Relationship Between Gravitational and Kinetic Forces and Electrical and Magnetic Forces

reply to post by buddhasystem



Why does light exist (by why, I dont mean "because thats the way the universe is"...I mean what is light and how does it exist)?

Before light/photons leave the sun, what are they, where are they?

If we pause all motion in the universe right now, and had really good equipment, we could zoom in and see every minuscule detail of anything/everything that truly exists, what would the EM radiation appear as?

how does a moving electron cause the existence of light? where is the light coming from, is it physical energy dripping out of the electron? is it friction between an aether and the electron? how does light exist? Please try and explain.

if we remove everything out of the universe, so we are left with a perfect vacuum, and we shoot two electrons towards each other, what is the deal with radiation, can they create an infinite amount of radiation, because they can just pass it back and forth, not creating or destroying, forever? or electrons repulse each other, so they will emit some radiation, until they are stable, and then they will just exist forever?

Anyone simply reading the slides would find them to be gibberish...as with anything taken out of context. If I gave you my flash cards for my phys papers you'd call them gibberish as well....

My GPS works fine, thank you. It does seem to exist all right. It's complete because it allows me to run errands of all sorts in a very efficient manner. Based on this and other observations, your statement does not have merit.

I can not believe you actually said that. So you are asserting that GR is a fully formed complete understanding of the universe??!?!

You can not be serious..."My GPS works therefore GR is perfect"...Im at a loss for words at your deduction....one only needs to read my signature to see how glaringly offensive your statement is to the originator of GR

As far as Gavin "who ever" the validity of his life story I could careless about, nor could I attest to it. However, when I look at ariel pictures of CERN, I do in-fact, see towns around the vicinity but I'll take your word for it as it has no effect on the topic he presents on black hole theory and "exsistics". Which is why I presented the information. It directly pertains to the topic and others have deemed it valid enough to debate.

I would also like to make it clear that I do not support his theory in any way but he has been debated by suskind and found to at least be capable in that regard. (I am not referring to his home made claymation videos on his site)

So I will agree with you that he is a "mumbling idiot" but others with far more credentials and clout in the scientific community are not so sure. I wonder what you think of people who cannot perform complex spatial geometric equations....

Einstein's field equations are given by,

Gμν = Rμν - ½ gμνR = -κTμν.

According to the claims of the proponents of the Standard Model, if the energy-momentum tensor Tμν is zero, then the equations Rμν = 0 result (since the Ricci curvature R becomes zero also). However, since Rμν = 0 is inadmissible, because it violates Einstein's 'Principle of Equivalence', the energy-momentum tensor can never be zero for Einstein's gravitational field. Therefore, Einstein's field equations must take the form

Gμν / κ + Tμν = 0

wherein the Gμν/κ are the components of a gravitational energy tensor. Thus, when Tμν = 0, Gμν = 0, i.e. they vanish identically - there is no gravitational field.

This is an inescapable consequence of the inadmissibility of Rμν = 0.

As you say in your sig....

“It never ceases to surprise me at the infinite capacity of the human mind to resist the introduction of useful knowledge.” -- T.R. Lounsbury

I believe you will find the scientific ability of those that support the "psudeo science" of the EU far more capable and testable than those that support dividing by 0, magical jelly beans of infinite density, mass eating dark monsters and little spiraling triangles of invisible photonic convince, if you so chose to look. I am certainly not denying the practical application of GR or SR but to say they are complete is madness. Quantum Fields and quantum theories are a separate thing than GR.

Black Holes and Dark Matter/Energy are fairy tales that physics professors tell their undergrad students to keep them from trying to pose difficult questions in the classroom.

Gravity is not the only answer, simply part of the whole.

Originally posted by swan001

Originally posted by buddhasystem
...and I thought it was clear enough that sources of the fields and the fields are separate entities... I guess I was wrong and assumed to much.

Electron is not the same as the electric field. Repeat 10 times.

You are getting more and more cryptic with each instant that passes.

Seriously? What's "cryptic" in stating the difference between a charge and the field crated by same? If you find this cryptic, well then... There is always special education.

Originally posted by ImaFungi
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

Have you ever questioned about the universe by and from your self (using your knowledge, yes), or is all you have ever thought, exactly what you have read?

