Gravity is a push

A Bessler, gravity, free-energy free-for-all. Registered users can upload files, conduct polls, and more...

Moderator: scott

User avatar
Stewart
Devotee
Devotee
Posts: 1352
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 11:04 am
Location: Devon, England

re: Gravity is a push

Post by Stewart »

Hi Jim
I once read an old patent which stated if you connect two metal plates using an insulated wire then placed one plate out in the sun and the other plate in a darkened room above some plants they would grow as if they were in the sun.
I remember reading about this on KeelyNet some years ago. The guy's name was T. Galen Hieronymus. There is plenty of info on the web if you do a search on his name.
The patent was an early spectrometry device (Star Trek tricorder?).


I think this is the patent you are talking about:

DETECTION OF EMANATIONS FROM MATERIALS AND MEASUREMENT OF THE VOLUMES THEREOF (click to view)

Stewart
User avatar
Michael
Addict
Addict
Posts: 3065
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 6:10 pm
Location: Victoria

re: Gravity is a push

Post by Michael »

Hi Jonathan,

I am guessing you posted that information on the inference test just to be clear because of course I wasn't questioning that but your last information;

>Now what Jim describes about two coherent beams I've never observed, if that could be done then it would probably create an uproar in the sci. comm., since it would break the first law of thermodynamics. I'm not sure if they've tried, but you'd think they would've.

defines it. If there has been a test done that does show something else I'd like to know when and where.

Reg.

Michael
User avatar
Fletcher
Addict
Addict
Posts: 8200
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 9:03 am
Location: NZ

re: Gravity is a push

Post by Fletcher »

Just my two cents worth,

As far as I remember (high school physics) the standard physics test for promolgation of light interference patterns is a single light source beamed thru two vertical slits in a wall (of cardboard). On the other side is observed the troughs & peaks wave pattern.

I personally have not heard of two light sources "crossing beams" to create wave interfernce patterns in which case Terry5732 raises a good question about the use of filters to "create light" in a darkened room, if this were the case ?

-fletcher
User avatar
Jonathan
Addict
Addict
Posts: 2453
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 6:29 am
Location: Tucson, Az

re: Gravity is a push

Post by Jonathan »

I doubt you could use filters, because both lights have to be there but canceling, while having darkness there would be no light. I think I'm trying to say that if two beams can cancel, then their energy might be 'stored' as a stress on space or something, so that it isn't really gone, and darkness wouldn't have a stress like this. I can think of an experiment we could do to check, but we don't have the equipment (needs nano- or pico- meter precision).
Disclaimer: I reserve the right not to know what I'm talking about and not to mention this possibility in my posts. This disclaimer also applies to sentences I claim are quotes from anybody, including me.
User avatar
Lightwave
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 1:52 am

Re: re: Gravity is a push

Post by Lightwave »

Edit> I've never heard of light canceling each other out. Can you show references of where this is?

http://www.exploratorium.edu/snacks/bridge_light.html
Lightwave
User avatar
Michael
Addict
Addict
Posts: 3065
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 6:10 pm
Location: Victoria

re: Gravity is a push

Post by Michael »

Thanks, but no. Light cancelling each other out means light cancelling each other out. Not the creation of a different frequency-an inference pattern. I took it to be as Jim had meant it. The light energy disappears and go to the unmeasurbale aether medium.

Reg.

Michael
User avatar
Lightwave
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 1:52 am

re: Gravity is a push

Post by Lightwave »

Energy can be changed from one form to another, but it cannot be created or destroyed. you cant just cancel out light energy
Lightwave
User avatar
Michael
Addict
Addict
Posts: 3065
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 6:10 pm
Location: Victoria

re: Gravity is a push

Post by Michael »

??? head scratch....???

Lightwave I think you misunderstand the context. Jim is stating that light energy can be made to disappear without a trace or residue from our observations. In otherwords it seems to cancel itself out. This would be an observation.
He is then saying where it is going to is the aether. This is the theory.
I have never heard of light energy all of a sudden disappearing whether it actually is going somewhere else or not.

