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


Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #363749 > unrolled thread

The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued

Started by"Lleyton H. Bellucci" <lleyb@stratospheree.org>
First post2015-09-11 11:29 +0000
Last post2015-09-16 20:09 +0200
Articles 20 on this page of 89 — 10 participants

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


Contents

  The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued "Lleyton H. Bellucci" <lleyb@stratospheree.org> - 2015-09-11 11:29 +0000
    Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued "Lleyton H. Bellucci" <lleyb@stratospheree.org> - 2015-09-11 11:54 +0000
      Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued "Lleyton H. Bellucci" <lleyb@stratospheree.org> - 2015-09-11 11:58 +0000
        Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-11 08:18 -0400
          Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued "Lleyton H. Bellucci" <lleyb@stratospheree.org> - 2015-09-11 12:36 +0000
            Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued "Lleyton H. Bellucci" <lleyb@stratospheree.org> - 2015-09-11 12:45 +0000
      Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-11 08:15 -0400
        Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued "Lleyton H. Bellucci" <lleyb@stratospheree.org> - 2015-09-11 12:39 +0000
        Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-11 17:23 -0700
      Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 08:46 -0700
        Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Jimmie Wynne <jimmwyn@metermap.org> - 2015-09-17 20:33 +0000
    The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-11 05:56 -0700
      Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued "Lleyton H. Bellucci" <lleyb@stratospheree.org> - 2015-09-11 13:03 +0000
        Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-12 08:33 +0200
          Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-12 08:24 -0400
            Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-12 05:34 -0700
              Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-12 09:23 -0400
                Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-12 09:27 -0700
                  Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-12 17:23 -0400
                    Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Frances Espinosa <franesp@portio.org> - 2015-09-12 21:29 +0000
                    Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-12 15:07 -0700
                    Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 12:17 -0500
                      Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-14 16:32 -0400
                        Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 15:45 -0500
                          Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-14 17:28 -0400
                            Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 17:10 -0500
                              Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-14 20:38 -0400
                                Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 08:27 -0500
                                  Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-15 14:38 -0400
                                    Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 13:44 -0500
                                    Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Frances Espinosa <franesp@portio.org> - 2015-09-15 21:01 +0000
                        Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Frances Espinosa <franesp@portio.org> - 2015-09-14 20:55 +0000
                          Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-14 17:29 -0400
          Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-12 05:32 -0700
            Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-12 09:22 -0400
              Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-12 08:33 -0700
                Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-12 09:36 -0700
                  Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-14 07:57 -0700
                    Re: The mixed Up Nonsense of fyller.david - continued kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-14 12:29 -0400
                      Re: The mixed Up Nonsense of fyller.david - continued John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 18:48 -0700
                        Re: The mixed Up Nonsense of fyller.david - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-23 08:33 -0700
                          Re: The mixed Up Nonsense of fyller.david - continued kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-23 14:10 -0400
                        Re: The mixed Up Nonsense of fyller.david - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-23 08:36 -0700
                        Re: The mixed Up Nonsense of fyller.david - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-23 08:46 -0700
                          Re: The mixed Up Nonsense of fyller.david - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-23 11:13 -0700
                        Re: The mixed Up Nonsense of fyller.david - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-23 09:06 -0700
                          Re: The mixed Up Nonsense of fyller.david - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-23 10:46 -0700
                            Re: The mixed Up Nonsense of fyller.david - continued Jimmie Wynne <jimmwyn@metermap.org> - 2015-09-23 19:19 +0000
                          Re: The mixed Up Nonsense of fyller.david - continued shuba <tim@sh.uba> - 2015-09-23 17:51 +0000
                            Re: The mixed Up Nonsense of fyller.david - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-23 11:02 -0700
                            Re: The mixed Up Nonsense of fyller.david - continued Jimmie Wynne <jimmwyn@metermap.org> - 2015-09-23 19:18 +0000
                              Re: The mixed Up Nonsense of fyller.david - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-24 07:38 -0700
                                Re: The mixed Up Nonsense of fyller.david - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-24 07:55 -0700
                                  Re: The mixed Up Nonsense of fyller.david - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-24 08:18 -0700
                                Re: The mixed Up Nonsense of fyller.david - continued Jimmie Wynne <jimmwyn@metermap.org> - 2015-09-24 14:55 +0000
                                  Re: The mixed Up Nonsense of fyller.david - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-24 08:05 -0700
                                  Re: The mixed Up Nonsense of fyller.david - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-24 09:15 -0700
                                    Re: The mixed Up Nonsense of fyller.david - continued Jimmie Wynne <jimmwyn@metermap.org> - 2015-09-24 18:46 +0000
                    Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-17 21:02 -0700
                      Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-18 13:28 -0700
                Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-12 12:38 -0400
                  Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-12 10:10 -0700
                  Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-12 11:06 -0700
                  Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-12 11:24 -0700
                    Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-12 16:50 -0400
                      Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-12 14:37 -0700
          Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Frances Espinosa <franesp@portio.org> - 2015-09-12 16:03 +0000
        Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-12 21:45 +0200
          Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-12 13:00 -0700
            Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-13 02:51 +0200
              Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-13 06:25 -0700
              Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-13 06:52 -0700
                Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-13 08:02 -0700
                  Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-13 12:12 -0400
                    Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Jimmie Wynne <jimmwyn@metermap.org> - 2015-09-18 20:41 +0000
                      Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-18 17:18 -0400
                        Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Jimmie Wynne <jimmwyn@metermap.org> - 2015-09-18 21:49 +0000
                          Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Jimmie Wynne <jimmwyn@metermap.org> - 2015-09-18 22:01 +0000
                Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-13 21:48 +0200
                  Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-13 16:05 -0400
                    Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-14 05:19 +0200
                      Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued shuba <tim@sh.uba> - 2015-09-14 03:53 +0000
                        Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-09-13 21:15 -0700
                        Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-14 06:57 +0200
                        Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-15 21:18 +0200
                          Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued shuba <tim@sh.uba> - 2015-09-15 20:23 +0000
                            Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-16 07:48 +0200
                              Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued shuba <tim@sh.uba> - 2015-09-16 09:49 +0000
                                Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-16 20:09 +0200

Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5  Next page →


#363898

Fromkefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com>
Date2015-09-12 12:38 -0400
Message-ID<vcj8valgtek56d1rq7ak3l9u43bj3ltnm6@4ax.com>
In reply to#363887
On Sat, 12 Sep 2015 08:33:36 -0700 (PDT), fuller.david@hotmail.com
wrote:

>       Your words are like the perception of 
>identifiable meaning in the screeching of owls, 
>there is no relationship of the PoE and spacetime 
>or "convergent space" (whatever the hell that 
>is supposed to be). 
>
>      Converging spacetime would simple be the reciprocal of Divergent matter. 

         No, definitely NOT!

         Space-time (as in the gravity theory part of
General Relativity) does not (just) converge,
it can appear to do "shrink" as objects side-by-side
appear to "fall", or "stretch" as one object _below_
the other appears to "fall" faster (what really happens
is that in both cases, the "distance" between them
does not change, the one at higher altitude has
a higher upward velocity than the one at lower
altitude.

       In the case of two side-by-side, they both
have the same upward velocity after release,
but the meterstick gets longer and the surface
accelerates toward them, causing the appearance
of them "falling" at angles that appears to vector
them toward the center of the Earth.

       Space-time does nothing (in the Divergent
Matter model, it is vacuum nothingness with
NO attributes whatsoever.

       The measurement of impedance requires
emission and reception of electric "signals"
of some sort, which diminish with distance,
no matter what medium (or lack of medium)
they pass through.


>The impedance of the vacuum "Sets" the speed of light" and covers much more than just spark gap. 

        No, it doesn't, light passing through a 
medium is absorbed and re-emitted by
the molecules of the medium, causing
a delay for each step along the way.

       A vacuum has no molecules to
absorb light, so light propagates totally
undisturbed.

       Learn a little physics and QED and
stop imagining things and thinking it is
physics.

[Sound is different than light as it can
only move as fast as the molecular
activity because it is just a "vibration"
of the molecules and not electromagnetism.
That is why, once the  gas is identified as
air, the temperature is what determines
the speed of sound (approximately)]


      Gravity does NOT "propagate" in
the Divergent Matter model, matter is
in a slow propagation itself as it expands.
      There may be an appearance of
propagation of something because of
the slowing of time with the passing
of time, but in the Divergent Matter
model, there is no delay, because
nothing propagates.