In a stark contrast to you, I studied that Universe in the lab for what appears to be decades by now. I was not content with being an armchair philosopher or any other kind of schmuck like this, I walked the walk and did a lot of work. I always had questions about the Universe and I was willing to work to get a glimpse of the answers. It appears to me that you are reluctant to do as much as to crack open a book and try to read (well that might be difficult, I suppose).

Have you ever envisioned, inquisitively tinkered with and further questioned the 'mainstream' portrayal of the ideas of physics?

You gotta love the way woo-woos are fighting a straw man usually called "mainstream physics" while they never bothered to learn what physics is in the first place...

Originally posted by buddhasystem

You gotta love the way woo-woos are fighting a straw man usually called "mainstream physics" while they never bothered to learn what physics is in the first place...

No I only love that in the past year or so I have probably asked you around 50 questions pertaining to the universe which you have ignored. Either you know everything there is about the universe. Or I inquire at a depth so far out of reach from the simple thoughts you are capable of reading, that you mistake them for folly, or ignore them to withhold the perception of your self as the sacred textbook you pretend to be.

Originally posted by ImaFungi

Originally posted by buddhasystem

You gotta love the way woo-woos are fighting a straw man usually called "mainstream physics" while they never bothered to learn what physics is in the first place...

No I only love that in the past year or so I have probably asked you around 50 questions pertaining to the universe which you have ignored. Either you know everything there is about the universe. Or I inquire at a depth so far out of reach from the simple thoughts you are capable of reading, that you mistake them for folly, or ignore them to withhold the perception of your self as the sacred textbook you pretend to be.

edit on 18-5-2013 by ImaFungi because: (no reason given)

Perhaps you ought to entertain the notion that you didn't understand or recognize buddhasystem's answers when they came.

Originally posted by vind21

Black Holes and Dark Matter/Energy are fairy tales that physics professors tell their undergrad students to keep them from trying to pose difficult questions in the classroom.

Gravity is not the only answer, simply part of the whole.

edit on 17-5-2013 by vind21 because: (no reason given)

So if black holes and dark matter/energy are 'fairy tales' (presumably meaning not true), what better explains the observational evidence we have today?

Physicists know for certain that they don't have the microscopic equations of motion and constitutive relations for dark matter and dark energy which is why they have the uninformative placeholder names that they are. One hopes that eventually these will be replaced by one or more specific pieces of physics validated by observation and experiment.

That doesn't mean that their effect is false.

And what's wrong with general relativity? It passes every observational and experimental test, time and time again. There has to be something correct about it.

Perhaps I went a little over board with the fairy tale comment.

Perhaps you've already heard that GPS, by the very fact that it WORKS, confirms Einstein's relativity; also that Black Holes must be real. But these are little more than popular fictions, according to the distinguished GPS expert Ron Hatch. The same experimental data, he notes, suggests an absolute frame with only an appearance of relativity.

Ron has worked with satellite navigation and positioning for 50 years, having demonstrated the Navy's TRANSIT System at the 1962 Seattle World's Fair. He is well known for innovations in high-accuracy applications of the GPS system including the development of the "Hatch Filter" which is used in most GPS receivers. He has obtained over two dozen patents related to GPS positioning and is currently a member of the U.S National PNT (Positioning Navigation and Timing) Advisory Board. He is employed in advanced engineering at John Deere's Intelligent Systems Group.

There are a few questions I would like to pose that directly pertain to the original topic of this thread.

Where doe gravitational potential energy come from?
Do inertial and structural mass diverge?
Why is the matter wave frequency defined by twice the classical kinetic energy?
Do you really want to know the answers?

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

I have a few issues with GR, and I have great respect for the theory and those who practice it.

The primary issues I have are with the proponents of the theory themselves and the excessive lengths they go to defend something they know to be incomplete. The way it is used to stifle and dismiss information that must one day be included into our thinking on the universe if we hope to get past the same barriers that have been holding up progress for so many years. The basic workings of the universe in my opinion and hopes are far less complicated than "cosmologists" would like you to believe, the Latin priests holding all the books etc....

