Gravity Research Program

Thursday, December 13, 2018

Going back to the original electrolysis eperiments. I want to say that that process happens thoughout the universe.

Electrolysis was used to isolate most of the elements we found for the periodic table … Yes actually so . The mysterious thing about electrolysis is how when breaking up water in to constituent atoms of hydrogen and oxygen that the two respective gases emerge from the water at distant and separate positive / negative electric leads that are emerged in the water. The gases should come out at both leads or between them but instead the transpire up the electric leads separately. The mystery then is like Schroder's dead cat in real life physics. How far can the electric leads be apart to get an effect like this and how can it be that hydrogen and oxygen are not just coming out every where between the leads in to the water?

Once you find out that all electro magnetic disturbances including current moving though a wire or though a medium like water is nothing but code as what I call 'dark photons' then it makes sense. It proves conclusively that photons, dark in a medium or light as radiation cannot have mass and cannot transmit energy and that properties of frequency wave properties are the properties of mater that is coded to specific parts of the spectrum. This is a major missed physics discovery. It blow apart convention orthodox physics for good and absolutely so. I also have more poof and proofs. It also leads to a whole new model for the electron. It also may mistakenly be assigned properties of mass. A photon may only really be the manifestation of electro magnetic disturbance and only come into existence when we are observing something or thinking about our existing model. The source of all the energy then that relate to photonic activity and or dark photon actions inside mater is the underlying momentum of mass moving though space relative to everything else moving or not moving in space.. that is where my term for super relativity comes from . It does not now actually totally destroy Einstein's theory though photons are not going to bend off course because of gravity as they have no mass any more. Momentum as the source of all photonic energy can then create a different but similar kind of warping theory.

So what about electrolysis in the universe? It should be immediately clear. if hydrogen and oxygen can flow from leads in water at significant distance....well stars could be giant orbs of hydrogen that came from far far away ...oh and oxygen could be quite elsewhere doing something completely unkown as of yet.

Monday, December 3, 2018

Gravity Experiment.

I walk down the road collecting loose rocks in the road filling my bags and pockets. Having gravity as such sure takes energy. The further I walk the heavier my load gets. I am certainly not increasing my gravity attraction by gaining mass. The assumptions with gravitational bodies in space is that they increase their gravitational attraction by virtue of having more mass.

Thursday, November 18, 2010

New Laws of Physics- Major Updated Corrected Version is Finally Coming!

This is the old version. Lots of petty errors not yet corrected as these were just jotted down notes without any editing. The latest version includes a more concise explanation of dimensional expansion and the thermodynamic-'electrostatic' requirements for gravity with gravity anomaly meter measurements supporting it. Also are new topographical explanations of astronomical photos that have long been mislabeled based on silly metrics like the Hubble constant. There will be animations showing the causes and effects of gravity and the proof that mass of a photon is zero or perhaps even mathematically less than zero is shown in the behavior of the inability of photons to impart momentum as am indication of theoretical force of light.

http://www.webspawner.com/users/GRAVITY/

conversations with Lex slightly out of order...

All those photons forever absorbed into the 'nothing' pictures. Forever lost.

Saturday at 1:19pm · Lex Loeb thats true. the photos are lost forever at least at their original frequency-wavelenth. The conservation of energy law however says they are not really lost just "red shifted" to infrared heat energy at least the ones not reflected. The ...black voids on a computer screen actually do emit radiation just a lot less than those spots on the screens emitting brighter light. I wanted to start the anti-net and found someone had beat me to it of course. they also beat me to the nothing blog. My nothing blog has more nothing in it. You just can't have too much of nothing.

