Yeah, I also haven't read the entire thread (yet). However, I'd like to disagree with the OP for a few reasons. I've actually done a small amount of research into gravity and magnetism. I'm very certain they are two different things.
Originally posted by Promecus
In fact, we can prove that they are different. Gravity is actually the weaker of the two forces.
Originally posted by Promecus
If you take a magnet and use it to hold up a metallic object you are putting the power of the magnet against the power of Earth's gravity. The magnet often times will win.
Originally posted by Promecus
As I understand it, gravity is actually a byproduct of mass itself. (It isn't really a force at all.) That doesn't, however, necessarily make it magnetic. To use a lame example, if I may, think of space as being flat and two dimensional. Much like a sheet of cloth stretched out to be flat.
Originally posted by Promecus
Now, place a ball in the middle of this sheet and the sheet sags down into a 3rd dimension. Now, take a smaller ball and roll it around the edges of the sag. You'll notice it makes a circular flight down towards the larger ball. Which is exactly the same path we see meteors follow when heading towards larger bodies in space.
Originally posted by Promecus
Magnetism, on the other hand, is when all of the atoms of an object are aligned with each other, so all of the electromagnetic fields are pointing the same direction.
Originally posted by Promecus
It is easy to see how anyone would get the two forces confused with one another because of how similar they work.
Originally posted by Promecus
Simply put, in the world of physics, we cannot mathematically explain all types of forces the same way. We have to use different fields of thought for each one. The main question is Why? So, they've been working on a way to combine all equations into one grand equation that will tell all and explain all.
Originally posted by Promecus
Just as a question...what if you where on the other side of the world or in a different hemisphere and attempted the experiment in the first post? Would the other pole dip down? I ask because I know the magnetic lines of the Earth don't always perfectly stretch from one pole to another. Some do pass through part of the Earth itself.
Originally posted by Promecus
I do believe that I've just done a great job of settling this entire ordeal. The idea that gravity and magnetism are the same is totally wrong.
Originally posted by Promecus
Understanding magnetism is easy. As I previously explained this force occurs when all of the atoms in a mass are aligned, thus combining their electromagnetic fields.
Originally posted by Promecus
Gravity, on the other hand, is some what of a mystery but can be narrowed down into 2 possible hypotheses.
1) Mass attracts mass. We can see that clearly after looking at the work Fourmilab has done.
2) Mass creates a dip in 2d space which other objects can then fall into (or be attracted to).
Originally posted by Promecus
Just as another example, I once heard of a study a group of students did with that particle accelerator (sorry, but I do not have a link for this one). They took a particle, split it in half, and then sent it down the particle accelerator. They noticed that when they affected one half of the particle’s direction, the other half did the exact same thing. Even though they were no longer attached to each other. After crunching some numbers they discovered that it didn't matter if these particles were 2 inches apart or 2 billion light years apart. The communication between the two was instant.
Originally posted by Promecus
Such a force is neither gravity or magnetism, but may be the cause for both. However, that's just speculation on my part. At any rate, I digress. Gravity is simply not magnetism.