Where is the matter Einstein says velocity creates?

On Feb 10, 10:17*am, Uncle Ben wrote:
[...]

Completely unrelated query:

Is the fairly old fellow who randomly shows up on facebook as "Ben
Green" you? I keep forgetting to ask "wtf is that about?"

On Feb 10, 8:12*pm, Eric Gisse wrote:
On Feb 10, 10:17*am, Uncle Ben wrote:
[...]

Completely unrelated query:

Is the fairly old fellow who randomly shows up on facebook as "Ben
Green" you? I keep forgetting to ask "wtf is that about?"

Eric, I once did create a Facebook account, and now I don't know how
to delete it. If there is any activity there, it does not come from
me anymore. I don't even remember how to log in.

And yes, I am "fairly old." at 80.

Uncle Ben
www.greenba.com
(not accessible everywhere)

On Feb 10, 1:17*pm, Uncle Ben wrote:

Uncle Ben: If you have ever blown big soap bubbles, you will notice
the changing, pulsating shape as the bubble floats free. That change
in shape is what ungulate means. — NE —

On Feb 10, 11:19*am, NoEinstein wrote:

On Feb 9, 12:28*pm, Uncle Ben wrote:

Dear Uncle Ben: *I know about the meniscus bounding the Universe,
because there has to be a containment for the ether, otherwise all
matter would evaporate back into pure energy. *That's because there
couldn't be long-sustained ether flow (the mechanism of gravity) to
keep the masses together. *I'll leave the actual physical shape of the
Universe's ether bubble for astronomers to figure out. *— NoEinstein —

On Jan 24, 7:05*pm, NoEinstein wrote:

On Jan 23, 7:22*pm, cjcountess wrote:

Dear Conrad: *You are doing "better" without any (to look smart)
equations. *You keep talking about the Universe expanding and
contracting. *But I have DISPROVED the presence of gravity for Black
Holes. *And that means there was never a singularity to... explode
(HA! and sic!) into the imagined Big Bang—which supposedly caused the
Universe to expand in the first place. *Note: *The Universe is NOT
expanding. *But the electromagnetic bubble that contains the Universe
can ungulate, much like a soap bubble after it is blown.

Your theory, with "space-time" varying all over the place, has no easy
way of keeping the Laws of Nature working. *Saying that the motion for
creating matter was always there, is just a cop-out. *No motion, other
than random slow movement of the ether, is required to form the atom
hydrogen. *Once hydrogen condenses inside stars to start fusion, the
processes of matter creation are very well explained. *Your theory is
just armchair recreation, Conrad, not anything to improve man's status
in the Universe. *Remember, that I have disproved space-time variance
as a cause of any observation in nature, other than the stupidity of
its believers. *Get over your fantasies, and have a good day! *—
NoEinstein —

NoEinstein

Oh yea, you ask, “where did this motion come from that creates
“kinetic energy, relative mass”, from which the “rest mass”, which is
just “relative mass /kinetic energy”, in circular and or spherical
rotation, come from?”

Well it was always here
Just as everything in the Universe is interrelated, including space
and time, there was no beginning of motion or time, or matter or
space, which is energy, as an expanded form of matter.

As a matter of fact the Universe unfolds in a pattern of expansion and
contraction, from the furthest traceable regions of space and time, to
what is happening right here and now, in the Universe. And sense
everything is interrelated, including space and time, it is logical
that this interrelationship goes on forever, both in space and time.

It is also logical that, matter is a contracted form of space, that
condensed through motion, which has always been called the simplest
form of energy.

Even motion, in its simplest form, is a product of an interplay of
expansion and contraction. In other words you cannot have motion
without at least 3 components

1) * * *Something that moves
2) * * *Something that it moves in relation to
3) * * *And space within which to move

Not necessarily in that or any specific order, because the removal of
any one component will cease motion making them a package deal.

The two objects are a state of contraction and the space a state of
expansion, analogous to two poles and a field.

Furthermore, the very act of moving involves

1) Moving away from something, which is expanding the space between
them,
2) Moving toward something, which means contracting the space between
them,
3) Or moving around something, which is a combination of expansion as
centrifugal motion, and contraction as centripetal motion.