Lex Loeb To prove Einstein's time dilation thesis then you should be able to get some very big expensive telescopes to look back into time by observing the cosmos and you should be able to see some pretty weird optical illusions because light has ma...ss according to Einstein. Centers of galaxies should have light voids where they really have excessive radiating mass. It should not be black hole size but much more extensive than that. There should be a dark ring around galactic cores where light is bent out of site and you should see multiple images of the same star or structure repeated, not reflected but repeated meaning that they are not mirror images of each other. My research says binary stars are probably a star and its reflection. These stars would be rotating in the exact same direction facing the earth. Chucks of space should appear to be missing if Einstein is correct because light would warp toward gravity. That is another problem with the galactic center black hole theory.... There should be a Hubble redshift at the core if light has to fight to leave the gravitational attraction at the core instead we observe a blue shift at galaxy centers which suggests more energy being spent. If you were a photon at any angle outer than direct head on pointing in the direction of the earth you would experience some of the excess gravitational force from the heavy galactic core. some is less than on the black hole side of the stars but some would be enough to depress the energy observed. The next thing you would expect to see with relativity is time dilation shadows. which is why i talk about black rings of missing stars. academic physics has its cake and eats it too. They measure almost everything using Newtonian physics and then use that as evidence for relativity at any chance when they damn well know the theories don't mesh very well. Einstein's mass is completely different than newton's. Newton is way more predictive of actual empirical behaviors of objects in the cosmos. I obtained some very large photo pages from Hubble observatory to look at things deep out in the distant cosmos of the most massive scale we know in terms of net mass and expected gravity that goes along with it. I want to see evidence of any kind of time slowing down or speeding up. Maybe the only place is galaxies where symmetry should not be but then how does the galaxy have the intellectual logic to correct for it's own warp just so we can see it as a harmonious perfect geometry? The trick to proving relativity is to see the optical illusions that should be due to time condensation around the most gravitational objects. If time is concentrating light or is concentrate itself by mass then the universe should have a different schematic appearance. It is not easy to know exactly what that is except to say that if you are Charlton Heston on his way out in space looking back at earth and then coming back to earth in what is likely to be the future you should see things moving much faster looking back on the way out and on the way back. If you see things moving faster you might also see them moving in the opposite direction. You might expect to see more than one earth because there is more than one choice in time dilation. thousands of years don't pass with out empirical evidence immediately visible in 6 months to one year of space travel. Fortunately like charting Heston we are on a planet that is acting just like a rocket ship--on a journey out in space. We can look at landmarks in the cosmos in every direction and we should then be able to see which ones are in very slow motion that is too slow or at an unbelievable speed because of our own speed and motion. Then you have to add some more flammables to the fire. The study of the milky way galactic center does see very high unbelievable velocities of major size stars presumably around an as of yet invisible black hole. The astronomers who collected the data naturally assume they have clocked these celestial bodies at their true speeds in order to figure out their mass using Newtonian physics to then to identify the center as the elusive black hole found. They do the same thing with the theory of distant planets with the count getting bigger and bigger as the effort goes on. If these velocities observed are under the influence of relativity and time dilation then the speeds themselves are an illusion possibly which makes the suspected mass an illusion and the suspected black hole a pigment of the imagination. If these stars are not really moving as fast as they seem because time is just moving a whole lot faster there then you have to decide whether the black hole is the cause or the effect and that is saying the same thing as a double or quadruple negative. No there are no bananas. or No there are not any bananas because there are no bananas that are not bananas

Yes light is actually emitting from the pixels, even the black ones. But we know what we mean. Curious. What happens if you could have to much of nothing?

Saturday at 2:11pm

Lex Loeb I can't condense time except by analogy. If anything is condensed time it is winding the spring in a clock or pulling up the counter weights. I can get ahead of time by winding a clock backwards.

23 hours ago · LikeUnlike.Alexander C Shives III Or by moving really, really, really fast.