      _IF_  a very massive body _could_
vibrate (the entire mass move back and
forth), then the "effect" on nearby objects
would vibrate as modeled by GR, but
a very massive body cannot vibrate
like the strings on a harp, because
the ends of a very massive body cannot
be held stationary.

       So, in the Divergent Matter model,
there are NO gravity waves.

       No matter what kind of collision,
or orbiting stars, the center of mass
of the system does not "vibrate" or
change motion (accelerate).  




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


#363902

Fromfuller.david@hotmail.com
Date2015-09-12 10:10 -0700
Message-ID<b02f7554-5a63-4dad-937d-e3b2cf02625c@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#363898
On Sat, 12 Sep 2015 08:33:36 -0700 (PDT), fuller...@hotmail.com 
wrote: 

>       Your words are like the perception of 
>identifiable meaning in the screeching of owls, 
>there is no relationship of the PoE and spacetime
>or "convergent space" (whatever the hell that 
>is supposed to be). 
> 
>      Converging spacetime would simple be the reciprocal of Divergent matter. 

         No, definitely NOT! 

         Space-time (as in the gravity theory part of 
General Relativity) does not (just) converge, 
it can appear to do "shrink" as objects side-by-side
appear to "fall", or "stretch" as one object _below_ 
the other appears to "fall" faster (what really happens 
is that in both cases, the "distance" between them 
does not change, the one at higher altitude has 
a higher upward velocity than the one at lower 
altitude. 

       In the case of two side-by-side, they both 
have the same upward velocity after release, 
but the meterstick gets longer and the surface 
accelerates toward them, causing the appearance 
of them "falling" at angles that appears to vector 
them toward the center of the Earth. 

       Space-time does nothing (in the Divergent 
Matter model, it is vacuum nothingness with 
NO attributes whatsoever. 

Quantum mechanics says different, specifically Pound-Rebka. 
Pound-Rebka specifically requires spacetime to be quantified into specific "Planck Quantities" 

       The measurement of impedance requires 
emission and reception of electric "signals" 
of some sort, which diminish with distance, 
no matter what medium (or lack of medium) 
they pass through. 

Not if Dissonant signals are perceived as gravity. 

>The impedance of the vacuum "Sets" the speed of light" and covers much more than just spark gap. 

        No, it doesn't, light passing through a 
medium is absorbed and re-emitted by 
the molecules of the medium, causing 
a delay for each step along the way. 

       A vacuum has no molecules to 
absorb light, so light propagates totally 
undisturbed. 

Again QM & Pound-Rebka

       Learn a little physics and QED and 
stop imagining things and thinking it is 
physics. 

[Sound is different than light as it can 
only move as fast as the molecular 
activity because it is just a "vibration" 
of the molecules and not electromagnetism. 
That is why, once the  gas is identified as 
air, the temperature is what determines 
the speed of sound (approximately)] 


      Gravity does NOT "propagate" in 
the Divergent Matter model, matter is 
in a slow propagation itself as it expands. 
      
The variations in the vacuum impedance do propagate spatially. 

There may be an appearance of 
propagation of something because of 
the slowing of time with the passing 
of time, but in the Divergent Matter 
model, there is no delay, because 
nothing propagates. 

      _IF_  a very massive body _could_ 
vibrate (the entire mass move back and 
forth), then the "effect" on nearby objects 
would vibrate as modeled by GR, but 
a very massive body cannot vibrate 
like the strings on a harp, because 
the ends of a very massive body cannot 
be held stationary. 

       So, in the Divergent Matter model, 
there are NO gravity waves. 

       No matter what kind of collision, 
or orbiting stars, the center of mass 
of the system does not "vibrate" or 
change motion (accelerate).   


