In a Spirit of Harmony (was - Age of Universe...)

P.S. to Ody -

This link of Paxton's addresses the mathematical points you've
presented. But to qualify his terminology, i hafta wince since he
still utilizes the archaic term 'ether'. But he modifies it to
"Nether" signifying it as a dynamic fluid
and terms it "Mass" (capitalized) vis-a-vis mass.

Scroll down to II.D (Inverse square law)

http://www.softcom.net/users/greebo/grav.htm

oc

In article .com,
"oldcoot" wrote:

So (with math mode off momentarily), if gravity is not exactly what it
appears to be behaves as, then what is it?

I mean, i'm open to hear it.


Right until the point where it disagree's with your insane theory, in which
case you'll close your ears and go LALALALAL

--

"Yes, you're right of course, NB. And they get very useless very quickly.
I shall do my best to ignore them, as you wish." Painius

In article .com,
"oldcoot" wrote:

1. A high, fixed value of c.

2. The fact that there is no perceptible upper limit to amplitude of
EM radiation.

3. The fact that the behavior of gravity appears to be that of a
pressure-driven, accelerating flow into mass, with mass synonymous
with flow sink.



3. Wrong


4. The fact that whatever _causes_ gravity has the power to crush
massive stars down to the BH state.

5. The 'identical-ness' of all the elements everywhere in the
universe, even when out of lightspeed communication on opposite sides
of the universe.

6. The fact that the above points demonstrate a universal,
hyperpressurized, fluidic 'plemum' rather than a 'void'.


6. wrong

Show evidence for your assertions

--

"Yes, you're right of course, NB. And they get very useless very quickly.
I shall do my best to ignore them, as you wish." Painius

P.S. to Ody, Painius et al -

Just to reiterate, this is a re-posting of Paxton's treatment of the
inverse square law. Being a math hotshot, he demonstrates
mathematically what i've been saying over and over (but apparently
hasn't registered with anybody yet): The ISL is the product _OF AND
ONLY OF_ the *acceleration component* of the flow, not the specific
velocity of the flow.

Visualizing the flow inbound from deep space, the *acceleration rate*
of the flow (aka the "curvature of space") is what's rising
exponentially, _NOT_ the velocity of the flow itself at Earth's
surface.

There is no conflict with the *velocity of inflow* at Earth's surface
being equivalent to escape velocity.

Notice that Paxton echoes the statement (paraphrasing) that insofar as
the ISL relates to gravity, gravity
does not "obey" the ISL but creates it.


II.D. The Inverse Square Law (ISL)

This is a known law for gravity which states that the acceleration
that we call gravity varies inversely with the square of the distance
from the center of the mass that creates that acceleration. In other
words, if we are at an altitude which is twice as far from the center
of the earth as the earth's surface, the acceleration due to gravity
with be one-fourth as great as it is on the earth's surface. So if the
gravity at the earth's surface is 32 feet per second squared and the
radius of the earth is 4,000 miles, the gravity at an altitude of
4,000 miles (which is 8,000 miles from the earth's center) will be
approximately 8 feet per second squared.

In mathematical language, the ISL is ga/ge = re2/ra2 where ga is the
gravity at a higher location, ge is the gravity at a lower location,
ra is the radius at the same higher location, and re is the radius at
the same lower location.

On page 14 of Book Two of the series Behind Light's Illusion
is the equation g = v2/2r, where "g" is gravity.
We may use this eqation because it is derived for nether purposes, is
derived correctly, and is the same one known for escape velocity.
Therefore, we may substitute va2/2ra for ga in the ISL equation and
ve2/2re for ge, and simplify.
The result, va/ve = re1/2/ra1/2, shows that v is indeed proportional
to r-1/2. Therefore, the fact that each level of incoming nether is an
energy level is, very likely, the reason for the ISL.

The inverse square law, like all laws of science, is not a reason
explaining why something works. It is merely a statement of the
consequences of something working. ANY VALID GRAVITY THEORY MUST SHOW
THAT THE GRAVITY IT THEORIZES ACTUALLY CREATES THE INVERSE SQUARE LAW.
The line of reasoning shown above provides a gravity that perfectly
creates the inverse square law. (Emphasis added)

************************
And as stated previously in the 'Dark Matter' thread, gravity is not
constrained to "obey" that which it creates in the first place. Thus
in deep intergalactic space, where hydrodynamic pressure of space is
highest, greatly amped-up acceleration-rates ("curvatures of space")
would explain the enhanced gravitational lensing of galaxies and non-
Keplerian (frisbee-esque) rotation of galaxies *without* need for ad
hoc fixes like
"dark matter" which are necessary under the void-space regime.

oc

In article .com,
"oldcoot" wrote:

The inverse square law, like all laws of science, is not a reason
explaining why something works. It is merely a statement of the
consequences of something working. ANY VALID GRAVITY THEORY MUST SHOW
THAT THE GRAVITY IT THEORIZES ACTUALLY CREATES THE INVERSE SQUARE LAW.
The line of reasoning shown above provides a gravity that perfectly
creates the inverse square law. (Emphasis added)


You are so desperate to rescue this failed theory you utterly run away from
answering its shortcoming loon.

