Michael parrot what? I explained before you... :) The 4th dimension is confusing, and you keep insisting upon this frame and measurement nonsense that is not possible in the 4th dimension. We must experience measurement in our 3 dimensions and use it to describe a 4th dimension for energy. However, if we WERE IN the 4th dimension of infinity then no. Measurement then becomes meaningless because we could be every where simultanously. All entitys in the universe is mutual for existance in all respects, like you say very often "relative". An entity must exchange energy with another to exist as a reference to both. If no exchange occurs, then no existance occurs to both entitys. Like playing pool, when the balls move, they make no difference until they collide with another ball and change the trajectory and velocities of both. The real meaning is what happens between interactions? Electrons are no different. Between interaction electrons have the ability to exist elsewhere. The probability of them being at a location is not absolute, this is shown with Planck's constant and the uncertainty principle. This is the quantum concept of superposition. This ability to be elsewhere between the mutuality is the gravitation. This occurs BETWEEN measurement that we can not absolutely perceive in 3 dimensions.Michael wrote:No, I am not. , I simply stated that time ( DURATION; occuring from difference ) is used in measurement in comparing a frame of reference to another. All you've really done is parrot what I said using different words. Bar, TIME is duration. Duration is always a comparision from one frame of reference to another. If you are talking about an inability to measure duration, then you are really talking about timelessness, or infinity. And I agree on the point that the fourth dimension is probably infinite in it's totality.
I've already said it, but I'll try again. 2 dimensions can't really exist. 3 dimensions are the minimum number we can measure matter on, but they can't really exist by themselves either because all measurement and all existence, anything we can concieve of as form requires difference, in order to exist, and this difference shows itself in the forms of motion, sequence, duration, greater and lesser etc. and these items only exist because of what we call the fourth dimension.
What is this statement here number 2?Michael wrote:Before I go any further with what you wrote show me when and where I said or even implied to you that gravity worked by magic.
And again, your the one saying gravity creates and destroys, basically the very essence of magic. I've asked you a few times to give a concrete example of what gravity does with the energy you say it destroys and you fail to give this concrete and direct answer, all you say is it puts it into the fourth dimension. By putting it into the fourth dimension how can it at the same time be destroyed? And if destroyed was a bad choice of term on your part and you really just mean it was put into the fourth dimension then in what form does it exist, how can it be measured, what are the mechanics of the whole process? And if you again answer or imply that you don't know because the fourth dimension can't be measured, well it will be very telling.
I also want to know where your proof is that gravity exists at all points simultaneously. You might not be aware as of yet but proof has been found that gravity travels at the speed of light.
You are implying that I am saying gravitation is by magic. How else can this be interpreted? LOL!2. I find the view that gravity is the creator and destroyer of energy to be incomplete and somewhat childish. You've posted the comment a few times now that essentially says, what...do you believe in magic? But that's essentially the power you are giving to gravity when you say it has the power to create and destroy. That's the exact power your giving it. Voila, ...materializo, Voila, ...dissapero.
As for concrete examples there is nothing ever concrete about gravitation, quantum physics, or relativity. I would also like to say that nothing in science is proven with 100% certainty, ever! The best we can say is that something is so well supported that it would be against the odds to deny it. Then sometimes it is later discovered to be incorrect with new evidence. The inherent consequence is that scientific theorys are not absolute, and then are always open to interpretation. :) The best possible thing I can do is try to explain the dynamics of the 4th dimension and superpositon in laymens terms of how energy is created and destroyed in the gravitational field. I HAVE pointed out the first day here that my quantum theory of gravitation is the first to be public that I am aware of. I could be wrong, my theory may already be on the internet by someone else. I have never found it though. So it is impossible to give complete references on it. The next best thing is to give links that the theory is based upon.
Here are links. Google these also to find more.