Reg.

Mike
Vic Hays
Aficionado
Aficionado
Posts: 413
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 4:10 am
Location: Montana
Contact:

Re: re: Gravity is a push

Post by Vic Hays »

Michael wrote:??? head scratch....???

Lightwave I think you misunderstand the context. Jim is stating that light energy can be made to disappear without a trace or residue from our observations. In otherwords it seems to cancel itself out. This would be an observation.
He is then saying where it is going to is the aether. This is the theory.
I have never heard of light energy all of a sudden disappearing whether it actually is going somewhere else or not.

Reg.

Mike
I read the article about the different colors of the spectrum cancelling each other out. To get the light to disappear, all of the colors would need to cancel. Maybe the energy would go into the zero point field or maybe it would create heat.

Interesting that light should come up in a gravity thread. Light travels at the speed of light. Gravity apparently travels much faster or is intantaneous. Maybe it travels at quatum speed, whatever that is. It is obvious then that light and gravity are related, but not real closely. I seem to remember talk of an experiment down in California, UCLA maybe, where they were doing quantum transport of light. They said that in possibly ten years that we could do quantum transport of matter (molecular transport ala startrek).
Vic Hays

Ambassador MFG LLC
User avatar
Fletcher
Addict
Addict
Posts: 8200
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 9:03 am
Location: NZ

re: Gravity is a push

Post by Fletcher »

Without knowing to much detail about Albert E's theory of Special Relativity I always wondered what possessed him to search for another "fuller" descrition of gravity when Newtons seemed perfectly adequate.

I reasoned it must have been the instantaneous effects of gravity even over very vast distances bothering him (faster than light) ergo he came up with curved space time (the fish bowl analogy - shortest distance point to point) to explain it's instantaneous effect, voila curved space time !?

Can someone set me straight ?
User avatar
Oystein
Aficionado
Aficionado
Posts: 968
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 8:41 am
Contact:

re: Gravity is a push

Post by Oystein »

Albert E did not predict or even suggest instantanious gravity !!
Because the whole theory predict nothing to travel faster than C.
Since he never predicted the cause of gravity (only effect)
Gravity waves was suggested (travelling at C) as gravity information / communication carriers.

He describes gravity as simple as this :
(BUT you will se one missing part, and that is the cause of gravity ! )

Since E=mc^2 Matter = energy, or one atom contains energy, (a rather large amount) leading to prediction of the atom bomb !

Since matter gaines kinetic energy entering a gravityfield, it looses internal rotational/vibration energy.. (this is curved spacetime)
(This also creates a whole bunch of contradictions to conservation of energy..but that another story, as I also predict that E=mc^2 describes theoretical OU :-)

Meaning that vibration or spinning of the atoms / matter will slow down in a gravity field, making atom-clocks/biological clocks move slower etc..

BUT still no clues to what communicates gravity, only that matters internal rot. energy is less in a gravityfield, this will if drawn in a 3d envirnoment look like a dent, or a ball lying on a bed etc..in respect to internal energy of the atoms in various position relative to the bigger mass/gravity field.

So they say that the smaller (atoms) will roll down the dent towards the bigger mass....stupid isn`t it ?? Because nothing rolls "downhill" if there is not gravity in the first place, because then there would be no up/down at all :-)... Making the analogy STUPID !

Oystein
Vic Hays
Aficionado
Aficionado
Posts: 413
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 4:10 am
Location: Montana
Contact:

Re: re: Gravity is a push

Post by Vic Hays »

Oystein wrote:Albert E did not predict or even suggest instantanious gravity !!
Because the whole theory predict nothing to travel faster than C.
Since he never predicted the cause of gravity (only effect)
Gravity waves was suggested (travelling at C) as gravity information / communication carriers.


