Gravity Doesn't Exist
You would think, with the scientific method and all, that modern molecular physics would have dumped the notion of gravity being a product of mass.
One disproof is all that is needed… unless the scientific community decides to ignore that disproof. And ignore that one. And ignore that one. and that one, and that one, and that one…
And now these "scientists" have made up a theory that can't be tested. So, it can never be disproven.
Gravity anomolies
If the earth is a sphere (oblate spheroid) the height of the mountains is inconsequential to the size of the sphere. From a galactic giant's view, the earth is extremely smooth.
So, why does "whether it rained or not", so the mountain near the gravity measuring lab is filled with water, effect the gravity measurements? The earth is so big, the mountain so small, the extra water being only a few feet, these factors should not have any effect. But it does, and it has a large, very measurable effect.
Why does the measurement of gravity vary from place to place on the earth? And not just a little bit, quite a lot in various "holy places". So much that one scientists believes there are micro-black-holes in the earth's crusts. These differences are not in the area of hard to measure / beyond the accuracy of the measuring device. They are quite substantial.
They take gravity measurements from many sites all over the world, throughout the year, and average them all. If gravity was the result of mass, and the earth is a giant sphere, then all we should be dealing with is a change in the numbers at the end. In insignificant numbers beyond the ability to measure. But we don't. We have serious discrepancies.
If gravity is based on mass, why does electricity defy it?
A scientists wanted to know what would happen if he charged a capacitor up to millions of volts.
So, he carefully constructed such. Pouring resin carefully, making sure no bubbles were formed so the insulation layer would not fail.
He then charged it up to a million volts, and the capacitor lost weight. At 10 million volts, the capacitor floated.
Today we have people experimenting with unequal capacitors and making flying devices.
Why do these things exist? Why can an electric charge defy gravity? And why is the direction of the charge important?
If gravity is based on mass, why can spinning defy it?
Some scientists in Japan who play with gyroscopes noticed that at very high revs, the gyroscopes lost weight. But only spinning clockwise. They tried many things to see if it was vibration, or air, or atmosphere. It was none of these things.
The NAZI Bell supposedly worked on a superfluid and getting it to spin around quickly. (this fluid loses friction as it compresses itself.)
The NAZI Bell is mostly conjecture, but many people have repeated the gyroscope experiments.
Obviously we really need to go back to the drawing board on gravity.
We believe in gravity as a result of mass because that is what we are taught. The experiment that measured the amount of gravity per mass looks simple and doable, but in reality is impossible to perform. (electrical force is so much larger than gravity, that any attraction measured is a result of electrical forces. It is almost impossible to completely remove it. Even air currents will charge an object. Even sunlight will charge an object. Even you being near will charge an object. After that, you need to measure a movement so small, that you would need to use laser measuring tools, that will charge the object)
But, we just take this for granted. Every kid learns this in physics class.
Scientists have gone further and further to uphold Newton's theory. Now, they even believe in mass that cannot be seen, and energy that cannot be measured. All of this to keep up a theory that is obviously wrong.
Asking all the right questions my friend! Well done 🫡
Yes, however, everyone want me to give them the answers.
Like i should rewrite the physics books before opening my mouth.
But, what step at a time.
Well, you've chosen a truly challenging battle, and the final boss is something like cognitive dissonance...almost becomes like a hive-mind...no pun intended
We turn universities into mental institutions for aged academic scientists?
"E equals mc squared!"
"Yes professor, and lets get you to the cafeteria. They are having ice cream today"
And you should always intend puns! :-p
I believe that we will get new things based on ideas from new science, and then it becomes harder and harder to stand on the old. Like, flying cars. And then it is in everyone's face that gravity by mass is not in effect.
Hahaha! Indeed, “no pun intended” is a lot like being a shitty wing man 🤣 like yeah, I recognize that guy but I don’t really know him…or at least, I didn’t invite him. Puns deserve better in general, that much is true.
You’re right about the inevitable revelation of undeniable truths, but when that day comes - or rather, as that day unfolds piece by piece - big brother’s ability to rewrite, paired with the masses’ ability to faithfully swallow it down and suppress anyone who threatens to fracture their false narratives for fear of what the truth would imply, may dampen the effects of said revelations.
