Flowing space...

(Apologies if this is a duplicate. The first send via the DSL rig
apparently didn't go thru.)

(Painius) wrote, re. those who rejected the VSP
for FS-gravity:

....I *can't* be the only one. I would
hope to hear from others who have
shunned the VSP and are not afraid to
discuss it.

Huh? The "others" have been posted here many times along with their
prolific writings on this subject. And they all came from once having
been hardline VS'ers steeped in the "educational" process. But they rose
above the 'no medium' indoctrination and saw, independantly and without
collaboration, essentially the *same* causal mechanism of gravity.
Gads, it's wearisome posting those links again, but
Google is your friend. If interested, Google:

Tom Martin, gravity
Lew Paxton, gravity
Henry Warren, Big Bang, gravity
Jerry Shifman, gravity
Henry Lindner, gravity


And replying to the DDuck conjoinment Painius said,

The instruments to detect this energy
(the SPED) have yet to be invented.

Again, "huh?". The only required 'instrument' resides between one's
ears. It's simply the clear-headed observation of the *evidence* the
spatial medium demonstrates in spades:

1.) The high, fixed speed of light demonstrating a medium of a
particular energy-density(or PDT value) that fixes the
'permeability/permittivity' values of space.
2.) The fact that there's no perceptible upper limit to EM amplitude
demonstrates a *carrier medium* of even greater energy density than the
most energetic wave it carries.
3.) The ability to crush massive stars down to a BH demonstrates a
hyperpressurized state exceeding degeneracy pressure of the atomic
nucleus.
4.) The behavior of gravity demonstrates a pressure-driven, accelerating
flow into mass, with mass synonymous with flow sink.

In light of the above,

5.) The fact that we perceive space as 'void' demonstrates a
sub-Planckian wavelength-state or 'granularity' below our sensory and EM
resolution.

To perceive the glaringly obvious evidence, any need for
'instrumentation' is quite moot and redundant.

And to the DD conjoinment re. the Crookes radiometer imbroglio, Painius
said:

Will you please wake up... ?

And this was not intended to be evidence for the SPED, if you'll
please go back
and check that.

In the future, please strive harder to
keep up.

Comprehensional dysfunction. "This is your brain on drugs". Both members
of the DD conjoinment appear to suffer from it.

oc

In article ,
(oldcoot) wrote:

Huh? The "others" have been posted here many times along with their
prolific writings on this subject. And they all came from once having
been hardline VS'ers steeped in the "educational" process. But they rose
above the 'no medium' indoctrination and saw, independantly and without
collaboration, essentially the *same* causal mechanism of gravity.
Gads, it's wearisome posting those links again, but
Google is your friend. If interested, Google:

Tom Martin, gravity
Lew Paxton, gravity
Henry Warren, Big Bang, gravity
Jerry Shifman, gravity
Henry Lindner, gravity


MD's and engineers, not physicists. Some of those papers are 40 years old and
heavily discredited.

--
Sacred keeper of the Hollow Sphere, and the space within the Coffee Boy
singularity.

COOSN-174-07-82116: alt.astronomy's favourite poster (from a survey taken
of the saucerhead high command).

In article ,
(oldcoot) wrote:

Again, "huh?". The only required 'instrument' resides between one's
ears. It's simply the clear-headed observation of the *evidence* the
spatial medium demonstrates in spades:

1.) The high, fixed speed of light demonstrating a medium of a
particular energy-density(or PDT value) that fixes the
'permeability/permittivity' values of space.

Define c in terms of P,D,T then

2.) The fact that there's no perceptible upper limit to EM amplitude
demonstrates a *carrier medium* of even greater energy density than the
most energetic wave it carries.

Really? Planck Energy?

3.) The ability to crush massive stars down to a BH demonstrates a
hyperpressurized state exceeding degeneracy pressure of the atomic
nucleus.

Nope - removal of radiation pressure disrupting hydrostatic equilibrium

4.) The behavior of gravity demonstrates a pressure-driven, accelerating
flow into mass, with mass synonymous with flow sink.


No it doesn't in the slightest.



You repeat this mantra without any inkling of how wrong it is.

--
Sacred keeper of the Hollow Sphere, and the space within the Coffee Boy
singularity.

COOSN-174-07-82116: alt.astronomy's favourite poster (from a survey taken
of the saucerhead high command).

In article ,
(oldcoot) wrote:

5.) The fact that we perceive space as 'void' demonstrates a
sub-Planckian wavelength-state or 'granularity' below our sensory and EM
resolution.


BWAHAHHAHA

Absolute nonsense.

