Solar gravity cell spins at 72.5 days for 1 revolution; Modern dayAntikythera Mechanism Chapt16.15 Gravity Cells #1473 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed

This math is bothering me, so let me try to nail it.

We have the problem of the force of gravity. There is no problem if
the Sun had 0 speed, but the Sun is 220 km/sec, far faster than any of
its planets and so there is a huge problem.

To solve the problem, we need the force of gravity to be EM-gravity
with Space itself having been formed by gravity and then, that newly
formed space to have a spin.


So, now, how to work out the spin.

We go to the planet most close to the Sun, which is Mercury.

Now there would be no problem if the planets had their orbital speeds
plus tacked on a 220km/sec.

Thus, Mercury would be alright if its true speed were 267km/sec rather
than 220km/sec.

So that if Mercury and the Sun were moving in a straight line and at a
distance apart of 0.4AU in Euclidean Space that they would be the
orbits we know of today. However, Mercury is not moving at a 267km/sec
speed in Space.

So, we have elliptical geometry Space and this space has a spin. So
what measure of a spin of Space so that 47km/sec is required to go
around the Sun moving at 220km/sec. Now one complete revolution of
Mercury is 88 days.

So how much of a spin is required of this Elliptical geometry Space to
carry the Mercury planet around at 47km/sec, around the Sun moving at
220km/sec.

So, now, if the Space was spinning at 88 days for one complete
revolution, then the planet Mercury need go 0km/sec and it would be
making 1 complete orbit. But Mercury is not going at 0 km/sec but
rather at 47km/sec. So, I think the ratio I need to build on is this
ratio:

88 267
X 220

And now, cross multiplying I get 88x220 = 267X

And solving for X, I get 19360/267 = 72.5.

So the rotation for one complete revolution of the Solar gravity-cell
is that of 72.5 days.

So when I did this last night and came up with 70 days, I was more
correct than in the next day thinking it had to be 110 days.

Now the other worry was how would a spinning of the Solar gravity cell
fix the revolution of Earth at 29km/sec or the revolution of Jupiter
at 13 km/sec?
It is solid body rotation of the Solar Gravity Cell, but it takes 1
complete turn of 72.5 days to fix Mercury at 47km/sec and 88 days. It
takes 3 or more complete turns of the Solar Gravity Cell to render
Venus and 5 or more complete turns to render Earth of its 29km and 1
year full revolution and takes about 60 or more Cell complete spins
to render Jupiter of its 13km/sec and its 11.8 years.

Now the spinning of the Solar Gravity Cell is solid body rotation, but
the orbits of the planets is not solid body rotation. The orbits of
the planets are "aided or helped out along their path, by the spinning
of the Sun's gravity cell."

So if Michael Wright were to be so kind as to build a Antikythera
Mechanism that is heliocentric and which has the Sun depicted as a
linear forward motion of 220km/sec, then to counterbalance that motion
a gear wheel has to be engineered so that
it makes the entire Solar Ecliptic revolve one complete circuit in
72.5 days.

Hopefully I got it correct now. On issues so complex as astro body
motion, we often mistake one side for the other side, we get 70 and
then think it wrong and get 110, and finally we go back to the 70
(72.5).

Now Gravity Cells would solve many other problems and questions in
astronomy. Earlier today I wrote that pulsars are likely to be two
nearby gravity cells pushing on one another as a Faraday law and
producing a pulsed radio signal.

Gravity Cells also solve the question of redshift of stars and
galaxies, because of the high degree of bent space, that light
traveling through the bent space is shifted by diffraction or
refraction into the red wavelengths. So that the Shapley concentrate
of galaxies may actually be a close by neighbor of the Milky Way.

Gravity Cells also allow us to unravel the mystery of the morphology
and evolution of galaxies, that they are all ball shaped once we
include the gravity cell with the galactic plane of the galaxy.

And Gravity Cells solves the question of where galaxies are locating
in the mapping of the Universe.
And I am delighted to say that the galaxies are spaced very evenly and
uniformly, much like a fruit tree orchard of evenly spaced trees in
rows.