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


#363907

Fromfuller.david@hotmail.com
Date2015-09-12 11:06 -0700
Message-ID<b0ee76a3-d7f8-412f-bd7b-81303371ce96@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#363898
Your words are like the perception of 
identifiable meaning in the screeching of owls, 

LOL .. That's funny 
Yes like the gibbering of baboons. 
Again Sorry

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


#363908

Fromfuller.david@hotmail.com
Date2015-09-12 11:24 -0700
Message-ID<bea94009-8c8f-4851-bd7f-a866dd8360b8@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#363898
[Sound is different than light as it can 
only move as fast as the molecular 
activity because it is just a "vibration" 
of the molecules and not electromagnetism. 
That is why, once the  gas is identified as 
air, the temperature is what determines 
the speed of sound (approximately)] 

I do not believe it is a vibration. 
I believe it is a smooth rotation based on two counter balanced golden ratios 
Phi / Phi

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


#363920

Fromkefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com>
Date2015-09-12 16:50 -0400
Message-ID<4049vahl0cgef48mnpd51ulkgf2r6e249t@4ax.com>
In reply to#363908
On Sat, 12 Sep 2015 11:24:56 -0700 (PDT), fuller.david@hotmail.com
wrote:

>[Sound is different than light as it can 
>only move as fast as the molecular 
>activity because it is just a "vibration" 
>of the molecules and not electromagnetism. 
>That is why, once the  gas is identified as 
>air, the temperature is what determines 
>the speed of sound (approximately)] 
>
>I do not believe it is a vibration. 
>I believe it is a smooth rotation based on two counter balanced golden ratios 
>Phi / Phi

       Yeah, sure, rub it;s belly and it will purr.





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


#363930

Fromfuller.david@hotmail.com
Date2015-09-12 14:37 -0700
Message-ID<e45303f9-5da4-49dc-ae02-ab7ae01c1f1b@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#363920
On Sat, 12 Sep 2015 11:24:56 -0700 (PDT), fuller...@hotmail.com 
wrote: 

>[Sound is different than light as it can 
>only move as fast as the molecular 
>activity because it is just a "vibration" 
>of the molecules and not electromagnetism. 
>That is why, once the  gas is identified as 
>air, the temperature is what determines 
>the speed of sound (approximately)] 
> 
>I do not believe it is a vibration. 
>I believe it is a smooth rotation based on two counter balanced golden ratios 
>Phi / Phi 

       Yeah, sure, rub it's belly and it will purr. 


Like this 

http://i60.tinypic.com/34852zp.jpg

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


#363891

FromFrances Espinosa <franesp@portio.org>
Date2015-09-12 16:03 +0000
Message-ID<mt1ic6$r0h$2@speranza.aioe.org>
In reply to#363851
Thomas Heger wrote:

> Am 11.09.2015 15:03, schrieb Lleyton H. Bellucci:
>> Il giorno Fri, 11 Sep 2015 05:56:26 -0700  *_fuller.david_* ha scritto:
>>
>>>> While in Relativity Tensors are something Inconceivable IMMATERIAL,
>>>> defined /assumed floating in empty space, "spacetime" or wherever, in
>>>> Divergent Matter Tensors are pretty much WELL posed literally
>>>> MATERIAL.
>>>>
>>>> Of course they are embedded in the Matter which is Expanding. In
>>>> numbers this gives a score of
>>>>
>>>> Relativity 0 Divergent Matter 2 Have a nice weekend.
>>>
>>> It is simple matter is an amount of entropy, that entropy is
>>> increasing.
>>
>> Wow, this must give
>>
>> Relativity 0 Divergent Matter 3
>>
>> I really appreciate.
> 
> Actually I think, that GR is true and there is a physical entity called
> 'spacetime'. This we observe from the inside, because we are a part of
> that entity, like anything else.

This sound like an horror movie, The Entity. (spacetime)

> Matter is also a part, like a wave is a part of the ocean.
> I explain matter a 'structures' of/in spacetime. This matter is
> 'relative' (to the specific FoR, from where we observe).

Nothing.

> So matter is not matter in some other FoR, if that is chosen in a
> certain way. This is a mutual relation, where one object is shrinking in
> one FoR, while expanding in another FoR.
> Once it's too small to see, it has 'dropped behind the event horizon' -
> where it still is unchanged.

Say something.

