Erasing concepts of gravity

[Allcanadian]

@Aaron

You mention all the "energies" traveling through space as we know there are all kinds of xrays, etc... But do you think they can travel through a
true "vacuum", which doesn't have an "aether" or do you think those
xrays and other spectrum do actually need a medium to travel through?

To be honest I am just as confused about this issue as everyone else and I am not sure if we will ever know in our lifetime. One issue is relativity, we perceive very little energy around us but we live in an atmosphere under a pressure near 14 psi and also in a substantial voltage gradient. However we did not know this until we had the means to compare our surroundings to something else. This is similar to the bird on a high voltage wire scenario where the bird does not detect a change because the rate of change is low relative to the bird itself. What we call a vacuum could be under thousands of tons of pressure or have an ambient potential of billions of volts or have a massive density but we will never know until we find something else to compare it to as all measurement is relative.
I would tend to agree with Nikola Tesla in that what we call nothing could be considered as a type of gas or fluid. Even in what we call a perfect vacuum a plasma arc will produce illumination, we can say it is the plasma itself or we can say the very high tension has illuminated something already present-- how would we know? To be honest I do not know, I like to keep things as simple as possible which is a big part of the reason I tend to fall in line with Tesla's theories.

The one thing I do know for sure is that every time I look up into a clear night sky I feel very small and very insignificant.
Regards
AC

[sucahyo]

One issue is relativity

Agree. I assume scientist measure planet mass using the weight of earth soil material in earth. However, if we see periodic table, there is no definition relate to atomic influence to gravity generation. Who can be sure that a mass of hydrogen (sun) produce less gravity than a mass of water or soil (earth)? Who can be sure that huge volume of iron has more gravity than small volume of gold?

Who can be sure tha in space planet weight just the same like they weight on earth. Do weight have any meaning in planet orbit?

What about asteroids? Why they don't all fall down to the nearest planet and only at spesific resonant time with jupiter revolution? What kept them there?
Asteroid belt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I seems even the Huge Jupiter do not have gravitation big enough to pull them all. If Sun gravity effect sea tide only at around 50% of moon gravity effect, then gravity/centrifugal force should not be the force that kept asteroid belt in its place. I mean asteroids belt size is nothing compared to Jupiter and orbit in the range of speed of jupiter, share same space with Jupiter and yet they still there.

The one thing I do know for sure is that every time I look up into a clear night sky I feel very small and very insignificant.

That only happen on people who observe .

[Aaron]

mass vs weight

Do weight have any meaning in planet orbit?

Do you know the difference between MASS and WEIGHT?

[Armagdn03]

@Aaron


To be honest I am just as confused about this issue as everyone else and I am not sure if we will ever know in our lifetime. One issue is relativity, we perceive very little energy around us but we live in an atmosphere under a pressure near 14 psi and also in a substantial voltage gradient. However we did not know this until we had the means to compare our surroundings to something else. This is similar to the bird on a high voltage wire scenario where the bird does not detect a change because the rate of change is low relative to the bird itself. What we call a vacuum could be under thousands of tons of pressure or have an ambient potential of billions of volts or have a massive density but we will never know until we find something else to compare it to as all measurement is relative.
I would tend to agree with Nikola Tesla in that what we call nothing could be considered as a type of gas or fluid. Even in what we call a perfect vacuum a plasma arc will produce illumination, we can say it is the plasma itself or we can say the very high tension has illuminated something already present-- how would we know? To be honest I do not know, I like to keep things as simple as possible which is a big part of the reason I tend to fall in line with Tesla's theories.

The one thing I do know for sure is that every time I look up into a clear night sky I feel very small and very insignificant.
Regards
AC

Concerning light.

Think of space and matter. It is almost like saying hot and cold they are relative and really it is a gradient. There really is no space and matter, there is a gradient between so called absolute vacuum, and the densest matter we have found, which tend to be unstable in our relative environment.

Matter occurs with immense cycles of compression whose periods (of frequency) span millions of years.

If you think of all "matter" as having inherent qualities of permeability and permittivity in various arrangements, matter can be thought of as various arrangements of "capacitors" and "inductors" (if you are thinking in terms of lumped element theory, which has its limitations) The more of these properties a mass has, the more "space" has been crammed into a smaller volume.