The Universe must have always contained matter and space, as states of
contraction and expansion, and motion to transform the matter to
energy and energy to matter, in time, which is just a relating of two
or more motions, and not something that gives the Universe as a whole,
an absolute beginning, and an absolute end.

Conrad J Countess- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

NoEinstein:

*"But the electromagnetic bubble that contains the Universe
can ungulate, much like a soap bubble after it is blown."

Is that like a wildebeest or a cow?

Uncle Ben- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I am happy to learn that you understand the word "meniscus." *Now how
about "ungulate"?

On Feb 10, 8:12*pm, Eric Gisse wrote:
On Feb 10, 10:17*am, Uncle Ben wrote:
[...]

Completely unrelated query:

Is the fairly old fellow who randomly shows up on facebook as "Ben
Green" you? I keep forgetting to ask "wtf is that about?"

Dear Eric: Know this: Time spent viewing FaceBook is inversely
proportional to the IQ of the viewer. — NE —

On Feb 11, 10:55*am, Uncle Ben wrote:
On Feb 10, 8:12*pm, Eric Gisse wrote:

On Feb 10, 10:17*am, Uncle Ben wrote:
[...]

Completely unrelated query:

Is the fairly old fellow who randomly shows up on facebook as "Ben
Green" you? I keep forgetting to ask "wtf is that about?"

Eric, I once did create a Facebook account, and now I don't know how
to delete it. *If there is any activity there, it does not come from
me anymore. I don't even remember how to log in.

And yes, I am "fairly old." at 80.

Uncle Benwww.greenba.com
(not accessible everywhere)

Hang-in-there, Uncle Ben! — NE —

On Feb 11, 11:02*am, NoEinstein wrote:
On Feb 10, 1:17*pm, Uncle Ben wrote:

Uncle Ben: *If you have ever blown big soap bubbles, you will notice
the changing, pulsating shape as the bubble floats free. *That change
in shape is whatungulatemeans. — NE —





On Feb 10, 11:19*am, NoEinstein wrote:

On Feb 9, 12:28*pm, Uncle Ben wrote:

Dear Uncle Ben: *I know about the meniscus bounding the Universe,
because there has to be a containment for the ether, otherwise all
matter would evaporate back into pure energy. *That's because there
couldn't be long-sustained ether flow (the mechanism of gravity) to
keep the masses together. *I'll leave the actual physical shape of the
Universe's ether bubble for astronomers to figure out. *— NoEinstein —

On Jan 24, 7:05*pm, NoEinstein wrote:

On Jan 23, 7:22*pm, cjcountess wrote:

Dear Conrad: *You are doing "better" without any (to look smart)
equations. *You keep talking about the Universe expanding and
contracting. *But I have DISPROVED the presence of gravity for Black
Holes. *And that means there was never a singularity to... explode
(HA! and sic!) into the imagined Big Bang—which supposedly caused the
Universe to expand in the first place. *Note: *The Universe is NOT
expanding. *But the electromagnetic bubble that contains the Universe
canungulate, much like a soap bubble after it is blown.

Your theory, with "space-time" varying all over the place, has no easy
way of keeping the Laws of Nature working. *Saying that the motion for
creating matter was always there, is just a cop-out. *No motion, other
than random slow movement of the ether, is required to form the atom
hydrogen. *Once hydrogen condenses inside stars to start fusion, the
processes of matter creation are very well explained. *Your theory is
just armchair recreation, Conrad, not anything to improve man's status
in the Universe. *Remember, that I have disproved space-time variance
as a cause of any observation in nature, other than the stupidity of
its believers. *Get over your fantasies, and have a good day! *—
NoEinstein —

NoEinstein

Oh yea, you ask, “where did this motion come from that creates
“kinetic energy, relative mass”, from which the “rest mass”, which is
just “relative mass /kinetic energy”, in circular and or spherical
rotation, come from?”

Well it was always here
Just as everything in the Universe is interrelated, including space
and time, there was no beginning of motion or time, or matter or
space, which is energy, as an expanded form of matter.