> Our observation is then like a 'comoving cut', since we are using the
> same kind of clocks around the globe. 
> The surface of the Earth is not the only possible place. It is only
> difficult to leave (for us as common human beings). But we could imagine
> to be in another location and observe the world from there.

Nothing. See you in Glucksburg.

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


#363914

FromThomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de>
Date2015-09-12 21:45 +0200
Message-ID<d5jdmoF9c29U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#363760
Am 11.09.2015 15:03, schrieb Lleyton H. Bellucci:
> Il giorno Fri, 11 Sep 2015 05:56:26 -0700  *_fuller.david_* ha scritto:
>
>>> While in Relativity Tensors are something Inconceivable IMMATERIAL,
>>> defined /assumed floating in empty space, "spacetime" or wherever, in
>>> Divergent Matter Tensors are pretty much WELL posed literally MATERIAL.
>>>
>>> Of course they are embedded in the Matter which is Expanding. In numbers
>>> this gives a score of
>>>
>>> Relativity 0 Divergent Matter 2
>>> Have a nice weekend.
>>
>> It is simple matter is an amount of entropy, that entropy is increasing.
>
> Wow, this must give
>
> Relativity 0
> Divergent Matter 3
>
> I really appreciate.

Actually I think, that GR is true and there is a physical entity called 
'spacetime'. This we observe from the inside, because we are a part of 
that entity, like anything else.

I explain matter as 'structures' of spacetime (like a wave is a part of 
the ocean). This matter is 'relative' (to the specific FoR, from where 
we observe).

So matter is not matter in all other FoR, but could vanish, if that is 
chosen in a certain way. This is a mutual relation, where one object is 
shrinking in one FoR, while expanding in another FoR.

Once it's too small to see, it will 'drop behind the event horizon' - 
where it remains unchanged.

Our observation is then like a 'comoving cut'. This is as if we are 
moving in time (along the axis of time). This axis defines a 'time 
domain', where we are using the same kind of clocks. (Within this domain 
matter stays matter.)

The surface of the Earth is not the only possible place. It is only 
difficult to leave (for us as common human beings). But we could imagine 
to be in another location and observe the world from there.

 From such a FoR the view would be like our view upon the universe. But 
we would see a different 'universe' there, since in a different FoR we 
have also a different way to measure time and a different order of 
causal relations.

TH

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


#363916

Fromfuller.david@hotmail.com
Date2015-09-12 13:00 -0700
Message-ID<49a0ddd3-dfc7-4445-a79e-377b53d0ecb4@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#363914
Actually I think, that GR is true and there is a physical entity called 
'spacetime'. This we observe from the inside, because we are a part of 
that entity, like anything else. 

I explain matter as 'structures' of spacetime (like a wave is a part of 
the ocean). This matter is 'relative' (to the specific FoR, from where 
we observe). 

So matter is not matter in all other FoR, but could vanish, if that is 
chosen in a certain way. This is a mutual relation, where one object is 
shrinking in one FoR, while expanding in another FoR. 

For me I seem to view matter as a container displacing Vacuum energy. 

And the volume of the vacuum it is displacing 
Is equal to the formula for kinetic energy with the velocity set at c

Which would literally make the vacuum of spacetime equivalent to Kinetic energy. 

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


#363945

FromThomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de>
Date2015-09-13 02:51 +0200
Message-ID<d5jvkcFdh1cU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#363916
Am 12.09.2015 22:00, schrieb fuller.david@hotmail.com:
> Actually I think, that GR is true and there is a physical entity called
> 'spacetime'. This we observe from the inside, because we are a part of
> that entity, like anything else.
>
> I explain matter as 'structures' of spacetime (like a wave is a part of
> the ocean). This matter is 'relative' (to the specific FoR, from where
> we observe).
>
> So matter is not matter in all other FoR, but could vanish, if that is
> chosen in a certain way. This is a mutual relation, where one object is
> shrinking in one FoR, while expanding in another FoR.
>
> For me I seem to view matter as a container displacing Vacuum energy.
>
> And the volume of the vacuum it is displacing
> Is equal to the formula for kinetic energy with the velocity set at c
>
> Which would literally make the vacuum of spacetime equivalent to Kinetic energy.

Not quite..

