Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #376572 > unrolled thread

Re: Teslas Theory of Gravity

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Teslas Theory of Gravity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-19 12:02 -0800
    Re: Teslas Theory of Gravity John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-19 18:59 -0800
      Re: Teslas Theory of Gravity John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-19 19:04 -0800
        Re: Teslas Theory of Gravity John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-19 19:09 -0800
        Re: Teslas Theory of Gravity John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-19 19:15 -0800
          Re: Teslas Theory of Gravity John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-19 19:28 -0800
            Re: Teslas Theory of Gravity John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-19 19:33 -0800
      Re: Teslas Theory of Gravity John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-19 19:12 -0800
        Re: Teslas Theory of Gravity John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-19 19:37 -0800
    Re: Teslas Theory of Gravity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-19 22:52 -0800
      Re: Teslas Theory of Gravity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-02-19 23:11 -0800
        Re: Teslas Theory of Gravity John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-20 18:43 -0800
          Re: Teslas Theory of Gravity John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-20 18:57 -0800
            Re: Teslas Theory of Gravity John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-20 19:00 -0800
              Re: Teslas Theory of Gravity John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-20 19:13 -0800
                Re: Teslas Theory of Gravity John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-21 18:28 -0800
          Re: Teslas Theory of Gravity Stzepan Zdrobněliny <stzepan282@guadalajara.org> - 2016-02-21 15:44 +0000

#376572 — Re: Teslas Theory of Gravity

mr.hvac@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> Spocks...@gmail.com
> In Tesla's gravitational theory gravity is a secondary force, Newton's apple does not fall to the ground because of the downward force of gravity but because of the upward momentum of EMR or light. Gravity is not a real force at all. Objects just free-fall towards the greatest mass or energy because they have the slowest rate or flow of time.


really, i didn't know that.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#376585

On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 2:02:27 PM UTC-6, The Starmaker wrote:
> mr.hvac@gmail.com wrote:
> > 
> > Spocks...@gmail.com
> > In Tesla's gravitational theory gravity is a secondary force, Newton's apple does not fall to the ground because of the downward force of gravity but because of the upward momentum of EMR or light. Gravity is not a real force at all. Objects just free-fall towards the greatest mass or energy because they have the slowest rate or flow of time.
> 
> 
> really, i didn't know that.

The ultimate gravity equation will be expressed by the law of addition.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#376586

On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 8:59:18 PM UTC-6, John Gogo wrote:
> On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 2:02:27 PM UTC-6, The Starmaker wrote:
> > mr.hvac@gmail.com wrote:
> > > 
> > > Spocks...@gmail.com
> > > In Tesla's gravitational theory gravity is a secondary force, Newton's apple does not fall to the ground because of the downward force of gravity but because of the upward momentum of EMR or light. Gravity is not a real force at all. Objects just free-fall towards the greatest mass or energy because they have the slowest rate or flow of time.
> > 
> > 
> > really, i didn't know that.
> 
> The ultimate gravity equation will be expressed by the law of addition.

To me, when two different weighted balls fall off the Tower of Pisa means nothing to me- other than the fact that we allow ourselves to be swayed by two objects which are essentially identical when it come to universal measure. We become trapped into the multi-dimension of our muse. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#376587

On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 9:04:31 PM UTC-6, John Gogo wrote:
> On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 8:59:18 PM UTC-6, John Gogo wrote:
> > On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 2:02:27 PM UTC-6, The Starmaker wrote:
> > > mr.hvac@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Spocks...@gmail.com
> > > > In Tesla's gravitational theory gravity is a secondary force, Newton's apple does not fall to the ground because of the downward force of gravity but because of the upward momentum of EMR or light. Gravity is not a real force at all. Objects just free-fall towards the greatest mass or energy because they have the slowest rate or flow of time.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > really, i didn't know that.
> > 
> > The ultimate gravity equation will be expressed by the law of addition.
> 
> To me, when two different weighted balls fall off the Tower of Pisa means nothing to me- other than the fact that we allow ourselves to be swayed by two objects which are essentially identical when it come to universal measure. We become trapped into the multi-dimension of our muse.

