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.

 

during solar eclipses there is a change in gravity

page: 3
17
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 4 2011 @ 09:07 PM
link   
This thread sent me off on a super theory.

I will post after im over the 20 post limit, but it revolves around the recycling universe theory, singularities to everything and back again. Surely the rotation, or gravity of this long process must be in there somewhere, almost certainly longer than we can observe in many lifetimes. But it hit me, it light is suppose to be the fastest, but gavity is proven to be faster, gravity is a controller mechanism and controls time, and light, and many other processes. In the lifetime of infinity (start, reset, repeat) gravity speeds and slows, creating time (within no time, if you know what i mean as it all exists at the same 'time'). Anyway, i made some graphs etc and expanded a theory of concious residue, which goes back to the revolutions of the pendulum over a massive amount of time.

Giant gravitational clock!

Thanks for the inspiration




posted on Jun, 4 2011 @ 09:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 

A brief but way too interesting aside to pass up.

The only observer who doesn't see the distortion is the one within the bent frame of reference. All outside observers see the longer path no matter what their perspective is.

But that does bring up an interesting exception. If the distortion lies in a single plane and an observation directly along the plane perpendicular to the distortion is made, would the observer see a straight path? It seems that for that observer, light would appear to slow down since the curve would not be apparent.

I wonder how that could be tested.


that is an amazing idea
i would encourage you to think on this further
and come up with observational "predictions" for what is expected

i think you will end up as a fan on density/gravity lensing


While relativists have always been partial to the curved space-time explanation of gravity, it is not an essential feature of GR. Eddington (1920, p. 109) was already aware of the mostly equivalent “refracting medium” explanation for GR features, which retains Euclidean space and time in the same mathematical formalism. In essence, the bending of light, gravitational redshift, Mercury perihelion advance, and radar time delay can all be consequences of electromagnetic wave motion through an underlying refracting medium that is made denser in proportion to the nearness of a source of gravity. (Van Flandern, 1993, pp. 62-67 and Van Flandern, 1994) And it is now known that even ordinary matter has certain electromagnetic-wave-like characteristics. The principal objection to this conceptually simpler refraction interpretation of GR is that a faster-than-light propagation speed for gravity itself is required. In the context of this paper, that cannot be considered as a fatal objection.




source

xploder



posted on Jun, 4 2011 @ 09:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Fatmandy
 


welcome to ats

feel free to give your interpretation to the information contained in this thread
im glad we got your brain spinning
cause at the moment my brain is in overdrive
lol
please enjoy

xploder



posted on Jun, 4 2011 @ 09:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


i wont dispute the fact that the readings are very strange and do not fit
a very definitive conclusion.
i do think there was some effort to minimise back round readings
there was also no comunication between sites
and anomolis behaviour was recoreded at a similar offset from eclipse
different equipment was used,
human error in the pendulums experimetns canot be ruled out,

but statistically what is the chances of random "noise" in the data in all locations time corrilated within a few hours of the eclipse

i cant say for sure this was conducted properly
but i also cant say there is evedence of total failure of the effect

i would like to point out that any results without interpretation or understanding of the causitive nature of the phenomonon may look like anomolus data points.

xploder



posted on Jun, 4 2011 @ 09:34 PM
link   
In reply to other comments:

Pendulums may be affected by outside parameters, but one would assume that the atomic clocks are not (afaaik, excuse my ignorance if it rears its head). The eclipse would almost certainly change affects by solar wind, air mass etc which could affect the swing, but could the gravity change affect the atomic clocks?

A small deviation in time that our planet may experience due to changing gravity zones could have strange consequences when thinking about the other planets closer to the suns gravity well. They could all be perceiving a different method in time compared to our location? slowing gravity = longer time, accelerating could = faster time.

The speed of light is supposed to be a constant (could be wrong with this statement), but if gravity can superceed this surely it can influence the transmisson of light and bend, capture and distort it?



posted on Jun, 4 2011 @ 09:46 PM
link   
reply to post by QuantumPhysicist
 


Perhaps this could explain a deviation in atomic clocks, infact it could be a great example to study as the gravity change occured on a short term basis and was observed by the beings within the change. There was time to note the expected outcome and the change that occured, I would assume usually changes like this happening on a system scale would occur over a longer period and be more subtle and harder to spot.