--
A Google author archive search for AP reveals massive vandalism
starting May 
2012 where only one or two posts per month survive,
whereas another poster David Bernier, all his posts continue to be
author-archived. 
A Google search of just Archimedes Plutonium reveals
massive search-engine-bombing, and likely the reason for wanting to
destroy the author-archive of AP. 
If we listen to the 
excuse-fool
Jeff Relf:

Google Groups is 100% uncensored, so it isn't fully
indexed. Were Google Groups fully indexed, it'd be used to game
the system;

We would think all posters have some of their posts missing in the
author archive, but apparently only AP is targeted for deletions of
his author archive posts.

Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a excellent, simple and fair author-
archiving of AP posts for the past several years as seen he

http://mathforum.org/kb/profile.jspa?userID=499986

Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

On Apr 6, 12:33*am, Archimedes Plutonium
wrote:
This math is bothering me, so let me try to nail it.

We have the problem of the force of gravity. There is no problem if
the Sun had 0 speed, but the Sun is 220 km/sec, far faster than any of
its planets and so there is a huge problem.

To solve the problem, we need the force of gravity to be EM-gravity
with Space itself having been formed by gravity and then, that newly
formed space to have a spin.

So, now, how to work out the spin.

We go to the planet most close to the Sun, which is Mercury.

Now there would be no problem if the planets had their orbital speeds
plus tacked on a 220km/sec.

Thus, Mercury would be alright if its true speed were 267km/sec rather
than 220km/sec.

Sorry, thinking faster than my typing. that should read 47km/sec not
220 since Mercury is 47.
Changed it on my original.

I sincerely hope Michael Wright, the UK engineer on the NOVA show
Ancient Computer can build a device which has a Solar Gravity cell of
72.5 day spin on the entire Solar Ecliptic Plane of planets.

AP

On Apr 6, 12:33Â*am, Archimedes Plutonium
wrote:
(snipped)

Now Gravity Cells would solve many other problems and questions in
astronomy. Earlier today I wrote that pulsars are likely to be two
nearby gravity cells pushing on one another as a Faraday law and
producing a pulsed radio signal.

Gravity Cells also solve the question of redshift of stars and
galaxies, because of the high degree of bent space, that light
traveling through the bent space is shifted by diffraction or
refraction into the red wavelengths. So that the Shapley concentrate
of galaxies may actually be a close by neighbor of the Milky Way.

Gravity Cells also allow us to unravel the mystery of the morphology
and evolution of galaxies, that they are all ball shaped once we
include the gravity cell with the galactic plane of the galaxy.

And Gravity Cells solves the question of where galaxies are locating
in the mapping of the Universe.
And I am delighted to say that the galaxies are spaced very evenly and
uniformly, much like a fruit tree orchard of evenly spaced trees in
rows.


Now Quasars are easily solved in EM-gravity. In Old Physics, they were
so rumdummy that they believed in Doppler redshift on light when even
Hubble himself rejected Doppler redshift.

A Doppler redshift on light violates Special Relativity and thus
violates the Maxwell Equations.

So when you are a rumdummy physicist or a rumdummy astronomer and see
a object with a large redshift but with bright luminosity, you will
call it a Quasar. But if you are a true physicist and a true
astronomer, you reject Doppler redshift as a distance measure and see
it only as a measure of Space curvature. So when you see a bright
luminosity of a galaxy bulge or galactic center, you bypass the
redshift and immediately conclude it is close by and nearby to the
Milky Way.

So, Quasars were figments of the imagination of physicists and
astronomers gone berserk. Our schools can teach physicists and
astronomers to pass quizzes and tests, but it seems none of our
schools is good at teaching people how to think with logic.


--


A Google author archive search for AP reveals massive vandalism
starting May 
2012 where only one or two posts per month survive,
whereas another poster David Bernier, all his posts continue to be
author-archived. 
A Google search of just Archimedes Plutonium
reveals 
massive search-engine-bombing, and likely the reason for
wanting to 
destroy the author-archive of AP. 
If we listen to the
excuse-fool 
Jeff Relf:
Google Groups is 100% uncensored, so it isn't fully
indexed. Were Google Groups fully indexed, it'd be used to game
the system;

We would think all posters have some of their posts missing in the
author archive, but apparently only AP is targeted for deletions of
his author archive posts.

Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a excellent, simple and fair author-
archiving of AP posts for the past several years as seen he

http://mathforum.org/kb/profile.jspa?userID=499986

Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom

where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies