0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
An ether gravity-model. -Units of the ether inside two gravitationally-attracted bodies, which are at a higher energy level than in the ether in space, :"leak" into the space between the bodies, through "gaps" between the relatively-much-larger quantum units on the outside surfaces of the solid bodies. The ether making up the space between the two bodies normally is un-energized, and vibrates quietly, in a random fashion. This influx of vibratory, energized, ether units into the space between the bodies aligns the normally-"quieter" ether units there, so that they entrain with each other, and form larger units, quantizing the space between the bodies. This process simultaneously contracts the ether, which is no longer vibrating randomly, and is now combining into larger quantum units. This contraction of the ether draws the two bodies toward each other.
You certainly like to type. Have you ever tried reading even a basic science book? Is that just too difficult and time consuming? More time consuming than spending time typing nonsense?For once, I'd like to see someone stop trolling and actually ask a legitimate question. The floor is yours ...
Quote from: jeffreyH on 06/04/2021 22:47:45You certainly like to type. Have you ever tried reading even a basic science book? Is that just too difficult and time consuming? More time consuming than spending time typing nonsense?For once, I'd like to see someone stop trolling and actually ask a legitimate question. The floor is yours ... I wasn't sure how you meant a couple remarks in your reply. You said I "certainly like to type..." Does that refer to the fact my Post had several careless typos? -Also, regarding your reference to "legitimate questions," and my Post on gravity vs. magnetism, I would be only too happy to address questions, if viewers would ask any.
To continue my last post, discussing planets and gravity, a little further, it is interesting to look at how cosmologists presently view the internal make-ups of various planets, and how that conceivably could relate to an alternative theory of physics like ether-theory.Cosmology, in applying quantum physics to the formation of the various planets, states that the reason for the "otherwise puzzling" very-low density and heavy gravity of planets like Uranus and Neptune "has to be due to internal gases," referring to those planets as "the gas giants." According to Cosmology, all the planets originally formed mainly from "swirling gas clouds."In my ether model, I claim that physics is currently missing the existence, and key role, of a universal ether in cosmic events such as this. I would submit that the extremely low gravity of the outer giant planets is not due to any buildup of internal gases, but rather, due to a relatively high internal ether component, compared to the much-heavier gravity of Earth (when adjusted for the differences in planet sizes.) I believe Earth has, comparatively, a very-low internal ether component, and that this could well have resulted from some cosmic event(s), now unappreciated, in a past cosmic age. -Immanuel Velikovsky described just such a cosmic event affecting Earth in his famous 1950 book "Worlds in Collision." A similar event conceivably could have stripped away Earth's ether, without similarly affecting other planets, in a past cosmic age.
gravity is the same basic process as magnetism
I would submit that the extremely low gravity of the outer giant planets is not due to any buildup of internal gases, but rather, due to a relatively high internal ether component, compared to the much-heavier gravity of Earth (when adjusted for the differences in planet sizes.)
Quote from: MichaelMD on 09/04/2021 15:27:49To continue my last post, discussing planets and gravity, a little further, it is interesting to look at how cosmologists presently view the internal make-ups of various planets, and how that conceivably could relate to an alternative theory of physics like ether-theory.Cosmology, in applying quantum physics to the formation of the various planets, states that the reason for the "otherwise puzzling" very-low density and heavy gravity of planets like Uranus and Neptune "has to be due to internal gases," referring to those planets as "the gas giants." According to Cosmology, all the planets originally formed mainly from "swirling gas clouds."In my ether model, I claim that physics is currently missing the existence, and key role, of a universal ether in cosmic events such as this. I would submit that the extremely low gravity of the outer giant planets is not due to any buildup of internal gases, but rather, due to a relatively high internal ether component, compared to the much-heavier gravity of Earth (when adjusted for the differences in planet sizes.) I believe Earth has, comparatively, a very-low internal ether component, and that this could well have resulted from some cosmic event(s), now unappreciated, in a past cosmic age. -Immanuel Velikovsky described just such a cosmic event affecting Earth in his famous 1950 book "Worlds in Collision." A similar event conceivably could have stripped away Earth's ether, without similarly affecting other planets, in a past cosmic age.Or it could be something to do with mass. Just a thought for you. In case you had missed the blindingly obvious.
Quote from: MichaelMDgravity is the same basic process as magnetismHow about addressing why gravity and magnetism can be so different, if they express the same basic process?- Gravity only ever seems to be attractive, while magnetism can be both attractive and repulsive?- Gravity is always seen as a "monopole", while magnetism always appears as pairs of "North" and "South"?- The force of Gravity follows an inverse-square law, while magnetic fields decay much more quickly with distance - something like an inverse cube law?- You can have small things with an intense magnetic field (think of the strong magnets you can get at the hardware store), and yet some large things with almost no magnetism (like the Moon)?
However, my ether model would not accept that magnetism can be repulsive
physicists, in trying to draw comparisons to show the possibility of the existence of repulsive magnetism, have cited how "matter and antimatter strongly repel each other."
As part of the creational process, antiparticles were shunted away from interfering with these newly-formed quantum particles, by directing the antiparticles toward black holes
Again, I should not have tried to venture into an area of cosmology I was insufficiently familiar with.
Quote from: MichaelMD on 10/04/2021 17:27:03However, my ether model would not accept that magnetism can be repulsiveHave you ever tried to hold the north poles of two different magnets together?Quote from: MichaelMD on 10/04/2021 17:27:03physicists, in trying to draw comparisons to show the possibility of the existence of repulsive magnetism, have cited how "matter and antimatter strongly repel each other."What physicist ever said that? Matter and antimatter do not strongly repel each other.Quote from: MichaelMD on 10/04/2021 17:27:03As part of the creational process, antiparticles were shunted away from interfering with these newly-formed quantum particles, by directing the antiparticles toward black holesWhat mechanism would preferentially put antimatter into black holes while avoiding doing the same to nearby matter?