I assume, that the universe is based on a space, that is oriented at any 
point. This is: a point is more than just a coordinate, but is has a 
direction. There is a vector attached to it and this vector can turn its 
direction.

The orientation can also oscillate and would the build a tiny spherical 
wave - a rotational wave.

Along the axis of time those spheres are, what we call 'matter'. In 
respect to another axis, the sphere is like a tiny helical screw and 
those are, what we call radiation.

So matter is matter in one FoR and radiation in another FoR.

What we call electrons is actually the outer shell of such a wave. And 
those could be turned into light or light could be turned into 
electrons, depending on the state of movement.

What we call empty space (vacuum)  is then a certain aspect of a more 
fundamental entity (spacetime) as seen from a certain perspective.

This vacuum is assumed to be the 'stage' for all events. And events are 
functions of matter and the energetic interactions of material objects.

But in my model the universe is more or less one thing, that has 
substructures, which we call material objects or radiation. And where is 
none of those, we assume vacuum.

This distinction between matter and vacuum is then depending on the 
point of view or: the 'axis of time'.

This is a slightly unusual idea, but I assume this is true, 
nevertheless. The reason to think so: this assumption would enable to 
explain a lot of different observations.

It also enable to connect GR to QM. The method is to assume, that 
spacetime has structures and that are, what QM calls particles.

I have written kind of 'book' about this idea (it's actually still a 
google.doc presentation):

https://docs.google.com/present/view?id=dd8jz2tx_3gfzvqgd6


TH

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


#363977

Fromfuller.david@hotmail.com
Date2015-09-13 06:25 -0700
Message-ID<86378320-e7ab-495f-a3d4-a9b3e3bcc4d9@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#363945
- hide quoted text -
Am 12.09.2015 22:00, schrieb fuller...@hotmail.com: 
> Actually I think, that GR is true and there is a physical entity called 
> 'spacetime'. This we observe from the inside, because we are a part of 
> that entity, like anything else. 
> 
> I explain matter as 'structures' of spacetime (like a wave is a part of 
> the ocean). This matter is 'relative' (to the specific FoR, from where 
> we observe). 
> 
> So matter is not matter in all other FoR, but could vanish, if that is 
> chosen in a certain way. This is a mutual relation, where one object is 
> shrinking in one FoR, while expanding in another FoR. 
> 
> For me I seem to view matter as a container displacing Vacuum energy. 
> 
> And the volume of the vacuum it is displacing 
> Is equal to the formula for kinetic energy with the velocity set at c 
> 
> Which would literally make the vacuum of spacetime equivalent to Kinetic energy. 

Not quite.. 

I assume, that the universe is based on a space, that is oriented at any 
point. This is: a point is more than just a coordinate, but is has a 
direction. There is a vector attached to it and this vector can turn its 
direction. 

The orientation can also oscillate and would the build a tiny spherical 
wave - a rotational wave. 

Along the axis of time those spheres are, what we call 'matter'. In 
respect to another axis, the sphere is like a tiny helical screw and 
those are, what we call radiation. 

That sounds like SR

So matter is matter in one FoR and radiation in another FoR. 

What we call electrons is actually the outer shell of such a wave. And 
those could be turned into light or light could be turned into 
electrons, depending on the state of movement. 

What we call empty space (vacuum)  is then a certain aspect of a more 
fundamental entity (spacetime) as seen from a certain perspective. 

This vacuum is assumed to be the 'stage' for all events. And events are 
functions of matter and the energetic interactions of material objects. 

But in my model the universe is more or less one thing, that has 
substructures, which we call material objects or radiation. And where is 
none of those, we assume vacuum. 

This distinction between matter and vacuum is then depending on the 
point of view or: the 'axis of time'. 

This is a slightly unusual idea, but I assume this is true, 
nevertheless. The reason to think so: this assumption would enable to 
explain a lot of different observations. 

It also enable to connect GR to QM. The method is to assume, that 
spacetime has structures and that are, what QM calls particles. 

I have written kind of 'book' about this idea (it's actually still a 
google.doc presentation): 

https://docs.google.com/present/view?id=dd8jz2tx_3gfzvqgd6 


TH 

Hi TH
Before getting to the bottom of your post I was thinking of suggesting a book to you that sounded similar, but when I got to the bottom I realized it was your book. 