Quantum Superposition has no locality in its meaning. Of course most scientist do not "want" to violate the velocity of light. :) This link also has references to the uncertainty principle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_superposition
Now in this refernce they are considering that the 4th dimension is another Euclidean dimension of substance, but not time. However this is the geometrical behavior of an entity of infinite time with no measurement.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4th_dimension
Maxwell states" "the fraction of a large number of particles within a particular velocity range is nearly constant if the system is at or near equilibrium"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell_distribution
Since mass in finite, even the quantum uncertainty space of it's interaction must obey this geometry. Mass / space = density
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_square_law
Now with these links it is not a far stretch to merge them to understand what I am saying about with quantum gravitation. The electron mass is the ultimate resolution of the universe. It is the smallest entity of mass, it possesses the least volume of any particle. So the earth's mass has neutral electrons exchanging momentum. Now if their interactions were absolute, the continuum would be best described as a singularity. All mass would collect and become a "black hole" to have no losses in interaction. However, electrons must occupy space and collide. They must move across space to interact. By probability two entitys interacting averages to a spherical area in 3 dimensions in any collision and recoil. This interaction also has a quantity of uncertainty with it, and this quantity must obey a resolution known as Planck's constant. This uncertainty is superposition, and it has the ability to be present with unlimited velocity. This inherent uncertainty of superposition has a defined geometry and limits the interaction. This net interaction of mass can not become more dense than 7.5 x 10E14 grams a cu. cm. or 4Pi x c(squared) x G. I call it OMEGA DENSITY. That is the maximum density possible in the nucleus of an atom, or in the most massive black holes in the center of any galaxy. I guarantee you will not find acceptance in this theory of omega density by mainstream. However they can NOT answer why nuclei have their densitys. :) Mass can not become more dense than Omega anywhere in the universe. Contrary to mainstream astrophysics, black holes can not crush to infinity. The value of Omega density is a great limitation that can not be easily ignored. :)
Now back to the gravitation and how it transforms energy. This can be understood when one takes that probability of the neutral electron interaction further with the uncertainty principle, neutral electrons can exist in the 4th dimension adding or taking away energy in our 3 dimensions. In principle this is really no different than ballistic molecular bodies of a gas colliding and conserving momentum in 3 dimensions. The difference is the uncertainty of the neutral electrons must also exist simultaneously across 4 dimensional space in quantum superposition. Their activity is omnidirectional, so the momemtum intensity is the net average probability of Maxwellian distribution at maximum velocitys, but present over a spherical volume, and so must obey the inverse square law. This is how gravitation can add or remove energy, without the gravitation itself gaining or losing energy. Gravitation is like a catalyst in the exchange of momentum.
How much proof of gravitation's velocity fo you want? Mainstream will not admit it, but we still can not be ignorant of the reality. Programmers do not consider time lag, neither does rocket scientists in sending robots to other planets. Gravitation is always shown to have an instantaneous force. Measured forces of gravitational bodies are exactly where their positions are at that moment, not where they were in an earlier position from the velocity of light in some assumed delay. If gravity was like a hose "squirting out" gravitation, then what information is sent back to the gravitational source (sun) to "aim" the gravitation to intercept a planet to interact with in the future? Gravitation "turning off" has nothing to do with it. Even a continuous stream has a delay at the velocity of light. If you have basic mathematical skills simply calculate how our planet moves some 30km / sec around the sun, and if gravitation takes some 8 minutes to reach us at the velocity of light, then should you really question this? If gravitation is radiation, how does it know where our planet will be? If radiation bounces off our planet, how can reactions keep an orbit around the sun? This "guessing" where the gravitation should aim itself to hit earth is further complicated by the additional angular components that are changing. The earth's total motion is also influenced by our sun orbiting the galaxy, and our galaxy moving towards andromeda. If gravitation is like the planets immersed in water, then how would the waves propagate with a delay and still keep stability of the orbits? Another example, tie a long string to a ball and spin it around in a circle. What if this was the earth and the sun bound together? Now if the tension of the string had a delay, how could you swing it in a circle? There is no mathematical concept that I am aware of that can explain the instant action of a distance from Newton's gravitation, by the limited velocity of light. Perhaps you can show me one?I also want to know where your proof is that gravity exists at all points simultaneously. You might not be aware as of yet but proof has been found that gravity travels at the speed of light.? Really? Because the gravity from the sun has not been "turned off".How do all the planets remain stable in their orbits if the suns gravity travels at the velocity of light?
As for "free energy" yes energy at no cost is really free. Energy that can be gained by processes that are not understood, but can not be reproduced are very much in question. Energy that is tried to be obtained by proven experiments that say otherwise, is simply being stubborn, but anything is possible on the quantum level of universes. The only way we can have any chance to violate the conservation of energy is by the gravitational or magnetic fields. Simply 3 dimensional events like centifugal or impact forces are simply differnet manifestations of kinetic energy. Closed systems can not violate conservation.
Gravitation is really "free energy" so a properly designed engine will have rotary motion. The problem is everything I have ever seen with failures ignores the physics. Now I am busy with my prototype and I estimate a few weeks yet.