--
Sacred keeper of the Hollow Sphere, and the space within the Coffee Boy
singularity.

COOSN-174-07-82116: alt.astronomy's favourite poster (from a survey taken
of the saucerhead high command).

In article ,
(oldcoot) wrote:


In the future, please strive harder to
keep up.

Comprehensional dysfunction. "This is your brain on drugs". Both members
of the DD conjoinment appear to suffer from it.


Is this your new lame, attack the messenger again?

--
Sacred keeper of the Hollow Sphere, and the space within the Coffee Boy
singularity.

COOSN-174-07-82116: alt.astronomy's favourite poster (from a survey taken
of the saucerhead high command).

Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:

In article ,
(oldcoot) wrote:

Huh? The "others" have been posted here many times along with their
prolific writings on this subject. And they all came from once having
been hardline VS'ers steeped in the "educational" process. But they rose
above the 'no medium' indoctrination and saw, independantly and without
collaboration, essentially the *same* causal mechanism of gravity.
Gads, it's wearisome posting those links again, but
Google is your friend. If interested, Google:

Tom Martin, gravity
Lew Paxton, gravity
Henry Warren, Big Bang, gravity
Jerry Shifman, gravity
Henry Lindner, gravity


MD's and engineers, not physicists. Some of those papers are 40 years old and
heavily discredited.

That doesn't matter; they think fluid space is correct so anything they
write is automatically accepted.

--
Supreme Leader of the Brainwashed Followers of Art Deco

"Causation of gravity is missing frame field always attempting
renormalization back to base memory of equalized uniform momentum."
-- nightbat the saucerhead-in-chief

"Of doing Venus in person would obviously incorporate a composite
rigid airship, along with it's internal cache of frozen pizza and
ice cold beer."
-- Brad Guth, bigoted racist

Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:

In article ,
(oldcoot) wrote:

Again, "huh?". The only required 'instrument' resides between one's
ears. It's simply the clear-headed observation of the *evidence* the
spatial medium demonstrates in spades:

1.) The high, fixed speed of light demonstrating a medium of a
particular energy-density(or PDT value) that fixes the
'permeability/permittivity' values of space.

Define c in terms of P,D,T then

2.) The fact that there's no perceptible upper limit to EM amplitude
demonstrates a *carrier medium* of even greater energy density than the
most energetic wave it carries.

Really? Planck Energy?

3.) The ability to crush massive stars down to a BH demonstrates a
hyperpressurized state exceeding degeneracy pressure of the atomic
nucleus.

Nope - removal of radiation pressure disrupting hydrostatic equilibrium

4.) The behavior of gravity demonstrates a pressure-driven, accelerating
flow into mass, with mass synonymous with flow sink.


No it doesn't in the slightest.



You repeat this mantra without any inkling of how wrong it is.

He still refuses to explain how this model can cause two masses to be
attracted to each other.

--
Supreme Leader of the Brainwashed Followers of Art Deco

"Causation of gravity is missing frame field always attempting
renormalization back to base memory of equalized uniform momentum."
-- nightbat the saucerhead-in-chief

"Of doing Venus in person would obviously incorporate a composite
rigid airship, along with it's internal cache of frozen pizza and
ice cold beer."
-- Brad Guth, bigoted racist

Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:

In article ,
(oldcoot) wrote:

5.) The fact that we perceive space as 'void' demonstrates a
sub-Planckian wavelength-state or 'granularity' below our sensory and EM
resolution.


BWAHAHHAHA

Absolute nonsense.

This is really nothing more than just new age touchy-feely nonsense
dressed up with pseudo-scientific verbage.

--
Supreme Leader of the Brainwashed Followers of Art Deco

"Causation of gravity is missing frame field always attempting
renormalization back to base memory of equalized uniform momentum."
-- nightbat the saucerhead-in-chief

"Of doing Venus in person would obviously incorporate a composite
rigid airship, along with it's internal cache of frozen pizza and
ice cold beer."
-- Brad Guth, bigoted racist

"oldcoot" wrote in message...
...
(Apologies if this is a duplicate. The first send via the DSL rig
apparently didn't go thru.)

(Painius) wrote, re. those who rejected the VSP
for FS-gravity:

....I *can't* be the only one. I would
hope to hear from others who have
shunned the VSP and are not afraid to
discuss it.