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


#363979

Fromfuller.david@hotmail.com
Date2015-09-13 06:52 -0700
Message-ID<d68ab135-1868-41bb-974c-4e0729904966@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#363945
Along the axis of time those spheres are, what we call 'matter'. In 
respect to another axis, the sphere is like a tiny helical screw and 
those are, what we call radiation.

So if a space ship was at a black hole trying to maintain its position in a gravitational acceleration of .866 v of c , the inside of the space ship would be hotter than the surface of the Sun from the space ship's counter acceleration to balance against the gravitation  of the black hole?

A severe case of "the bends" would result as soon as acceleration was ceased. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decompression_sickness

Yes, the passengers would have had their molecules Stratified like a centrifuge long before. 

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


#363985

Fromfuller.david@hotmail.com
Date2015-09-13 08:02 -0700
Message-ID<55d03a3f-264d-470d-bdb4-24a3d6019269@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#363979
Along the axis of time those spheres are, what we call 'matter'. In 
respect to another axis, the sphere is like a tiny helical screw and 
those are, what we call radiation. 

So if a space ship was at a black hole trying to maintain its position in a gravitational acceleration of .866 v of c , the inside of the space ship would be hotter than the surface of the Sun from the space ship's counter acceleration to balance against the gravitation  of the black hole? 

A severe case of "the bends" would result as soon as acceleration was ceased. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decompression_sickness 

Yes, the passengers would have had their molecules Stratified like a centrifuge long before. 


So, the variation in the vacuum impedance caused by the gravitation of the black hole would cause a temperature of 70 degrees to appear close to a temperature nearer the surface of the sun. 

If the gravity suddenly turned off, an extreme blue shift of any radiation would propagate from the point where gravity ceased as the the vacuum impedance returns to a more homogenous spatial state. 

Would gravity waves just be detected as photons ?

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


#363989

Fromkefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com>
Date2015-09-13 12:12 -0400
Message-ID<118bvatnf4gl74ih4pku1s8rgm8f6j6t1t@4ax.com>
In reply to#363985
On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 08:02:32 -0700 (PDT), fuller.david@hotmail.com
wrote:

>Along the axis of time those spheres are, what we call 'matter'. In 
>respect to another axis, the sphere is like a tiny helical screw and 
>those are, what we call radiation. 
>
>So if a space ship was at a black hole trying to maintain its position in a gravitational acceleration of .866 v of c , the inside of the space ship would be hotter than the surface of the Sun from the space ship's counter acceleration to balance against the gravitation  of the black hole? 
>
>A severe case of "the bends" would result as soon as acceleration was ceased. 
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decompression_sickness 
>
>Yes, the passengers would have had their molecules Stratified like a centrifuge long before. 
>
>
>So, the variation in the vacuum impedance caused by the gravitation of the black hole would cause a temperature of 70 degrees to appear close to a temperature nearer the surface of the sun. 
>
>If the gravity suddenly turned off, an extreme blue shift of any radiation would propagate from the point where gravity ceased as the the vacuum impedance returns to a more homogenous spatial state. 
>
>Would gravity waves just be detected as photons ?

        If you are going to post physics garbage,
start a thread and title it properly.





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


#364519

FromJimmie Wynne <jimmwyn@metermap.org>
Date2015-09-18 20:41 +0000
Message-ID<mthstd$bd6$1@speranza.aioe.org>
In reply to#363989
kefischer wrote:

>>If the gravity suddenly turned off, an extreme blue shift of any
>>radiation would propagate from the point where gravity ceased as the the
>>vacuum impedance returns to a more homogenous spatial state.
>>Would gravity waves just be detected as photons ?
> 
>         If you are going to post physics garbage,
> start a thread and title it properly.

Honestly, I like the Divergent Matter very much. But at the end of the 
day, I don't get it.