Balls also fall to Earth simultaneously when ejected vertically(without force in free fall) or horizontally without limited force.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#376589

On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 9:04:31 PM UTC-6, John Gogo wrote:
> On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 8:59:18 PM UTC-6, John Gogo wrote:
> > On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 2:02:27 PM UTC-6, The Starmaker wrote:
> > > mr.hvac@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Spocks...@gmail.com
> > > > In Tesla's gravitational theory gravity is a secondary force, Newton's apple does not fall to the ground because of the downward force of gravity but because of the upward momentum of EMR or light. Gravity is not a real force at all. Objects just free-fall towards the greatest mass or energy because they have the slowest rate or flow of time.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > really, i didn't know that.
> > 
> > The ultimate gravity equation will be expressed by the law of addition.
> 
> To me, when two different weighted balls fall off the Tower of Pisa means nothing to me- other than the fact that we allow ourselves to be swayed by two objects which are essentially identical when it come to universal measure. We become trapped into the multi-dimension of our muse.

I fundamentally believe that different sized objects do not fall at the same rate.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#376590

On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 9:15:13 PM UTC-6, John Gogo wrote:
> On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 9:04:31 PM UTC-6, John Gogo wrote:
> > On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 8:59:18 PM UTC-6, John Gogo wrote:
> > > On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 2:02:27 PM UTC-6, The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > mr.hvac@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > Spocks...@gmail.com
> > > > > In Tesla's gravitational theory gravity is a secondary force, Newton's apple does not fall to the ground because of the downward force of gravity but because of the upward momentum of EMR or light. Gravity is not a real force at all. Objects just free-fall towards the greatest mass or energy because they have the slowest rate or flow of time.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > really, i didn't know that.
> > > 
> > > The ultimate gravity equation will be expressed by the law of addition.
> > 
> > To me, when two different weighted balls fall off the Tower of Pisa means nothing to me- other than the fact that we allow ourselves to be swayed by two objects which are essentially identical when it come to universal measure. We become trapped into the multi-dimension of our muse.
> 
> I fundamentally believe that different sized objects do not fall at the same rate.

Earth-wise, larger objects fall slower than smaller objects.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#376591

On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 9:28:43 PM UTC-6, John Gogo wrote:
> On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 9:15:13 PM UTC-6, John Gogo wrote:
> > On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 9:04:31 PM UTC-6, John Gogo wrote:
> > > On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 8:59:18 PM UTC-6, John Gogo wrote:
> > > > On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 2:02:27 PM UTC-6, The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > > mr.hvac@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Spocks...@gmail.com
> > > > > > In Tesla's gravitational theory gravity is a secondary force, Newton's apple does not fall to the ground because of the downward force of gravity but because of the upward momentum of EMR or light. Gravity is not a real force at all. Objects just free-fall towards the greatest mass or energy because they have the slowest rate or flow of time.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > really, i didn't know that.
> > > > 
> > > > The ultimate gravity equation will be expressed by the law of addition.
> > > 
> > > To me, when two different weighted balls fall off the Tower of Pisa means nothing to me- other than the fact that we allow ourselves to be swayed by two objects which are essentially identical when it come to universal measure. We become trapped into the multi-dimension of our muse.
> > 
> > I fundamentally believe that different sized objects do not fall at the same rate.
> 
> Earth-wise, larger objects fall slower than smaller objects.

If 9.8 m/s2 equals Earth's gravity- we are saying that the Earth has a constant pull on objects toward Earth. But what is the information really providing?  What knowledge is this information providing us?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#376588

On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 8:59:18 PM UTC-6, John Gogo wrote:
> On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 2:02:27 PM UTC-6, The Starmaker wrote:
> > mr.hvac@gmail.com wrote:
> > > 
> > > Spocks...@gmail.com
> > > In Tesla's gravitational theory gravity is a secondary force, Newton's apple does not fall to the ground because of the downward force of gravity but because of the upward momentum of EMR or light. Gravity is not a real force at all. Objects just free-fall towards the greatest mass or energy because they have the slowest rate or flow of time.
> > 
> > 
> > really, i didn't know that.
> 
> The ultimate gravity equation will be expressed by the law of addition.