So they say that the smaller (atoms) will roll down the dent towards the bigger mass....stupid isn`t it ?? Because nothing rolls "downhill" if there is not gravity in the first place, because then there would be no up/down at all :-)... Making the analogy STUPID !

Oystein
This is a real good in MHO case for the exostence of the zero point field or ether or whatever. Another example of an anomaly that Newton was aware of was that he could not satisfactorily explain centrifugal force. Now we all know that as far as newtonian physics go, gravity, inertia, and centrufugal force act the same on a mass.

The kicker is that if an object such as a flywheel were light years from any star or planet and was accelerated to its elastic limit as far as centrifugal force. It would still come apart. Even though it is far away from any significant gravity field.

The $64,000 question is: How does the object know that it is rotating and that the universe is not rotating around it?

The answer can only be that somehow it is attached to the rest of the universe and that something is going through it or is attached to it. The zero point fiield?

If so, what does the zero point field have to do with push gravity? Perhaps it does.
Vic Hays

Ambassador MFG LLC
User avatar
Jonathan
Addict
Addict
Posts: 2453
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 6:29 am
Location: Tucson, Az

re: Gravity is a push

Post by Jonathan »

I just noticed that I missed several posts after Fletcher's, so this only applies to his:
I'm not sure exactly, but I think it wasn't like that. The speed of light being constant everywhere, regardless of your speed, appears to break Galilean relativity. Because the mechanism by which G relativity occurs seemed incontrovertible, this was vexing. But Einstein thought that they both can be true if space and time are warped. I think what happened then was that he realized that warped space and time would make objects follow curved paths depending on the speed of nearby objects. It then wasn't much of a leap to come up with a version of the theory that also gave ways for objects to affect each other's motion based on mass and position, which would explain gravity (which Newton's law doesn't).
I should however point out that gravity still isn't explained, because no one knows how or why matter and energy warp space and time.
Disclaimer: I reserve the right not to know what I'm talking about and not to mention this possibility in my posts. This disclaimer also applies to sentences I claim are quotes from anybody, including me.
User avatar
Jonathan
Addict
Addict
Posts: 2453
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 6:29 am
Location: Tucson, Az

re: Gravity is a push

Post by Jonathan »

I think both Vic and Oystein have it wrong. I've never hear Oystein's version before, it is my understanding that in E's relativity, the energy gained when falling due to gravity is explained as having come from the pre-existing potential energy of the body.
In Newton's theory, centrifugal force is explained as an illusory effect of having a noninertial reference frame. Newton explained the flywheel knew it was moving and not the universe turning around it by saying that space and time were absolute, and that though an observer would be unable to tell which was really moving, the objects could.
Disclaimer: I reserve the right not to know what I'm talking about and not to mention this possibility in my posts. This disclaimer also applies to sentences I claim are quotes from anybody, including me.
User avatar
Michael
Addict
Addict
Posts: 3065
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 6:10 pm
Location: Victoria

re: Gravity is a push

Post by Michael »

Gravity is instantanious. What is meant is gravity does not - cannot, pull mass faster than the speed of light. Light consists basic components. All of matter can be reduced to these components. These components are traveling their fastest when in the form of light. Therefore it is argued that mass cannot travel faster than this. The question is why? One of the answers clearly indicates that the components of light and matter are actually interrelated to, and part of a medium. Velocity equals resistance against this medium, therefore a speed limit. This medium has been called the aether. It is now called the superstratuum. The structure is unknown. There are different theories. One is Quantuum mechanics. Something Einstein helped to invent but thought it not really correct. The current yet incomplete is superstring theory. Incomplete because it does not quite work. When one area gets fixed another breaks apart. Another question that comes up is, is it possible to bundle these components in such a way that it offers no resistance to this medium? In other words, becomes seperated from it.
Does faster than light speed equal time travel? No. At least I don't think so. How could it?

Reg.

Mike
meChANical Man.
--------------------
"All things move according to the whims of the great magnet"; Hunter S. Thompson.
Post Reply