14 hours ago · LikeUnlike.Lex Loeb Moving really fast probably does not work. If the speed of light is the limit of your velocity your distances are measured in light years which is a metric equivalent to approximately one earth orbit around the sun in time duration but a m...uch longer distance. It might might be 35000 of these units to the center of our galaxy and 3-4 to the nearest star. 1 million to the closest extremities of the Andromeda galaxy. If light from earth is reflected from a mirror on Andromeda and returns to earth in 2 million years and the earth is in a position to receive that light it is not going to be 14 minutes later on earth because time slowed down on the photon rocket. It should arrive 2 million years later and yes the earth could be the planet of the apes, it may be already, but it should be 2 million years later. Time dilation is a mistake because of Mass is quietly redefined in the famous mathematic calculations. It is no longer Newtonian mass. The famous light shooting across a moving elevator analogy is supposed to show a curvature of light in a separate frame of reference. If you use bullets instead of laser flashes in the elevator you hit the target on the opposite wall even as the elevator is moving really really fast up or down. When you fire the gun in the elevator the position in the elevator shaft is marked as A and the point where it hits the opposite wall of the elevator shaft is B. That line will be a diagonal or a curve to track the line of the bullet where as the line in the elevator is perfectly straight. In empty space there is no elevator tube or shaft. The elevator / rocket leaves no wake. There are no defining metrics to record the location of the bullet once it leaves the exterior wall of the elevator. Therefore you need the elevator shaft as a metric to make the mathematic game playable.

The line from A to B on an elevator moving at the speed of light should be as straight as any in an elevator shaft at any velocity or rate of acceleration. Point B should not be any lower on the opposite wall of the elevator than if the elevator is standing still but maybe higher because gravity with the elevator sitting on earth should cause the trajectory to fall back to earth incrementally. In space moving in a 'foreword' direction the bullet is automatically accelerated in that direction along with the rest of the contents of the elevator. It's trajectory should be smoother flatter and more direct. Sudden acceleration might change that. Quickly changing course could tear a fast moving elevator apart if any one part is not properly tied down as part of the composite hole and retains its foreword velocity which is in an opposite direction to a new direction.See More

11 hours ago · LikeUnlike.Alexander C Shives III So the idea of time dilation can only truly be defined within a frame of two reference points A and B? But time is the same anyway weather the line is diagonal or not. I think I can buy that. So what of the famous atomic clock experiments on the airplane. Wishful thinking? Like if you're a scientist who believes in ESP, the outcomes are more likely to prove in your favor?

10 hours ago · LikeUnlike.Alexander C Shives III How ever small the time difference was. It still seemed to have slowed down. Or so they say..

10 hours ago · Lex Loeb ‎..or so they say. The idea is that light is slowed down by the presence of gravity that requires it have mass. From that the idea of the elevator floor keeps catching up with the bullet flying across.

9 hours ago · Lex Loeb the problem with the famous atomic clocks on the planes is the nature of the aerosol as those clocks were not digital they actually had moving parts that were affected. The claim now is satellite signal delay proves it but there are other ...explanations for that. The aerosol mechanism was affected by the change in altitude. The Mercury proof is probably a solar wind effect being observed. As I said I can wind the spring in a clock to condense time and release it at any later date at variable rates. Astronomers see the universe as a sort of clock where everything visible is the detritus of prehistoric time long ago gone by..(its in a galaxy far far away and long long ago! as it can never be simultaneously local time when observed.) So If you look at the closest objects though your best telescope and the most distant known objects in the cosmos simultaneously say on the same photo plate which we always do you cannot necessarily be looking back in time if Einstein's relativity applies) we can't know the approximate ages of stars by Hubble's constant because of too many assumptions but we have a better idea of distance of galaxies because of their relative size to stars . red shift may give an applied sense of distance too but it is unlikely due to Doppler red shift of light because we know that light redshifts in objects that absorb and re-emit it and by no other known means. That changes the size of the universe by giving it topography that the Hubble constant leaves it without.

Here is the problem with relativity time warp , time dilation etc is we look at a nice Galaxy several millions of light years away and maybe a billion light years away. We see the galaxy at an angle where one side of it has to be further away from the earth then the rest of it. Then somewhere beyond that is the center that is thought to be much more massive --containing mass as it appears to be bulbous there. And the funny thing, very funny thing is we see the whole galaxy in a perfect galactic symmetry that if relativity were correct would be impossible. We see the back side of the galaxy in as much focus with no warp as the front side. It can take up to 200,000 years for light from the far side of a galaxy we see all at once to catch up with light from the near side. You could say that maybe this is because of the property of relativity causing a warp that gives us perfect symmetry in spite of the time delay. I would expect the warp from relativity to distort the images produced from our best telescopes in ways that would show us dilation in visual form that no one could argue with. It would be sort of like visualizing calculus where the warp would be the actual curvature we see. That curvature does not exist at least not in a way to track back to find light bending in operation. We might expect to see galaxies where parts were missing because light from the back side got bent fully around the central high density core. Not talking about gravity lensing between galaxies which some astronomers label a few Hubble deep field pictures as but gravity lensing necessarily with in a single galaxy. Unobserved to date. you can go out and look at a mountain like mt hood. you see the whole at once. part of it--the top is slightly further away then the rest of the parts you see. The difference in time photos take is faster than the frames of reference detected by the human eye but when you look at a galaxy a million light years away like Andromeda the frames of reference of visibility are a very very slow and it will take up to 100,000 years to see the most distant light from the most distant corner of the Andromeda phenomenon. I can take the image of Andromeda and correct it for the time differences and warp the image on my computer to give you an image that is more dynamic than what you think you see. Everyone makes the same mistake.....even when looking at mt hood. The bottom of the mountain is there before the top depending on your perspective. It does not cause the mountain to collapse but it does change the perspective of your view and modifies the horizon.. My speciality is visual astronomy. So I look at the theory of relativity and try to imagine what the visible universe looks like if the theory is correct. It does not have enough warp where there is enough mass to even consider the idea that time dilation is happening. You see. You see a light all at once from all different time phases of the universe. Some actually think they can look back directly at the origin of the big bang by some magical theory that does not flesh out with any of the images. Well if light plays einsteins tricks than what we see can't possibly look like it does and if it does we are misinterperting what we are looking at. Say every galaxy causes light to bend toward it then everything seen nearby in the region should have too much proximity. not because the objects are actually closer but because light has bent toward it. The discrepency might have light coming from dark areas which of course it does because everything is moving. With a single galaxy where symmetry is so pronounced you should have to wonder.See More

9 hours ago· 1 personLoading....Alexander C Shives III Lex that is amazing. Now I have to rethink everything. Can't the light from the far side of a galaxy that is much older than the light from the closest side still be seen as a flat image on a photographic plate? even though they may be light years away from each other. I'm not taking into account the gravity from the center of the galaxy. No wait a minute.. Let me re read this and think about it a bit. Damn.

When you feel like blogging about Nothing...

Nothing

emptynothing.blogspot.com..

Saturday at 3:23am ·LikeUnlike · Comment · Share.

Alexander C Shives III likes this..

Alexander C Shives III Anti-Blog. All those photons forever absorbed into the 'nothing' pictures. Forever lost.

Saturday at 1:19pm · LikeUnlike.Lex Loeb thats true. the photos are lost forever at least at their original frequency-wavelenth. The conservation of energy law however says they are not really lost just "red shifted" to infrared heat energy at least the ones not reflected. The ...black voids on a computer screen actually do emit radiation just a lot less than those spots on the screens emitting brighter light. I wanted to start the anti-net and found someone had beat me to it of course. they also beat me to the nothing blog. My nothing blog has more nothing in it. You just can't have too much of nothing.See More

Saturday at 1:56pm · LikeUnlike · 1 personLoading....Alexander C Shives III Yes light is actually emitting from the pixels, even the black ones. But we know what we mean. Curious. What happens if you could have to much of nothing?

Saturday at 2:11pm · LikeUnlike.Lex Loeb as you know I invented the space condenser. It takes all the empty space in the universe and packs it into a very very small area in my basement where the machine has been running for 15 years under water in the swimming pool. You can neve...r ever have too much of nothing. have you ever noticed when hotels sell luxury they tend to have voluminous empty spaces in the advertisements? The more of nothing you have between your big fancy possessions the richer you are. The aliens told me, when they assisted in the design of the space condenser, that if i keep concentrating empty space I become defacto emperor of the universe and not just this micky mouse galaxy. I understood what the aliens were saying when they revealed that the only antigravity is an explosive force. It is just basic real physics with out the magic conjectures. The reason it is so difficult to pack in space is because of antigravity which is where the absurd big bang theory comes from collecting space is actually collecting mater. Don't tell anyone about my private black hole. Men in black came to the door once and decided they were going to get up close and personal with my space condenser and they crossed the event horizon. Never heard from them again.See More

Saturday at 2:24pm · LikeUnlike.Lex Loeb dont have time now. I have new photos of my making contact hand to hand with aliens though a worm hole- we tried to set up a sistene chapel scene where I had god's hand and the alien is adam but it backfired because his hand was unrecognizable as a hand,

Saturday at 2:26pm · LikeUnlike.Alexander C Shives III This sounds vaguely familiar. Condensed time/space in a basement captured and suspended in liquid? Churches? I saw a campy movie once called 'Prince of Darkness' that kind of had the elements that you mentioned. Campy to most, but I actually liked the premise of the film.

Saturday at 3:03pm · LikeUnlike.Lex Loeb I can't condense time except by analogy. If anything is condensed time it is winding the spring in a clock or pulling up the counter weights. I can get ahead of time by winding a clock backwards.

23 hours ago · LikeUnlike.Alexander C Shives III Or by moving really, really, really fast.

14 hours ago · LikeUnlike.Lex Loeb Moving really fast probably does not work. If the speed of light is the limit of your velocity your distances are measured in light years which is a metric equivalent to approximately one earth orbit around the sun in time duration but a m...uch longer distance. It might might be 35000 of these units to the center of our galaxy and 3-4 to the nearest star. 1 million to the closest extremities of the Andromeda galaxy. If light from earth is reflected from a mirror on Andromeda and returns to earth in 2 million years and the earth is in a position to receive that light it is not going to be 14 minutes later on earth because time slowed down on the photon rocket. It should arrive 2 million years later and yes the earth could be the planet of the apes, it may be already, but it should be 2 million years later. Time dilation is a mistake because of Mass is quietly redefined in the famous mathematic calculations. It is no longer Newtonian mass. The famous light shooting across a moving elevator analogy is supposed to show a curvature of light in a separate frame of reference. If you use bullets instead of laser flashes in the elevator you hit the target on the opposite wall even as the elevator is moving really really fast up or down. When you fire the gun in the elevator the position in the elevator shaft is marked as A and the point where it hits the opposite wall of the elevator shaft is B. That line will be a diagonal or a curve to track the line of the bullet where as the line in the elevator is perfectly straight. In empty space there is no elevator tube or shaft. The elevator / rocket leaves no wake. There are no defining metrics to record the location of the bullet once it leaves the exterior wall of the elevator. Therefore you need the elevator shaft as a metric to make the mathematic game playable.

The line from A to B on an elevator moving at the speed of light should be as straight as any in an elevator shaft at any velocity or rate of acceleration. Point B should not be any lower on the opposite wall of the elevator than if the elevator is standing still but maybe higher because gravity with the elevator sitting on earth should cause the trajectory to fall back to earth incrementally. In space moving in a 'foreword' direction the bullet is automatically accelerated in that direction along with the rest of the contents of the elevator. It's trajectory should be smoother flatter and more direct. Sudden acceleration might change that. Quickly changing course could tear a fast moving elevator apart if any one part is not properly tied down as part of the composite hole and retains its foreword velocity which is in an opposite direction to a new direction.See More

11 hours ago · LikeUnlike.Alexander C Shives III So the idea of time dilation can only truly be defined within a frame of two reference points A and B? But time is the same anyway weather the line is diagonal or not. I think I can buy that. So what of the famous atomic clock experiments on the airplane. Wishful thinking? Like if you're a scientist who believes in ESP, the outcomes are more likely to prove in your favor?

10 hours ago · LikeUnlike.Alexander C Shives III How ever small the time difference was. It still seemed to have slowed down. Or so they say..

10 hours ago · LikeUnlike.Lex Loeb ‎..or so they say. The idea is that light is slowed down by the presence of gravity that requires it have mass. From that the idea of the elevator floor keeps catching up with the bullet flying across.

9 hours ago · LikeUnlike.Lex Loeb the problem with the famous atomic clocks on the planes is the nature of the aerosol as those clocks were not digital they actually had moving parts that were affected. The claim now is satellite signal delay proves it but there are other ...explanations for that. The aerosol mechanism was affected by the change in altitude. The Mercury proof is probably a solar wind effect being observed. As I said I can wind the spring in a clock to condense time and release it at any later date at variable rates. Astronomers see the universe as a sort of clock where everything visible is the detritus of prehistoric time long ago gone by..(its in a galaxy far far away and long long ago! as it can never be simultaneously local time when observed.) So If you look at the closest objects though your best telescope and the most distant known objects in the cosmos simultaneously say on the same photo plate which we always do you cannot necessarily be looking back in time if Einstein's relativity applies) we can't know the approximate ages of stars by Hubble's constant because of too many assumptions but we have a better idea of distance of galaxies because of their relative size to stars . red shift may give an applied sense of distance too but it is unlikely due to Doppler red shift of light because we know that light redshifts in objects that absorb and re-emit it and by no other known means. That changes the size of the universe by giving it topography that the Hubble constant leaves it without.

here is the problem with relativity time warp , time dilation etc is we look at a nice Galaxy several millions of light years away and maybe a billion light years away. We see the galaxy at an angle where one side of it has to be further away from the earth then the rest of it. Then somewhere beyond that is the center that is thought to be much more massive --containing mass as it appears to be bulbous there. And the funny thing, very funny thing is we see the whole galaxy in a perfect galactic symmetry that if relativity were correct would be impossible. We see the back side of the galaxy in as much focus with no warp as the front side. It can take up to 200,000 years for light from the far side of a galaxy we see all at once to catch up with light from the near side. You could say that maybe this is because of the property of relativity causing a warp that gives us perfect symmetry in spite of the time delay. I would expect the warp from relativity to distort the images produced from our best telescopes in ways that would show us dilation in visual form that no one could argue with. It would be sort of like visualizing calculus where the warp would be the actual curvature we see. That curvature does not exist at least not in a way to track back to find light bending in operation. We might expect to see galaxies where parts were missing because light from the back side got bent fully around the central high density core. Not talking about gravity lensing between galaxies which some astronomers label a few Hubble deep field pictures as but gravity lensing necessarily with in a single galaxy. Unobserved to date. you can go out and look at a mountain like mt hood. you see the whole at once. part of it--the top is slightly further away then the rest of the parts you see. The difference in time photos take is faster than the frames of reference detected by the human eye but when you look at a galaxy a million light years away like Andromeda the frames of reference of visibility are a very very slow and it will take up to 100,000 years to see the most distant light from the most distant corner of the Andromeda phenomenon. I can take the image of Andromeda and correct it for the time differences and warp the image on my computer to give you an image that is more dynamic than what you think you see. Everyone makes the same mistake.....even when looking at mt hood. The bottom of the mountain is there before the top depending on your perspective. It does not cause the mountain to collapse but it does change the perspective of your view and modifies the horizon.. My speciality is visual astronomy. So I look at the theory of relativity and try to imagine what the visible universe looks like if the theory is correct. It does not have enough warp where there is enough mass to even consider the idea that time dilation is happening. You see. You see a light all at once from all different time phases of the universe. Some actually think they can look back directly at the origin of the big bang by some magical theory that does not flesh out with any of the images. Well if light plays einsteins tricks than what we see can't possibly look like it does and if it does we are misinterperting what we are looking at. Say every galaxy causes light to bend toward it then everything seen nearby in the region should have too much proximity. not because the objects are actually closer but because light has bent toward it. The discrepency might have light coming from dark areas which of course it does because everything is moving. With a single galaxy where symmetry is so pronounced you should have to wonder.See More

9 hours ago · LikeUnlike · 1 personAlexander C Shives III likes this..Alexander C Shives III Lex that is amazing. Now I have to rethink everything. Can't the light from the far side of a galaxy that is much older than the light from the closest side still be seen as a flat image on a photographic plate? even though they may be light years away from each other. I'm not taking into account the gravity from the center of the galaxy. No wait a minute.. Let me re read this and think about it a bit. Damn..

6 hours ago · LikeUnlike.Lex Loeb there is always an official academic explanation that does not necessarily have enough structure of theory to hold water. If relativity is correct then you should be able to scan the universe and see evidence of it immediately . You could... say looking back in reverse. Every tiny point of light at all wavelengths and frequencies has to be generated, reflected, reflected, absorbed and re-emitted. I published all of this in my new laws of physics but it has not been updated. new laws of physics is on web spawner. the photons and radiometers site which partly updated it may be lost on line after the INTERNET bubble crash killed big chucks of the early INTERNET. I have copies here somewhere of everything. One of the best places to look for immediate signs of relativity with time dilation should be the super nova events. I believe every super nova event is a star collision with something else and definitely not a star running down on Prue deposited energy. E=Mc2 is the reason i can say so almost definitively even though i no longer think that this equation defines the maximum amount of energy that can be stored in mass. (can't prove that anyway so it does not mater) The equation just needs to say energy converts to mass and mass to energy and the energy in mass is a very big number where as the energy in energy is a tiny tiny fraction of that big big big number. It means very clearly that a very small amount of added mass is the same as a very large amount of energy. Einstein never worked the equation back wards. It worked fine for him to take credit for nuclear reactions spewing more energy than otherwise though possible from mass but it also means that in a real cosmic fusion reactor like stars are that their fuel is very slowly expendable. That is one reason i think that the e=mc2 net energy is too low plus the little problem later discovered called mass defect that had to be rationalized. Quantum mechanics probably comes up with yet another theoretical academic answer but the theory is not based on empirical science but rather scatter trajectories which is mindless physics.

The academic theory as to why gravity stretches the tide on the far side of the planet from the side where the moon has influence is an absurd answer to a problem that they develop a theoretical structure for that can't contain the earth's water. They did the same thing with their force of light experiments. They did the same thing with the young double slit light experiment. All that is needed is to re-preform the experiments re interpret the evidence with empirical thinking instead of theoretical bullying and everything comes out looking very different. I am not a believer in the never ending idea that empty space contains an invisible aether although when you look at atomic particles including electrons and even the behavior of photos it seems to be an easy explanation for some observations unfortunately it cannot yet be proved so therefore it cannot be in the theory. If there was an aether my space condensing machines would be working unimaginable wonders. I could have the entire universe in my Felix the cat suit case packed away already and you would not even know it. That is because the reticulum matrix of aether gives the whole universe a metric Cartesian plane in three dimensions which means it folds up really nicely and quickly.

Gravity Research Program

Thursday, December 13, 2018

Going back to the original electrolysis eperiments. I want to say that that process happens thoughout the universe.

Monday, December 3, 2018

Gravity Experiment.

Thursday, November 18, 2010

New Laws of Physics- Major Updated Corrected Version is Finally Coming!

My Blog List

Followers

Blog Archive

About Me

conversations with Lex slightly out of order...