"It is undoubtedly a fact that relativity theory had a profound impact on physics during the twentieth century. Einstein’s theory is celebrated the world over for having produced a series of brilliant successes. Nevertheless, there is a sizeable community of dissident scientists who reject it outright, and a far larger group, unaware of an alternative, who harbor a pronounced distaste for it. This dislike stems from the fact that Einstein borrows from the mathematics of Lorentz and Poincaré, and this allows him to modify length and time measurement to force the speed of light to be constant for all observers. Given a clear alternative to tampering with the fundamentals, most rational thinkers would jump at the chance for a substitute. But why challenge such a supposedly successful theory? Well, for two very good reasons—first, to truly understand and describe how nature works, and second, to achieve new breakthroughs, once an unintentional roadblock to progress has been removed."


^^^ The quote above best describes the issue at hand for most of us that have at least some real understanding of mathematics and how it applys to the real world. I find it rather offensive the lengths that people have gone to discredit perfectly good science coming from certain individuals of the EU and their highly testable and reproducible and unexpected results.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Here is a Link to the basic issues of relativity. (Please be kind to the source this is simply an easily worded page to understand for most people and not intended for those of us who have worked through these issues on paper nor would i advise you read the rest of the post, I was just looking for something easy to read so those that do not know what the questions are could look at something.) Your text books will tell you that these issues derived from paradox's in GR are inconsequential because "They ask the wrong questions" and that "No paradox actually exists" If that was true you wouldn't have people like hawking and Susskind running around debating them all the time.......I have yet to see any of them debate Ric = 0, given enough time Im sure someone will.


In the end the relationship of electrical energy and gravitational force has been ignored for far to long. There is room and necessitous need for both to be included in a more complete picture.

Originally posted by vind21

Einstein's field equations are given by,

Gμν = Rμν - ½ gμνR = -κTμν.

According to the claims of the proponents of the Standard Model, if the energy-momentum tensor Tμν is zero, then the equations Rμν = 0 result (since the Ricci curvature R becomes zero also). However, since Rμν = 0 is inadmissible, because it violates Einstein's 'Principle of Equivalence', the energy-momentum tensor can never be zero for Einstein's gravitational field. Therefore, Einstein's field equations must take the form

Gμν / κ + Tμν = 0

wherein the Gμν/κ are the components of a gravitational energy tensor. Thus, when Tμν = 0, Gμν = 0, i.e. they vanish identically - there is no gravitational field.

This is an inescapable consequence of the inadmissibility of Rμν = 0.

Are you talking about the same thing as Stephen Crothers in the video “Black Holes & Relativity”?

Published on Mar 1, 2013
Yes, it's an exotic subject, but Stephen Crothers has delivered a resounding critique of the most popular dogma in the theoretical sciences, all given at a level of common sense, free from mathematical elaborations.

Originally posted by mbkennel

Originally posted by ImaFungi

Originally posted by buddhasystem

You gotta love the way woo-woos are fighting a straw man usually called "mainstream physics" while they never bothered to learn what physics is in the first place...

No I only love that in the past year or so I have probably asked you around 50 questions pertaining to the universe which you have ignored. Either you know everything there is about the universe. Or I inquire at a depth so far out of reach from the simple thoughts you are capable of reading, that you mistake them for folly, or ignore them to withhold the perception of your self as the sacred textbook you pretend to be.

edit on 18-5-2013 by ImaFungi because: (no reason given)

Perhaps you ought to entertain the notion that you didn't understand or recognize buddhasystem's answers when they came.

I always understand his answers when he does rarely give them, I have skimmed the text books he has gained all his knowledge from. Perhaps you may comprehend that there are lots of answers buddhasystems doesnt know, I try to ask difficult and mysterious questions on interesting mysterious and questionable topics of the universe. You guys know X amount about the universe, I always am asking about Y. Im questioning the knowledge you guys do have, because it is far from complete, in order for you to see how little you both do know, and in order for me to advance my own understanding and mode of thought. You both perceive that you dwell in a state of comfort ability of your knowledge, you accept your knowledge and are satisfied with the lack of strain you cause yourselves by your restraint in asking the difficult questions I pose. And you do all this, while looking down on someone like me, because you (?) dont grasp the significance of my questions,. Its so easy for you to dismiss me for a fool, much easier then trying to think about the things which you are not yet aware of about the universe. (How do I think about things I am not aware of?... ask questions of the things you are aware of)

Originally posted by All Seeing Eye
Miss Identified as "Angels", "Aliens", "GFL", "Foo Fighters", "Muses", I believe, are "Ethereal" beings that pop into and out of our physical reality. They go into and out of, the "Ethereal". I suspect the true control of planets, galaxies, are controlled from that realm.