We get some gravity from the moon- a lot from the sun, some from Jupiter... will not gravity end product be expressed by adding all of these effects together?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#376592

On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 9:12:41 PM UTC-6, John Gogo wrote:
> On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 8:59:18 PM UTC-6, John Gogo wrote:
> > On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 2:02:27 PM UTC-6, The Starmaker wrote:
> > > mr.hvac@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Spocks...@gmail.com
> > > > In Tesla's gravitational theory gravity is a secondary force, Newton's apple does not fall to the ground because of the downward force of gravity but because of the upward momentum of EMR or light. Gravity is not a real force at all. Objects just free-fall towards the greatest mass or energy because they have the slowest rate or flow of time.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > really, i didn't know that.
> > 
> > The ultimate gravity equation will be expressed by the law of addition.
> 
> We get some gravity from the moon- a lot from the sun, some from Jupiter... will not gravity end product be expressed by adding all of these effects together?

For instance, we get the tides from the moon no?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#376596

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> mr.hvac@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > Spocks...@gmail.com
> > In Tesla's gravitational theory gravity is a secondary force, Newton's apple does not fall to the ground because of the downward force of gravity but because of the upward momentum of EMR or light. Gravity is not a real force at all. Objects just free-fall towards the greatest mass or energy because they have the slowest rate or flow of time.
> 
> really, i didn't know that.



I'm not sure what "fall" means...


i mean...if it is not at rest then it's...coasting, not falling, right?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#376597

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> The Starmaker wrote:
> >
> > mr.hvac@gmail.com wrote:
> > >
> > > Spocks...@gmail.com
> > > In Tesla's gravitational theory gravity is a secondary force, Newton's apple does not fall to the ground because of the downward force of gravity but because of the upward momentum of EMR or light. Gravity is not a real force at all. Objects just free-fall towards the greatest mass or energy because they have the slowest rate or flow of time.
> >
> > really, i didn't know that.
> 
> I'm not sure what "fall" means...
> 
> i mean...if it is not at rest then it's...coasting, not falling, right?



i mean...if you quickly grab the earth away
before the ball hits the earth ground,
the ball keeps going.

It's not falling.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#376715

On Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 1:10:57 AM UTC-6, The Starmaker wrote:
> The Starmaker wrote:
> > 
> > The Starmaker wrote:
> > >
> > > mr.hvac@gmail.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Spocks...@gmail.com
> > > > In Tesla's gravitational theory gravity is a secondary force, Newton's apple does not fall to the ground because of the downward force of gravity but because of the upward momentum of EMR or light. Gravity is not a real force at all. Objects just free-fall towards the greatest mass or energy because they have the slowest rate or flow of time.
> > >
> > > really, i didn't know that.
> > 
> > I'm not sure what "fall" means...
> > 
> > i mean...if it is not at rest then it's...coasting, not falling, right?
> 
> 
> 
> i mean...if you quickly grab the earth away
> before the ball hits the earth ground,
> the ball keeps going.
> 
> It's not falling.

Well, cannot forget Newton's universal Law of gravitation.

Modern form[edit]

In modern language, the law states the following:

Every point mass attracts every single other point mass by a force pointing along the line intersecting both points. The force is proportional to the product of the two masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them:[2] 
Diagram of two masses attracting one another
 

F = G \frac{m_1 m_2}{r^2}\ 
 where:
F is the force between the masses;
G is the gravitational constant (6.674×10−11 N · (m/kg)2);
m1 is the first mass;
m2 is the second mass;
r is the distance between the centers of the masses.
 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#376717

On Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 8:43:36 PM UTC-6, John Gogo wrote:
> On Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 1:10:57 AM UTC-6, The Starmaker wrote:
> > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > 
> > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > >
> > > > mr.hvac@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Spocks...@gmail.com
> > > > > In Tesla's gravitational theory gravity is a secondary force, Newton's apple does not fall to the ground because of the downward force of gravity but because of the upward momentum of EMR or light. Gravity is not a real force at all. Objects just free-fall towards the greatest mass or energy because they have the slowest rate or flow of time.
> > > >
> > > > really, i didn't know that.
> > > 
> > > I'm not sure what "fall" means...
> > > 
> > > i mean...if it is not at rest then it's...coasting, not falling, right?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > i mean...if you quickly grab the earth away
> > before the ball hits the earth ground,
> > the ball keeps going.
> > 
> > It's not falling.
> 
> Well, cannot forget Newton's universal Law of gravitation.
> 
> Modern form[edit]
> 
> In modern language, the law states the following:
> 
> Every point mass attracts every single other point mass by a force pointing along the line intersecting both points. The force is proportional to the product of the two masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them:[2] 
> Diagram of two masses attracting one another
>  
> 
> F = G \frac{m_1 m_2}{r^2}\ 
>  where:
> F is the force between the masses;
> G is the gravitational constant (6.674×10−11 N · (m/kg)2);
> m1 is the first mass;
> m2 is the second mass;
> r is the distance between the centers of the masses.

For instance, suppose the moon is just a rock which is always trying to fall to Earth but is not allowed to. The moon rock is kept in orbit gravitationally.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#376718

On Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 8:57:45 PM UTC-6, John Gogo wrote:
> On Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 8:43:36 PM UTC-6, John Gogo wrote:
> > On Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 1:10:57 AM UTC-6, The Starmaker wrote:
> > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > mr.hvac@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Spocks...@gmail.com
> > > > > > In Tesla's gravitational theory gravity is a secondary force, Newton's apple does not fall to the ground because of the downward force of gravity but because of the upward momentum of EMR or light. Gravity is not a real force at all. Objects just free-fall towards the greatest mass or energy because they have the slowest rate or flow of time.
> > > > >
> > > > > really, i didn't know that.
> > > > 
> > > > I'm not sure what "fall" means...
> > > > 
> > > > i mean...if it is not at rest then it's...coasting, not falling, right?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > i mean...if you quickly grab the earth away
> > > before the ball hits the earth ground,
> > > the ball keeps going.
> > > 
> > > It's not falling.
> > 
> > Well, cannot forget Newton's universal Law of gravitation.
> > 
> > Modern form[edit]
> > 
> > In modern language, the law states the following:
> > 
> > Every point mass attracts every single other point mass by a force pointing along the line intersecting both points. The force is proportional to the product of the two masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them:[2] 
> > Diagram of two masses attracting one another
> >  
> > 
> > F = G \frac{m_1 m_2}{r^2}\ 
> >  where:
> > F is the force between the masses;
> > G is the gravitational constant (6.674×10−11 N · (m/kg)2);
> > m1 is the first mass;
> > m2 is the second mass;
> > r is the distance between the centers of the masses.
> 
> For instance, suppose the moon is just a rock which is always trying to fall to Earth but is not allowed to. The moon rock is kept in orbit gravitationally.

Not only that, the moon is landlocked and only shows 56% of its' surface from Earth's point of view in a 12 month period.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#376719

On Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 9:00:44 PM UTC-6, John Gogo wrote:
> On Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 8:57:45 PM UTC-6, John Gogo wrote:
> > On Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 8:43:36 PM UTC-6, John Gogo wrote:
> > > On Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 1:10:57 AM UTC-6, The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > mr.hvac@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Spocks...@gmail.com
> > > > > > > In Tesla's gravitational theory gravity is a secondary force, Newton's apple does not fall to the ground because of the downward force of gravity but because of the upward momentum of EMR or light. Gravity is not a real force at all. Objects just free-fall towards the greatest mass or energy because they have the slowest rate or flow of time.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > really, i didn't know that.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I'm not sure what "fall" means...
> > > > > 
> > > > > i mean...if it is not at rest then it's...coasting, not falling, right?
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > i mean...if you quickly grab the earth away
> > > > before the ball hits the earth ground,
> > > > the ball keeps going.
> > > > 
> > > > It's not falling.
> > > 
> > > Well, cannot forget Newton's universal Law of gravitation.
> > > 
> > > Modern form[edit]
> > > 
> > > In modern language, the law states the following:
> > > 
> > > Every point mass attracts every single other point mass by a force pointing along the line intersecting both points. The force is proportional to the product of the two masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them:[2] 
> > > Diagram of two masses attracting one another
> > >  
> > > 
> > > F = G \frac{m_1 m_2}{r^2}\ 
> > >  where:
> > > F is the force between the masses;
> > > G is the gravitational constant (6.674×10−11 N · (m/kg)2);
> > > m1 is the first mass;
> > > m2 is the second mass;
> > > r is the distance between the centers of the masses.
> > 
> > For instance, suppose the moon is just a rock which is always trying to fall to Earth but is not allowed to. The moon rock is kept in orbit gravitationally.
> 
> Not only that, the moon is landlocked and only shows 56% of its' surface from Earth's point of view in a 12 month period.