Light is a disturbance. Since matter is a frequency or result of a frequency of huge duration (though manifest in particles or undertones whose properties are result of environment or overtones) light then is a frequency riding on a large frequency.

The so called "speed" of light is a measurement of this disturbance in the "absolute vacuum". When it enters areas of increasing permeability or permittivity (one could call this an accumulation of space) the speed is reduced. However this is not really happening. The speed is not reduced, it has instead gone through much space compact into small volume, giving the illusion of it slowing down.

Different combination of permeability and permittivity and other aspects yield different responsiveness to different ranges of frequencies within matter. This is why some materials are opaque and others are transparent, this can be simulated with LC circuits. The bandwidth of the circuit would be the frequencies for which it is transparent. Because different harmonics usually excite, a range of frequencies make it through, and to other frequencies it appears opaque, or of high impedance, or high resistance.

We think of the speed of a disturbance through a medium to be dependent on the physical properties of the medium. the calculation of speed of light in a vacuum requires the vacuum have an inherent density or tension. This is what we think of as the base state. However, it is entirely likely that this is only a local effect of where we are in the universe. After all, permeability and permittivity are not actually measured at 1 and 1 for free space, we set them equal to one for ease of calculation, then enter a constant.

However we did not know this until we had the means to compare our surroundings to something else.

well said!

[Aaron]

light and vacuum

I don't believe light can travel in a vacuum.

Outer space is full of "aether", which the light travels through.

It is an atmospheric vacuum.

An "absolute vacuum" lacks "space" and there is no traveling, which
implies a distance.

[Armagdn03]

I don't believe light can travel in a vacuum.

Outer space is full of "aether", which the light travels through.

It is an atmospheric vacuum.

An "absolute vacuum" lacks "space" and there is no traveling, which
implies a distance.

I agree, which is why I alluded to the point that it is possible that what we term vacuum is only a local zero, as Allcanadian also pointed out with reference to our awareness to our environment without something to measure against. For all intensive purposes the aether model works because we do live in a sea of energy, and so you can always say there is a background.

What this discussion has really evolved into, is how that energy orders itself, not whether it is all pervasive, which we already know that it is. Where aether falls apart is in the very definition of energy.

If you speak of aether like it is all energy together, an all encompassing idea, then you are left with nothing. Literally. All energy is manifests equal and opposite, so if you make 1+ units of energy, you also make 1- as well. Add it all together and you are left with a resultant of zero.

However all these energies do dance on a background plane of zero, the stillness or peace which many religions refer to ("I center all things""From me all things extend, to me all things return""I am the alpha and the omega...the begining and the end" etc...). But one cannot speak of this as if it can "push" on things or affect anything, because to do so is to endow it with the qualities of energy which confuses things. It is the fulcrum which allows energy and existence to exist, but they are not interchangeable. Just like one cannot interchange the fulcrum with the lever.

Again, I think that many of our ideas line up, but I think when you really get down to it, energy cannot be a base state and so "in the beginning" there was not aether, there was nothing...stillness which equates to equipotential or no net energy which means no net forces.. nothing. Its hard to "prove" something so fundamental, but I very much believe this to be true.

[sucahyo]

Do you know the difference between MASS and WEIGHT?

forget... . Anyone don't know weight is mass multiplied by gravity constant.

But same question applies, do mass have any meaning in orbit? Do acceleration and decceleration work the same way as in earth?


About light, is there a single electron in space? or it is an anti matter / aether / energy only? What about black hole?

Regarding aether vs energy, what if we think energy/heat/light as something that exist in aether and when materialize it move from aether to our world?

[Aaron]

energy and aether

Well my personal primary view of the "aether" is that it is not energy but
potential energy or the potential for work or physical action in our "3d space
and time" just to keep it simple.

Anywhere there is a voltage potential difference, the symmetrical aetheric
positive and negative "virtual photons" in the area of each pole of the dipole
is "broken" or charge separated, the chaotic flux changes from being chaotic
into something that is ordering or polarizing.

There is a separation of the negative and positive charges and they go to
their respective poles of the dipole (battery for example), and if there is
not enough of a sufficient conductive path to conduct the positive potential
from the positive terminal to the sink of the negative terminal and not
enough to conduct the negative charge from the negative terminal to
the positive terminal, it dissipates back into equilibrium.