The up and coming planetery / galaxy alignment could be a good opportunity to test these gravity affects on recording equiment. Perhaps a vacum could be setup with numerous equipemtn to rule out atmospheric changes?



posted on Jun, 4 2011 @ 11:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Fatmandy
 


if my theories of gravity are correct its not the optical alinment we should fear
it the "acual" alignment of the masses that we should be looking at
in the curve from the sun to planets
a curvature alignment that followed the curvature of the "acual" angles of the mass interaction

maby fear is the wrong word

direct alignments are optical
and curved alignments are acual and conform to the rotational aspect of the sun

xploder



posted on Jun, 5 2011 @ 03:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by XPLodER

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by XPLodER
 

Sorry. No, it isn't.

First you were talking about gravity being lensed (focused) by mass and now about light being lensed by gravity and somehow being accelerated in the process. You are speaking as if light behaves the same way as gravity does.

Mass bends space time which causes light to "bend". Gravity is the result of that bending.

edit on 6/4/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)


ill try again
lets asume three things first
before eclipse the moon is microlensing the sun
but it is micro lensing the "apparent position" of the sun 8.3 mins ago
as the moon gets closer to full eclipse the microlensing shortens the time for light to go from the sun to the earth,
in this case, with these conditions

the light source changes from "apparent" to "acual" location of the sun
this would present as a jumping of "apparent" position of the earth aginst the micro lense and backround light source

is there such an observation?
edit to ask
is there any lunar eclipse anomoloies with transit time of "appairent" motion or increase/decrease in observed length in transit?


xploder


edit on 4-6-2011 by XPLodER because: add extra question for phage


this sounds like the effect i am looking for

Why do total eclipses of the Sun by the Moon reach maximum eclipse about 40 seconds before the Sun and Moon’s gravitational forces align? How do binary pulsars anticipate each other’s future position, velocity, and acceleration faster than the light time between them would allow? How can black holes have gravity when nothing can get out because escape speed is greater than the speed of light?


40 seconds after eclipse gravitational forces align
this is what i was thinking for the micro lensing offset

xp



posted on Jun, 5 2011 @ 01:35 PM
link   
I need some time to catch up on this thread, but I do have a few preliminary comments. I respect Van Flandern, but with skepticism (because some of his theories are too wacky for me to swallow). I have a basic understanding of his version of the Fatio/Lesage gravity model, and it does imply some gravity blocking. As far as I can tell, (my own model doesn't imply or exclude gravity blocking.) The NASA link says something about gravity being 20 times faster than light; Van Flandern says 20 billion times faster than light.

Several Chinese universities walpapered the internet with publicity about their upcoming gravity experiments for the July 22, 2009, eclipse. Results of those experiments are sketchy and hard to find. A paper at arXiv calls the results "inconclusive". I have been anxious to see a more detailed analysis. If they found anything, I guess they want to keep it to themselves.



posted on Jun, 5 2011 @ 10:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Phractal Phil
 


well i will say that his work is controversial
and after a tenth read some of the models are in error
but his work has lead me to a conclusion
nasa is right about the speed of gravity it is much higher than C

and without his mistakes i would not have recognised that
solar eclipses are gravitational lensing events,
that comprise of "two" lenses not just one

mass doesnt dent space time it buldges space time like a bubble
lol

its the inverse reaction to the buldge that has us confused

lol

ok serously IMHO
the eclipse is a micro (moon) over macro (sun) lensing phenomonon
xploder



posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 12:33 AM
link   
in this experiment there were no anomolies detected



Horacio R. Salva*
Centro Atómico Bariloche and Instituto Balseiro, CNEA-UNCuyo-Conicet, Av. Bustillo 9500, (8400) Bariloche, Argentina

Received 28 December 2010; published 16 March 2011


I have measured the precession change of the oscillation plane with an automated Foucault pendulum and found no evidence (within the measurement error) of the Allais effect. The precession speed was registered and, due the variations involved, if the precession speed would changed 0.3 degree per hour (increasing or decreasing the angle of the normal precession speed) during the all eclipse, it would be notice in this measurement.


© 2011 American Physical Society



URL:

link.aps.org...


DOI:

10.1103/PhysRevD.83.067302


PACS:

95.10.Gi, 04.20.Cv, 45.50.Pk


*salva@cab.cnea.gov.ar




source

this is the most recent experiment i have found

xp



posted on Jun, 6 2011 @ 01:49 AM
link   
ok found some very compelling evedence here

www.iasoberg.com...