I've heard Tesla expert Eric Dollard talk about space and "counter-space." I've also heard him say that the sun is not powered by nuclear fusion, that it is hollow, and it is powered by some other dimension. He admits he doesn't know what the other dimension is, but that no one else knows how the sun is powered, either. He's just certain it's not by nuclear fusion - that there's fusion only in the arcs of the solar flares.

He has a new website, Aether Power.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
I'm interested in his ideas because he's talking about the concept of the ether, which I think needs to be returned to science.

I like Paul LaViolette's concept of the ether (subquantum kinetics). I like what he says about every part of space is affecting every other part of space in this short video clip, which is taken from a Project Camelot interview of him. When you click on this link, the sound will commence, and you can't pause the clip: Link

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Originally posted by All Seeing Eye
Miss Identified as "Angels", "Aliens", "GFL", "Foo Fighters", "Muses", I believe, are "Ethereal" beings that pop into and out of our physical reality. They go into and out of, the "Ethereal". I suspect the true control of planets, galaxies, are controlled from that realm.

I've heard Tesla expert Eric Dollard talk about space and "counter-space." I've also heard him say that the sun is not powered by nuclear fusion, that it is hollow, and it is powered by some other dimension. He admits he doesn't know what the other dimension is, but that no one else knows how the sun is powered, either. He's just certain it's not by nuclear fusion - that there's fusion only in the arcs of the solar flares.

He has a new website, Aether Power.

edit on 05/21/13 by Mary Rose because: Punctuation

Thanks for the thought.

The thought that gets me is what holds the planets in their positions. Sun very well could be hollow and have its own "Central Sun". I get these weird mental flashes that what actually drives all planets, Suns, Stars, etc, is actually anchored in the Ethereal.

A clue to what ever it is can be seen in the dwarf planet Ceres. I suspect this is actually the "Central Sun", or magnetic center of a planet that used to be there "Tiamat". The planet itself was destroyed long ago but its Center still holds its position in the solar system.

Ill look at the link, thank you.

Originally posted by All Seeing Eye

The thought that gets me is what holds the planets in their positions. Sun very well could be hollow and have its own "Central Sun". I get these weird mental flashes that what actually drives all planets, Suns, Stars, etc, is actually anchored in the Ethereal.

A clue to what ever it is can be seen in the dwarf planet Ceres. I suspect this is actually the "Central Sun", or magnetic center of a planet that used to be there "Tiamat". The planet itself was destroyed long ago but its Center still holds its position in the solar system.

Dollard has also talked about the fact that there is such a thing as radio astrology. He's said that radio frequencies are controlled by the sun but the positions of the planets affect the sun. At least that's what I understood him to say:

reply to post by Mary Rose


I can defiantly relate to this man and his resolve at what he believes! Our terminology may differ but the points are the same.

Our Galaxy is one big machine where the fulcrums, pivot points, and power source, come from another "Dimension", and I call that Dimension, the Ethereal. It is the true genesis of our reality. All planets and all matter originated from it. PERIOD!

I have studied planets, and rocks, always wondering how they could come to be. Oh, not the state they are in, but rather how did they come to be here.

Since my wake up call in 1978 where I witnessed balls of white light that were not registered in the books of science, I realized there was another place, another "Dimension" that really did exist. I must admit I am limited in the ability to look into that place and see what their is to see, but that is no way proves it is not there.

It seems as though there are transitional places where this ethereal place comes through to our reality, our material world.

As seen in this Hubble photo, this is a body being formed, from within.