Then again, I read recently that only efforts with right motives are truly bound to succeed, so perhaps by some great act of consciousness we will collectively stop 1984 from becoming anymore real than it already has. Shit, I can be hopeful, fuck it! Lol
Mass can be seen as resistance to a force. It seems like ths formula needs more terms. I think if you want to investigate further refine the formula with g. Do you have any of these gravity defying devices?
In a linear model, mass can be seen as a resistance to a force.
F = ma or acceleration = Force / mass
But physics tends to ignore the other motions. Ignore the non-euclidan geometry. And in some of those, Newton doesn't hold up.
An example is that E-M drive that guy thought up. A microwave horn into a specifically designed cone, and it makes a force where there is no equal and opposite force.
All my stuff is in storage :-( But, the secret space program has flying saucers that work off similar mechanics.
Yes. We simplifty things. I use Euclidean geometry for distances within a city because it is approximately correct but between continents the error becomes too large.
The modern physics world also ignores spin, counter-spin and frequency (as it defines distances and patterns)
My understanding is that e=mc2 is for objects not in motion.
The full formula for all objects is said to be :
e2=(mc2)2 + (pc)2
Where p is the momentum of the object in question and c is still the speed of light like in the mc2 part.
A great visual of the concept using a right angled triangle can be found at the following link:
https://www.britannica.com/video/185388/equation-theory-energy-relativity-mc
Neat idea, but i do not believe this works.
First of all, i do not believe in the theory of relativity.
Second, i believe that matter is slowed down light. (kinda sorta)
Third, there is a consciousness component to it all (double slit experiment)
Congratulations @builderofcastles! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain And have been rewarded with New badge(s)
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOP
Check out our last posts:
What force is it that defines the direction things buoy in...? In zero-G, You can put water on a piece of wood, and the water will flow around the wood until You have a bubble of water with a piece of wood in the middle.
I call that force "gravity."
What is mis-grasped is the nature of that force - it is part of the electro-gravito-magnetic makeup of the universe.
And I ponder that Japanese experiment. I wonder which direction works south of the equator....
Yep, we call it "gravity". The problem is "gravity as a result of mass" has taken over that word.
A lot of the future words will include things like buoyancy.
And we will have things, often massive things, that just float in the air. And we will have to be very careful with our words weight and mass and the difference there of.
Not sure if You recall (or were even aware) that I advocate for electrogravitics to be unhidden. Given it allows gravity control, it's pretty clear gravity is not what the einsteinians want Us to think it is. LOL! I'm a lavioletteian... I support the work of the late Dr. Paul A. LaViolette - subquantum kinetics (SQK), which predicts all the "mysteries" of the einsteinian bunk (like the Biefeld-Brown effect), needs no "renormalizations" and ad hoc things like "dark matter" and "dark energy" to explain things, and... Is euclidean! No "bending of spacetime.
In that view, gravity, as I mentioned, is a force, with both negative and positive elements that nearly, but not quite, cancel one another out, leaving the appearance that it is a "weak" force.
In case I have not offered:
SQK: https://starburstfound.org/category/research/subquantum-kinetics/
Electrogravitics PDF: https://starburstfound.org/downloads/aerospace/NASA-SEOP.pdf
And:
Electrogravitics – My Knowledge of Free Energy (article): https://peakd.com/informationwar/@amaterasusolar/electrogravitics-my-knowledge-of-free-energy
One big problem is that the universe is non-euclidian. The only thing that Einstein got right is that the universe is curved.
The right hand rule of electricity is Electricity - Magnetism - Force. That force is probably what we feel as gravity.
There is a right h and rule of aether, and we really need to know both in order to understand energy.
I dispute that the universe is bent. What brings You to that conclusion? SQK explains why things behave as they do without the need to bend things.
As for the rest, likely!
Ummm, you know the shape of a magnetic field?
You know the shape of a human aura?
This shape is repeated throughout the universe.
Yes. But I don't see how that leads to "...the universe is non-euclidian. The only thing that Einstein got right is that the universe is curved."