To focus on net force concepts... there are three things here.

1 - pos charge moving from pos terminal to neg terminal.

2 - neg charge moving from neg terminal to pos terminal.

3 - in the copper atoms themselves, there are multiple things in the
nucleus and then there are the so-called electrons. Out of all of this,
the electrons are the easiest thing to part from the atom in a practical
sense. The electron happens to be a negative charge. So the pos charge
attracts the electron from the atom since that happens to be the
easiest path for "dissipation" to happen.

The neg and pos "photon" charges flowing over the wire somewhat
negate themselves with a near perfect equilibrium but not quite, the copper
is there with an electron that is caused to move by the movement of
the charges over the wire even if they are in somewhat of a balance.

That movement of electrons in the direction of the pos terminal - attracted
to its opposite charge.

There is a net positive work movement, which is evidence that work can
actually be done by a dipole (battery) being maintained. It had its
counter emf or whatever is appropriate for the connection.

This closed loop has counter opposition to this movement and wears
it down. Wears down the dipole scattering polarity in the electrolytes so
the potential difference at the terminals is reduced. A battery goes dead
not because it lost anything but because what is there simply became
depolarized.

So we can see that work was done, we call that work energy
and it was made possible by the aether, which separated, moved to the
terminals of the dipole and flowed over the wire causing electron current
to flow. That aetheric condensed and polarized charge flowing over the
wire is the "Heaviside Flow".

When a battery is "charged" with current, electrons are moving through
from the neg terminal to positive. All the chemistry in the battery becomes
more and more polarized with more current and over time until it gets
to a point it can't get polarized any more. That polarization causes a
voltage potential difference at the terminals.

So the "source charge" comes from the aether, the battery doesn't give
up anything. It goes flat by depolarization and then it gets to the point
that it can't break the symmetry of the aether enough to get any real
current and the battery is considered "dead". The real charges is external
as Tesla says all the "energy" something has comes externally.

So I don't believe that the aether fails on the energy description, if
anything, it is one of the only things that actually justifies the energy
to even be there to begin with.

Work is done and those charges are scattered through dissipation and
they rejoin the symmetrical flux. Even if it nets zero, there was still a
positive impact it had in the physical world which is real and measurable.

Some see energy as a real thing and see potential as the abstract.

But to me, energy is abstract and it is the potential that is a real
photon charge.

[Aaron]

@Sucahyo

forget... . Anyone don't know weight is mass multiplied by gravity constant.

I'm just saying that a cubic foot of lead has the same mass here on
earth as it has in outer space but the weight is going to be based on
"gravitational" influence if on earth, inertia if it is moving through space,
etc...

Mass is the same here or there. You will weigh less on the moon but
you will have the same amount of mass - the amount of matter in all
your atoms is he same.

Weight is a calculation of the difference between centripetal aetheric
inward force and the centrifugal force of the mass being pushed out by the
rotation of the Earth in my view.

Interia is the same calculation of an object moving through space.

I would personally call the rotational force inertia as well since is the active
moving mass that experiences the force (actively) and gravity is the
one of the three that has mass being passively acted upon by the stronger
force.

[Aaron]

@Armagdn03

@Armadn03,

With the battery dipole concept. I think a battery on Earth that measures
12v may have a higher voltage with a higher gravity. So 10G's would have
higher voltage for the same battery. I think that that much more
dense of aether on the surface of the planet would exert more pressure
when it's symmetry is broken by the dipole. Anyway, my model would
predict that the voltage goes up with a higher net force for an equivalent
dipole.

To test could have a battery on volt meter in a rocket. Accelerate to
Mach whatever pulling whatever G's and see if the voltage increases.
Same net force whether gravity or inertia. My view would say a relative
higher density aether is experienced by the mass that is moving, same
as gravity.

Anywhere the tension or voltage can be higher the slower the time is
because higher density aether is like a rubberband propeller unwinding
in a bowl of jello instead of water (lower density aether).

Tension stores time , inductive spike charging is a time charge because
it literally contains a high density of aether that is really potential time.
In that denser aether, light is slower, a benchmark for time.