As a matter of fact the Universe unfolds in a pattern of expansion and
contraction, from the furthest traceable regions of space and time, to
what is happening right here and now, in the Universe. And sense
everything is interrelated, including space and time, it is logical
that this interrelationship goes on forever, both in space and time.

It is also logical that, matter is a contracted form of space, that
condensed through motion, which has always been called the simplest
form of energy.

Even motion, in its simplest form, is a product of an interplay of
expansion and contraction. In other words you cannot have motion
without at least 3 components

1) * * *Something that moves
2) * * *Something that it moves in relation to
3) * * *And space within which to move

Not necessarily in that or any specific order, because the removal of
any one component will cease motion making them a package deal.

The two objects are a state of contraction and the space a state of
expansion, analogous to two poles and a field.

Furthermore, the very act of moving involves

1) Moving away from something, which is expanding the space between
them,
2) Moving toward something, which means contracting the space between
them,
3) Or moving around something, which is a combination of expansion as
centrifugal motion, and contraction as centripetal motion.

The Universe must have always contained matter and space, as states of
contraction and expansion, and motion to transform the matter to
energy and energy to matter, in time, which is just a relating of two
or more motions, and not something that gives the Universe as a whole,
an absolute beginning, and an absolute end.

Conrad J Countess- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

NoEinstein:

*"But the electromagnetic bubble that contains the Universe
canungulate, much like a soap bubble after it is blown."

Is that like a wildebeest or a cow?

Uncle Ben- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I am happy to learn that you understand the word "meniscus." *Now how
about "ungulate"?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Do you make up words as well as physics? You must have been puzzled
by the reference to the wildebeest.
I think you are mistaken about "ungulate". If you don't own a
dictionary, you can look it up on line. Or you can just continue to
amuse us.

Uncle Ben

On Feb 11, 10:02*am, NoEinstein wrote:
On Feb 10, 1:17*pm, Uncle Ben wrote:

Uncle Ben: *If you have ever blown big soap bubbles, you will notice
the changing, pulsating shape as the bubble floats free. *That change
in shape is what ungulate means. — NE —


Oh dear. You really have no shame whatsoever. Now you can't claim it
was a typo, after repeating it a few times.

I'm trying to imagine what your mind is going to tell you about all
this after you look up the word "ungulate" in a dictionary. Perhaps it
will tell you that there has been a global conspiracy to change the
meaning of the word, just to put you down.

You're ill, John. Please consider getting help.


I am happy to learn that you understand the word "meniscus." *Now how
about "ungulate"?

On Feb 11, 3:54*pm, Uncle Ben wrote:
On Feb 11, 11:02*am, NoEinstein wrote:









On Feb 10, 1:17*pm, Uncle Ben wrote:

Uncle Ben: *If you have ever blown big soap bubbles, you will notice
the changing, pulsating shape as the bubble floats free. *That change
in shape is whatungulatemeans. — NE —

On Feb 10, 11:19*am, NoEinstein wrote:

On Feb 9, 12:28*pm, Uncle Ben wrote:

Dear Uncle Ben: *I know about the meniscus bounding the Universe,
because there has to be a containment for the ether, otherwise all
matter would evaporate back into pure energy. *That's because there
couldn't be long-sustained ether flow (the mechanism of gravity) to
keep the masses together. *I'll leave the actual physical shape of the
Universe's ether bubble for astronomers to figure out. *— NoEinstein —

On Jan 24, 7:05*pm, NoEinstein wrote:

On Jan 23, 7:22*pm, cjcountess wrote:

Dear Conrad: *You are doing "better" without any (to look smart)
equations. *You keep talking about the Universe expanding and
contracting. *But I have DISPROVED the presence of gravity for Black
Holes. *And that means there was never a singularity to... explode
(HA! and sic!) into the imagined Big Bang—which supposedly caused the
Universe to expand in the first place. *Note: *The Universe is NOT
expanding. *But the electromagnetic bubble that contains the Universe
canungulate, much like a soap bubble after it is blown.