--

"Yes, you're right of course, NB. And they get very useless very quickly.
I shall do my best to ignore them, as you wish." Painius

Yeah, Vera may have a chance for a Nobel, but you don't, BEERTbrain!

Saul Levy


On Thu, 1 Mar 2007 06:58:31 -0500, (G=EMC^2
Glazier) wrote:

Painius You can refer to the astronomer "Vera Rubin" She has these
submicroscopic particles as being very tiny,and very heavy. There are
two classes of possible objects they are called WIMPs,and MACHOs (no
charge) very heavy for their size. They do interact with "ordinary
matter" In the Planck world Rubin tells us these heavy particles are
great candidates for missing matter. Easy theory could be these
particles flow through space,and give the universe its gravitational
field. These are the thoughts that Ducky wit does not like they are
hypothetical. Still it gives Rubin a chance for a Nobel Bert

Cactus Saul I'm not getting a Nobel even having more theories on the
mysteries of the universe than any other person that is living or ever
lived. If I got a Nobel it would be for stopping light in its tracks.
Concave & Convex theory Spin is in theory Inertia theory(proven)
Structure of the electron theory, gravity theory etc Bert

In article ,
(G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:

Cactus Saul I'm not getting a Nobel even having more theories on the
mysteries of the universe than any other person that is living or ever
lived. If I got a Nobel it would be for stopping light in its tracks.
Concave & Convex theory Spin is in theory Inertia theory(proven)
Structure of the electron theory, gravity theory etc Bert


You don't get a Nobel on the *number* of theories. You only need one. But it
needs to be right.

--

"Yes, you're right of course, NB. And they get very useless very quickly.
I shall do my best to ignore them, as you wish." Painius

nightbat wrote

Saul Levy wrote:

Yeah, Vera may have a chance for a Nobel, but you don't, BEERTbrain!

Saul Levy

nightbat

Stop being so jealous of profound Earth Science Team Officers
Saul, you had your chance but you blew it. And Officer Bert like Vera is
correct, the field is composed theoretically of invisible sub Plank
state domain invisible energy of which bulk is far greater then composed
condensed macro mass visible domain one. The coined term WIMPs are most
likely in honor of the silly auk coffeeboys no doubt and the super
thinking Officer heavy weights that field hold everything together
called rightly MACHOs cause sure even beautiful deep pondering Vera sees
and knows the difference.

sheesh!,
the nightbat


On Thu, 1 Mar 2007 06:58:31 -0500, (G=EMC^2
Glazier) wrote:


Painius You can refer to the astronomer "Vera Rubin" She has these
submicroscopic particles as being very tiny,and very heavy. There are
two classes of possible objects they are called WIMPs,and MACHOs (no
charge) very heavy for their size. They do interact with "ordinary
matter" In the Planck world Rubin tells us these heavy particles are
great candidates for missing matter. Easy theory could be these
particles flow through space,and give the universe its gravitational
field. These are the thoughts that Ducky wit does not like they are
hypothetical. Still it gives Rubin a chance for a Nobel Bert

nightbat wrote:

Post correction and addition:

For our Saul the nightbat original post referred to proper Planck domain
not the net transcribed typo improper Plank one.

Mommy, those astronomy Science Officers are oh so nice and proper.
Yes sweetheart, unlike those nasty auk coffeeboys!

Also see Max Planck Biography and Nobel Prize history

with apology and respect,
the nightbat



Saul Levy wrote:

Yeah, Vera may have a chance for a Nobel, but you don't, BEERTbrain!

Saul Levy


nightbat

Stop being so jealous of profound Earth Science Team Officers
Saul, you had your chance but you blew it. And Officer Bert like Vera is
correct, the field is composed theoretically of invisible sub Planck
state domain invisible energy of which bulk is far greater then composed
condensed macro mass visible domain one. The coined term WIMPs are most
likely in honor of the silly auk coffeeboys no doubt and the super
thinking Officer heavy weights that field hold everything together
called rightly MACHOs cause sure even beautiful deep pondering Vera sees
and knows the difference.

sheesh!,
the nightbat


On Thu, 1 Mar 2007 06:58:31 -0500, (G=EMC^2
Glazier) wrote:


Painius You can refer to the astronomer "Vera Rubin" She has these
submicroscopic particles as being very tiny,and very heavy. There are
two classes of possible objects they are called WIMPs,and MACHOs (no
charge) very heavy for their size. They do interact with "ordinary
matter" In the Planck world Rubin tells us these heavy particles are
great candidates for missing matter. Easy theory could be these
particles flow through space,and give the universe its gravitational
field. These are the thoughts that Ducky wit does not like they are
hypothetical. Still it gives Rubin a chance for a Nobel Bert