[Armagdn03]

Well my personal primary view of the "aether" is that it is not energy but
potential energy or the potential for work or physical action in our "3d space
and time" just to keep it simple.

I don't think one can say that it is not energy, but that it has the potential to do work, or is potential energy, this is contradictory. This would indicate that there is a background on which the aether it sits, which must be of a lower potential than the aether so that this "potential difference" can occur.

For something to have potential, there must be an environment for it to act with, there must be a difference in energy states between environment and the thing with supposed potential. For aether to have potential energy, is to say that it itself sits in another sea of something.

@Armadn03,

With the battery dipole concept. I think a battery on Earth that measures
12v may have a higher voltage with a higher gravity. So 10G's would have
higher voltage for the same battery. I think that that much more
dense of aether on the surface of the planet would exert more pressure
when it's symmetry is broken by the dipole. Anyway, my model would
predict that the voltage goes up with a higher net force for an equivalent
dipole.

To test could have a battery on volt meter in a rocket. Accelerate to
Mach whatever pulling whatever G's and see if the voltage increases.
Same net force whether gravity or inertia. My view would say a relative
higher density aether is experienced by the mass that is moving, same
as gravity.

Anywhere the tension or voltage can be higher the slower the time is
because higher density aether is like a rubberband propeller unwinding
in a bowl of jello instead of water (lower density aether).

Tension stores time , inductive spike charging is a time charge because
it literally contains a high density of aether that is really potential time.
In that denser aether, light is slower, a benchmark for time.

I am afraid this is incorrect. A batteries terminals have potential with respect to each other, not ground. The positive terminal has 12v+ with respect to negative teminal. If you raise it 100 meters, it will still have a 12+v potential difference between terminals.

It is almost like stretching a rubber band, the tension is internal with respect to itself not the environment. If you change its environment, the tension on it will remain the same.

For example, say ground level is zero volts. Your battery is at 12. Now you go up 10 meters, at 300v per meter, you would be at a 3000volt difference by raising up. Now your battery is 12v sitting on top of 3000. If you were to go up there white the battery, you would see that this 3000v is with respect to the ground, so to you up there the 3000 becomes local zero. You take your meter and read the battery, and you see it says 12.

Now say you connect the negative terminal to ground, so that they are one and the same. Go up 10 meters. Now the positive terminal has voltage with respect to the ground, and negative terminal, and you might read 3012v.

this experiment is analogous to your rocket, because gravity is an inverse square field. Meaning that as you raise up, you are feeling less and less G force, or acceleration seems to decrease.

[Aaron]

potential difference

I am afraid this is incorrect. A batteries terminals have potential with respect to each other, not ground.

It is still correct. I'm fully aware of potential difference and it doesn't
change anything.

This is why splitting the positive works for example. Take 2 batteries in series for
24v and connect a third battery ground to the 24v bank ground. You
then have to positives facing each other. 24v and 12v, put a light
bulb and it lights. The symmetry breaking example still stands, there is
a low and high potential that still breaks the symmetry of the neg
and pos virtual charges.

This is exactly how a battery supplies power to a load. The Heaviside
flow over the wire comes from the environment (aether) and simply
needs polarization and conduction to move over a wire.

This vid shows 50kv jumping into 1kv from another source - both have
common grounds:
YouTube - aaronmurakami's Channel

You can say the "quantum flux" is energetic in nature but it is considered
potential because its overall chaotic nature is disorganized and is
in an equilibrium of sorts. Overall, there isn't a real potential difference.

[Armagdn03]

double post

[Armagdn03]

Come on man,

you are talking about adding potentials together, vector addition and Kirchhoff's voltage rules

Of course you can discharge 5kv into 1kv its a potential difference of 4kv.

Kirchhoff's circuit laws - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

also the potential of a battery does not change when the environment changes, we are only talking about where you read zero from.

Throwing batteries into the discussion is pointless because it has nothing to do with describing the force we call "gravity" or what I say we should be looking at, which is net force of an object removed from equilibrium. Lets let the battery and relative zero grounding issue lie for now, or start a new thread on this topic.

[Aaron]

defining potential and work

It was to define potential vs energy/work and happens to be the same potential
that imparts a push on mass that gives the net force. And when closing
the loop, you get a net force there as well. But we can move past the
battery connection.