We conclude on the contrary that it rather confirms that there is an essential and intrinsic
difference between the measures observed during eclipse and those without eclipse [14, 17,
18]. Our interpretation is that both anomalies result from the same phenomenon revealing an
antigravity. The paraconical pendulum, of which the oscillation plane is free to turn all sides
at the same time, seems to indicate that the more the anomaly increases the degree of
oscillating plane (with regard to the plane corresponding to the Foucault effect), the more the
deviated plane escapes the gravitation. The pendulum, and thus the Earth, is ‘lightened’.
Within the framework of the general relativity, the excess of arcseconds would mean that
there is a flatness, or a geodesic more remote from the Sun than the theoretical geodesic.


source


Scientific history seems to repeat itself.
When the GR predicted for the deflection of starlight just grazing the edge of the Sun an
angular distance of 1,74 arcseconds, two times the Newtonian prediction, the question of the
precise value of the deviation became a matter of principle which had to allow to choose
between both theories. The Relativity took it. Today, the Allais effect and the anomaly of
residual arc during total solar eclipse persuade us that it is not the complete story. The
observed 1,97 arcseconds for the deviation, considered up to here as one of the proofs of the
GR, is the average of the observations done during eight eclipses between 1919 and 1960. But
this number is higher than the number predicts by the calculation and in a proportion superior
to the experimental errors. And, as we tried to demonstrate it, the unexplained arcseconds
excess of these experiments would be in concomitance and in accordance with the abrupt shift
of the plane of oscillation of the Allais pendulum with regard to the plane corresponding to
the effect of Foucault. We do not hesitate to assert that these confirmed experiments and data
question the interpretation of the GR and once more our conception of the Universe.


source




my conclusion is newton was correct and the deviation expected was distorted by fore ground gravitational micro lensing of the moon and the sun as a cumulitive,
but noting the 40 second delay for "acual" rather than "apparent" position of the eclipse

xploder
edit on 6-6-2011 by XPLodER because: add pic



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 03:13 AM
link   
there are three distinct effects happening very close together,
the first is the optical solar "apparent" eclipse
followed by the "acual" gravatational eclipse
followed by the "loss"of mutual attraction between the earth and the moon "downstream curvature"




this is because
the optical eclipse is the "apparent" location of the sun
the offset of acual gravatational eclipse is a moving "perspective" this also has a direct effect on earth gravity(small)
the "flow" of medium is disturbed "downstream" ie the expansion dynamic of the medium is disturbed and there is a "fluctuation" in the low pressure area between the earth and the moon.

this creates a flow pressure increase "higher" on the "leading side" to our perspective and creates a "density hump" that would increase the lensing potential more on the high side.
this is because of the curved nature of the flow of the medium.
the effect should be to see more gravitational lensing potential on the leading side of the moon than on the trailing side of the moon.

looking at the leading edge of the disturbence its flow would have a higher potential to effect the mutual attraction as past a point (center) the flow would have a bias to draw the earth into the low presure area,
until the trailing edge gets past that same point.

in affect the earth
"slows down in its orbit" the earth is captured into the disturbed flow created by the moon "blocking the flow"
and moves to the centre of the "low pressure area" curving behind the disterbence of the moon
once the moon has rotated about the earth past a certain point
the earth is speed up to its normal orbit and released from the low pressure area.

this implyes a relation ship between the ability of the earth to create a similar effect on the moon while in transit behind the earth

so if we look for an "uneven" or larger lensing potential either side of the eclipse
or
moon disterbences in lunar eclipse "downstream" from totality
or after eclipse

so the orbital relationship would have to account for the combined effects of both earth and lunar "down stream wash" and its effect on the distence between the earth and the moon and there orbital speed as they rotate into each others down stream "wash" or disturbences.



xploder
edit on 7-6-2011 by XPLodER because: you know

edit on 7-6-2011 by XPLodER because: bla



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by XPLodER
 


What you are describing here sounds an awful lot like a gravitational "bow shock".

If this is a factual concept, would that not imply an aether?



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


because there are seperate considerations for
gravitaional alignment
and "bow shock" effects
ever wounder why

The Sun happens to be 400 times the Moon's diameter, and 400 times as far away. That coincidence means the Sun and Moon appear to be the same size when viewed from Earth. A total solar eclipse, in which the Moon is between the Earth and Sun, blocks the bright light from the Sun's photosphere, allowing us to see the faint glow from the corona, the Sun's outer atmosphere.


source

this would imply an expanding medium density and density/gravity effects
bow shock is correct but the down stream effects of a "bow shock"
the "wake" of the "bow shock"
and the direction and timing of influence would be up to the direction and pressure of flow

thank you for responding i was thinking i had "annoyed" everyone


xploder



posted on Jun, 7 2011 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by XPLodER
 


Not annoyed. Just busy (and a little ill). Planning a move across state soon and have been prepping for that. Haven't touched my blog in weeks, either.

Such is life.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join