Your theory, with "space-time" varying all over the place, has no easy
way of keeping the Laws of Nature working. *Saying that the motion for
creating matter was always there, is just a cop-out. *No motion, other
than random slow movement of the ether, is required to form the atom
hydrogen. *Once hydrogen condenses inside stars to start fusion, the
processes of matter creation are very well explained. *Your theory is
just armchair recreation, Conrad, not anything to improve man's status
in the Universe. *Remember, that I have disproved space-time variance
as a cause of any observation in nature, other than the stupidity of
its believers. *Get over your fantasies, and have a good day! *—
NoEinstein —

NoEinstein

Oh yea, you ask, “where did this motion come from that creates
“kinetic energy, relative mass”, from which the “rest mass”, which is
just “relative mass /kinetic energy”, in circular and or spherical
rotation, come from?”

Well it was always here
Just as everything in the Universe is interrelated, including space
and time, there was no beginning of motion or time, or matter or
space, which is energy, as an expanded form of matter.

As a matter of fact the Universe unfolds in a pattern of expansion and
contraction, from the furthest traceable regions of space and time, to
what is happening right here and now, in the Universe. And sense
everything is interrelated, including space and time, it is logical
that this interrelationship goes on forever, both in space and time.

It is also logical that, matter is a contracted form of space, that
condensed through motion, which has always been called the simplest
form of energy.

Even motion, in its simplest form, is a product of an interplay of
expansion and contraction. In other words you cannot have motion
without at least 3 components

1) * * *Something that moves
2) * * *Something that it moves in relation to
3) * * *And space within which to move

Not necessarily in that or any specific order, because the removal of
any one component will cease motion making them a package deal.

The two objects are a state of contraction and the space a state of
expansion, analogous to two poles and a field.

Furthermore, the very act of moving involves

1) Moving away from something, which is expanding the space between
them,
2) Moving toward something, which means contracting the space between
them,
3) Or moving around something, which is a combination of expansion as
centrifugal motion, and contraction as centripetal motion.

The Universe must have always contained matter and space, as states of
contraction and expansion, and motion to transform the matter to
energy and energy to matter, in time, which is just a relating of two
or more motions, and not something that gives the Universe as a whole,
an absolute beginning, and an absolute end.

Conrad J Countess- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

NoEinstein:

*"But the electromagnetic bubble that contains the Universe
canungulate, much like a soap bubble after it is blown."

Is that like a wildebeest or a cow?

Uncle Ben- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I am happy to learn that you understand the word "meniscus." *Now how
about "ungulate"?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Do you make up words as well as physics? *You must have been puzzled
by the reference to the wildebeest.
I think you are mistaken about "ungulate". If you don't own a
dictionary, you can look it up on line. *Or you can just continue to
amuse us.

Uncle Ben

Dear Uncle Ben: Mark your calendar. You have successfully caught me
making a (close) homophonic spelling error. Biology isn’t my niche
specialty. I should have written undulate instead of “ungulate”. I
depend a lot on my spell checker. Since both of those are listed
words, none were tagged. You would have done me a favor if you had
just explained my error rather than implying I had the “definition”
wrong. I had the right (context) definition, but the wrong spelling
of the word to fit that context. — NE —

On Feb 11, 4:21*pm, PD wrote:

PD, the Dunce, is undeserving of a reply. — NE —

On Feb 11, 10:02*am, NoEinstein wrote:

On Feb 10, 1:17*pm, Uncle Ben wrote:

Uncle Ben: *If you have ever blown big soap bubbles, you will notice
the changing, pulsating shape as the bubble floats free. *That change
in shape is what ungulate means. — NE —

Oh dear. You really have no shame whatsoever. Now you can't claim it
was a typo, after repeating it a few times.

I'm trying to imagine what your mind is going to tell you about all
this after you look up the word "ungulate" in a dictionary. Perhaps it
will tell you that there has been a global conspiracy to change the
meaning of the word, just to put you down.

You're ill, John. Please consider getting help.









I am happy to learn that you understand the word "meniscus." *Now how
about "ungulate"?