Any overall review of gravity reveals that any meaning of gravity i.e. weather, ie. tides, etc.- I appeal to the meaning of which the proportions of Earth/moon exist in their own right. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#376812

On Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 9:13:24 PM UTC-6, John Gogo wrote:
> On Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 9:00:44 PM UTC-6, John Gogo wrote:
> > On Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 8:57:45 PM UTC-6, John Gogo wrote:
> > > On Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 8:43:36 PM UTC-6, John Gogo wrote:
> > > > On Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 1:10:57 AM UTC-6, The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > mr.hvac@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Spocks...@gmail.com
> > > > > > > > In Tesla's gravitational theory gravity is a secondary force, Newton's apple does not fall to the ground because of the downward force of gravity but because of the upward momentum of EMR or light. Gravity is not a real force at all. Objects just free-fall towards the greatest mass or energy because they have the slowest rate or flow of time.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > really, i didn't know that.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I'm not sure what "fall" means...
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > i mean...if it is not at rest then it's...coasting, not falling, right?
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > i mean...if you quickly grab the earth away
> > > > > before the ball hits the earth ground,
> > > > > the ball keeps going.
> > > > > 
> > > > > It's not falling.
> > > > 
> > > > Well, cannot forget Newton's universal Law of gravitation.
> > > > 
> > > > Modern form[edit]
> > > > 
> > > > In modern language, the law states the following:
> > > > 
> > > > Every point mass attracts every single other point mass by a force pointing along the line intersecting both points. The force is proportional to the product of the two masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them:[2] 
> > > > Diagram of two masses attracting one another
> > > >  
> > > > 
> > > > F = G \frac{m_1 m_2}{r^2}\ 
> > > >  where:
> > > > F is the force between the masses;
> > > > G is the gravitational constant (6.674×10−11 N · (m/kg)2);
> > > > m1 is the first mass;
> > > > m2 is the second mass;
> > > > r is the distance between the centers of the masses.
> > > 
> > > For instance, suppose the moon is just a rock which is always trying to fall to Earth but is not allowed to. The moon rock is kept in orbit gravitationally.
> > 
> > Not only that, the moon is landlocked and only shows 56% of its' surface from Earth's point of view in a 12 month period.
> 
> Any overall review of gravity reveals that any meaning of gravity i.e. weather, ie. tides, etc.- I appeal to the meaning of which the proportions of Earth/moon exist in their own right.

For instance, the Moon is nearly 1/4 the diameter of the Earth.  The moon revolves at approximately 250,000 miles from Earth.  This object called the moon wants to fall to the Earth, or wants to fall out of orbit.  These duel tendencies seems to flabbergast the scientist when it comes to the measure of gravity.  The moon's distance is nearly 110 Earth diameters. What makes this motion in perpetuality contain meaning in that the moon never falls or flies away? 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#376763

John Gogo wrote:

>> > > > Spocks...@gmail.com In Tesla's gravitational theory gravity is a
>> > > > secondary force, Newton's apple does not fall to the ground
>> > > > because of the downward force of gravity but because of the
>> > > > upward momentum of EMR or light. Gravity is not a real force at
>> > > > all. Objects just free-fall towards the greatest mass or energy
>> > > > because they have the slowest rate or flow of time.

Why should that be slowest time, once you said there is no GR, but only 
Newton? WTF am I reading here, 🐔💩?

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web