There are no gigantic whirling gas clouds bonding to itself in some magical way. It simply comes into the physical/ material world, of its own force. There is no factory floating around in deep space, spitting out suns and planets, PERIOD! There is only "Self Inspiration" of heavenly bodies. Even the gigantic gas clouds are spewed from one point, and over time spread out. Practice makes perfect

Our human minds are not wired to be able to comprehend this process, and I suspect it is part of the reason we are here in the first place. We can comprehend the material world because our space suit, our flesh and blood bodies, are designed to perform in the material. Only that part of us that is not of flesh and blood, our spirit or soul, can comprehend the "Ethereal", because that is where the spirit and soul originate. Do not try to use your brain to comprehend this, try using your spirit instead.

In another thread to which I cant remember the name someone made the statement that they thought each of us would receive our own galaxy to be "God" over if we complete the lessons of this life. I did not answer that posting but I also have had that feeling many years ago. Maybe not a god per say but rather our own little lab where we could be the scientist creating new and exciting experiences to challenge and sometimes enjoy the trip it may create. We may actually be junior creators waiting in the wings for our day, to shine At any rate...

The relationships observed in just our solar system between the bodies is absolutely illogical, until you factor in the "Ethereal", then it all makes sense. The birthing of a planet is a singular event in that it does not require other physical matter to happen. It does seem to be the last event as the Sun would be the first, etc, etc. No point in having a planet, unless it has a sun and solar system. And none of it, Galaxy, Sun, planet, make any sense unless their was a human mind to wonder about all of it. Why make anything if their is no observer to observe, or enjoy it.

Originally posted by All Seeing Eye
reply to post by Mary Rose

 

I can defiantly relate to this man and his resolve at what he believes!

So it's like religion. I see. Like on that AmWay motivational tape: "if you believe enough, facts don't matter".

Our Galaxy is one big machine where the fulcrums, pivot points, and power source, come from another "Dimension", and I call that Dimension, the Ethereal.

Dude, this is deep.

It is the true genesis of our reality

Mmm, except it has nothing to do with reality.

PERIOD!

Sounds like a "comma". Or maybe "coma".

Originally posted by All Seeing Eye
reply to post by Mary Rose

 

I can defiantly relate to this man and his resolve at what he believes!

Our terminology may differ but the points are the same.

Eric Dollard was a child prodigy now in his 60s who describes himself as a natural philosopher. He has the backing of a grassroots movement to bring the ether back into science - in a form that is consistent with scientific observation.

reply to post by All Seeing Eye


If you have time, please check out the thread "The Artificial Division Between Physics and Metaphysics."

Originally posted by All Seeing Eye
Only that part of us that is not of flesh and blood, our spirit or soul, can comprehend the "Ethereal", because that is where the spirit and soul originate. Do not try to use your brain to comprehend this, try using your spirit instead.

I believe you're correct about that.

We need a more holistic approach to our contemplation of the workings of the universe and life itself so that science is not rejecting non-material phenomena as being "outside of science."

reply to post by Mary Rose


Mary Rose,
A few posts back you linked to an article by ‘Dragan Hajdukovic’ Here to support your hypothesis. There is a poster “Sebastian” on ‘Skeptic Friends Network Forum’ also referencing this person. Must admit Mary, Sebastian sounds an awfully lot like you, is that you by any chance? Link is here.

This poster Here refers to your post as:

Posted by Subterranean13:
Just another made up pseudo-science post from a member with a long track record of spamming rubbish like this all over the boards.

Mary, you have no credibility on this board due to the people you research as being classified as frauds, charlatans, scammers or hoaxers. Your threads on Nassim Haramein, John Searl etc, etc have been discussed many, many times on many forums and people have reached the same conclusion. You really need to channel your research abilities into more constructive projects, otherwise people on this forum may come to the conclusion you may have some hidden agenda. ATS is blessed with having a number of outstanding writers and academics who give of their time and knowledge – we should make use of this in a constructive manner and not resort to insulting them.

Concerning your research on Eric P. Dollard, other people claim him as being the classic nutjob pseudo-scientist. My own research is that certain individuals may be exploiting him and may have hijacking his identity Here. Also someone has set up a fundraising campaign in his name, which he may/may not have any knowledge of Here

What bothers me according to this ATS poster here on Eric’s website he has collections of books for sale listed as ‘out of print’ books between 80-400 years old ranging from $85 to $200. Out of print books are those listed as being in the ‘public domain’ and represent a very lucrative business for those people re-publishing them (no publisher’s fees to pay). This smells like a scam to me.