0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Space time is made up of an inactive conductive field in a grid structure, it only becomes active when energy acts on it. A second component of space time are blocks that line the grid. These void blocks, as I call them, are also made of an conductive grid much smaller and only become active when acted upon by matter.
You have to remove the grid reference, that is a bit suggestive to an intelligent design, you have to have an XYZ matrix of charge that A+B=C or q1+q2=N to show 0 net charge. q1 and q2 being entangled and acting as a single manifold constant.
Quote from: Thebox on 29/07/2017 18:27:27You have to remove the grid reference, that is a bit suggestive to an intelligent design, you have to have an XYZ matrix of charge that A+B=C or q1+q2=N to show 0 net charge. q1 and q2 being entangled and acting as a single manifold constant. I'm not sure how this proves I'm wrong could you elaborate some more.
The Michelson Morley experiment highly discounts the possibility of a stationary grid structure. I would have to agree with that assessment but that did not prove a grid made of points that spin in a complimentary fashion was disproven. We nave to account for energy to move the electrons. A spin grid of c complimentary points would satisfy that requirement and create relativity. Or continue on the path of magic rather than mechanical electron motion that is confounded with photon motion.
Quote from: GoC on 04/09/2017 12:44:38 The Michelson Morley experiment highly discounts the possibility of a stationary grid structure. I would have to agree with that assessment but that did not prove a grid made of points that spin in a complimentary fashion was disproven. We nave to account for energy to move the electrons. A spin grid of c complimentary points would satisfy that requirement and create relativity. Or continue on the path of magic rather than mechanical electron motion that is confounded with photon motion. I've been discussing this. I have come to the conclusion that the split light beam in the Michelson Moorley experiment doesn't lose or gain momentum energy from the moving grid or ether because it returns on exactly the same path as it was sent out cancelling any momentum it gains or loses from it's moving through the ether. Measuring how fast the light gets to the END of each arm in the experiment would show which way the ether was moving in respect to the movement of the earth through a stationairy conductive grid or ether.
This is the speed that the aether enters the Earth. Its called gravity. 9.8m/sec. If the aether is travelling at the same speed as the Earth then of course, there wont be much wind.
I'm not sure you got that one right. why would the speed of the moving ether as relative to earth equate to gravity? The aether or conductive grid is stationairy and we're moving through it. Gravity is something entirely different.
QuoteI'm not sure you got that one right. why would the speed of the moving ether as relative to earth equate to gravity? The aether or conductive grid is stationairy and we're moving through it. Gravity is something entirely different. Most of current physics is wrong. Space is not empty and the Earth and all the other planets are pushed around the sun by the aether. Note - All the planets move at the same relative speed according to there position and size. The conductive grid is not stationary. The universe is constantly expanding and contracting at the same time. Suns expand and create matter and black holes destroy matter back to aether again. Its a circular motion which is perpendicular the the galactic axis. Similar to magnetic forces which are tiny fractals of aethic forces and movements.
Well the conductive grid is stationairy. The planets move around the sun because of the early formation of the solar system in a disk form. A star, not a sun, can expand and then collapse on itself creating a supernovea that creates all known elements in the universe. A black hole will capture any matter it brings in I don't know how the creates aether.Most of that looks like word salad to me. Can you explain some more about the rotation causing the infraction in the experiment you posted?