Huh? The "others" have been posted here many times along with their
prolific writings on this subject. And they all came from once having
been hardline VS'ers steeped in the "educational" process. But they rose
above the 'no medium' indoctrination and saw, independantly and without
collaboration, essentially the *same* causal mechanism of gravity.
Gads, it's wearisome posting those links again, but
Google is your friend. If interested, Google:

Tom Martin, gravity
Lew Paxton, gravity
Henry Warren, Big Bang, gravity
Jerry Shifman, gravity
Henry Lindner, gravity

I didn't realize that these were all paradigm
plonkers. I thought they were aether lovers
from the word go. Good for them.

And replying to the DDuck conjoinment Painius said,

The instruments to detect this energy
(the SPED) have yet to be invented.

Again, "huh?". The only required 'instrument' resides between one's
ears. It's simply the clear-headed observation of the *evidence* the
spatial medium demonstrates in spades:

1.) The high, fixed speed of light demonstrating a medium of a
particular energy-density(or PDT value) that fixes the
'permeability/permittivity' values of space.
2.) The fact that there's no perceptible upper limit to EM amplitude
demonstrates a *carrier medium* of even greater energy density than the
most energetic wave it carries.
3.) The ability to crush massive stars down to a BH demonstrates a
hyperpressurized state exceeding degeneracy pressure of the atomic
nucleus.
4.) The behavior of gravity demonstrates a pressure-driven, accelerating
flow into mass, with mass synonymous with flow sink.

In light of the above,

5.) The fact that we perceive space as 'void' demonstrates a
sub-Planckian wavelength-state or 'granularity' below our sensory and EM
resolution.

To perceive the glaringly obvious evidence, any need for
'instrumentation' is quite moot and redundant.

We'll have to "agree to disagree" on this point.
As you've noted, none of the above demonstrations
are evidence *enough* to battle and win against
the deeply embedded VSP that's cherished by most
people.

To devise an instrument that can actually sense the
SPED would be akin to discovering the graviton!
(Which, BTW, may very well be what the extremely
particle-like energy packets of the SPED may one
day be called.)

And to the DD conjoinment re. the Crookes radiometer imbroglio, Painius
said:

Will you please wake up... ?

And this was not intended to be evidence for the SPED, if you'll
please go back
and check that.

In the future, please strive harder to
keep up.

Comprehensional dysfunction. "This is your brain on drugs". Both members
of the DD conjoinment appear to suffer from it.

oc

It's rather sad. They make themselves appear
so foolish.

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Thirty five million miles,
This is Mars at its nearest,
And when my heart goes there
'Tis nearest and dearest.

Someday it shall act as
Our stair to the stars,
So get with the program,
And LET'S GO TO MARS!

http://www.marssociety.org/portal

Indelibly yours,
Paine
http://www.savethechildren.org/
http://www.painellsworth.net

On May 3, 6:09 am, "Painius" wrote,
replying to oc:

To perceive the glaringly obvious.., any need for
'instrumentation' is quite moot and redundant.

We'll have to "agree to disagree" on this point.
As you've noted, none of the above demonstrations
are evidence *enough* to battle and win against the entrenched paradigm.

Well, put it in a purely legalistic/judicial context then. And base it
on the evidence. By the preponderance of evidence (which means the
abundance of *ponderable* evidence), the spatial medium demonstrates
its existance beyond any reasonable doubt (i would interject, beyond
*any* doubt). And by its visible effects and behavior, gravity
demonstrates its causal mechanism beyond any reasonable doubt (i would
interject, beyond any doubt). I rest my case. g :-)

Yet in the face of all the visible, ponderable evidence, and against
all reason and logic, the sitting paradigm remains glued to the 'no
medium' doctrine.

To devise an instrument that can actually sense the
SPED would be akin to discovering the graviton!

Well, there was that big discussion several years ago about the
bathroom scale and how it gives a very reliable analog readout of
matter's resistance to the flow of space (which should actually be
amended as matter's resistance to the *acceleration component* of the
flow of space).
Again i contend that given the abundance of
ponderable evidence at hand, any need for sub-Planckian-resolution
instrumentation is purely redundant. And even IF such sub-Planckian
resolution were presented, it would still be rejected out of hand,
just as the geocentrists refused to look at the circling moons of
Jupiter.

Which, BTW, may very well be what the extremely particle-like energy packets of the SPED may one day be called.

Yeah, the quest for the graviton. 'Member the discussion about the
particle-like "granularity" of the SPED? It was pointed out that in
non-accelerating space, its constituent 'particles' have no ability to
impart momentum to an embedded mass. And this is true whether space is
flowing or at rest.
Only when the SPED *is accelerating* do its constituent 'particles'
take on the status of "gravitons", capable of imparting momentum. Of
course this was a pretty tongue-in-cheek gambit to mollify the diehard
graviton-seeker. :-)

oc