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


#364526

Fromkefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com>
Date2015-09-18 17:18 -0400
Message-ID<5qvovahfkb92sbo9nss54ri2edrqncif5p@4ax.com>
In reply to#364519
On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 20:41:18 +0000 (UTC), Jimmie Wynne
<jimmwyn@metermap.org> wrote:

>kefischer wrote:
>
>>>If the gravity suddenly turned off, an extreme blue shift of any
>>>radiation would propagate from the point where gravity ceased as the the
>>>vacuum impedance returns to a more homogenous spatial state.
>>>Would gravity waves just be detected as photons ?
>> 
>>         If you are going to post physics garbage,
>> start a thread and title it properly.
>
>Honestly, I like the Divergent Matter very much. But at the end of the 
>day, I don't get it.

       Yeah, your brain must be mush,
you don't even know your own name,
you just keep trying different ones.





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


#364527

FromJimmie Wynne <jimmwyn@metermap.org>
Date2015-09-18 21:49 +0000
Message-ID<mti0sc$kej$1@speranza.aioe.org>
In reply to#364526
kefischer wrote:

> On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 20:41:18 +0000 (UTC), Jimmie Wynne
> <jimmwyn@metermap.org> wrote:
> 
>>kefischer wrote:
>>
>>>>If the gravity suddenly turned off, an extreme blue shift of any
>>>>radiation would propagate from the point where gravity ceased as the
>>>>the vacuum impedance returns to a more homogenous spatial state.
>>>>Would gravity waves just be detected as photons ?
>>> 
>>>         If you are going to post physics garbage,
>>> start a thread and title it properly.
>>
>>Honestly, I like the Divergent Matter very much. But at the end of the
>>day, I don't get it.
> 
>        Yeah, your brain must be mush,
> you don't even know your own name,
> you just keep trying different ones.

All right, show me the power of Divergent Matter. Two stones, one of 1.8 
Kg the other 3.6 Kg. Initial elevation 100 m. Predict the elevation of the 
falling stones 1.6 and 3.2 seconds respectively.

You may use Divergent Matter, GR or even cheat by using Newton. (the 
relativists are cheating as well, they never use GR to falling stones, but 
only Newton). (show the details in your work) (good luck)

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


#364530

FromJimmie Wynne <jimmwyn@metermap.org>
Date2015-09-18 22:01 +0000
Message-ID<mti1jd$lgh$1@speranza.aioe.org>
In reply to#364527
Jimmie Wynne wrote:

>>>Honestly, I like the Divergent Matter very much. But at the end of the
>>>day, I don't get it.
>> 
>>        Yeah, your brain must be mush,
>> you don't even know your own name, you just keep trying different ones.
> 
> All right, show me the power of Divergent Matter. Two stones, one of 1.8
> Kg the other 3.6 Kg. Initial elevation 100 m. Predict the elevation of
> the falling stones 1.6 and 3.2 seconds respectively.

I mean, the falling stones 1.6 and 3.2 seconds later. But this was 
implicitly clear, from the above context. You always take the time as 
LATER.

> You may use Divergent Matter, GR or even cheat by using Newton. (the
> relativists are cheating as well, they never use GR to falling stones,
> but only Newton). (show the details in your work) (good luck)

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


#364007

FromThomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de>
Date2015-09-13 21:48 +0200
Message-ID<d5m28sFtlbeU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#363979
Am 13.09.2015 15:52, schrieb fuller.david@hotmail.com:
> Along the axis of time those spheres are, what we call 'matter'. In
> respect to another axis, the sphere is like a tiny helical screw and
> those are, what we call radiation.
>
> So if a space ship was at a black hole trying to maintain its position in a gravitational acceleration of .866 v of c , the inside of the space ship would be hotter than the surface of the Sun from the space ship's counter acceleration to balance against the gravitation  of the black hole?
>
> A severe case of "the bends" would result as soon as acceleration was ceased.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decompression_sickness
>
> Yes, the passengers would have had their molecules Stratified like a centrifuge long before.

A black hole is a good example.

Such a structure (the black hole) is an example of 'curvature of spacetime'.

Now we could use the surface of the Earth as some kind of analogy and 
see, how spacetime behaves.

This is a little abstract, but not that difficult.

Lets start at New York (for example) and let us sail with a ship to the 
East (maybe to Hamburg).

Now the vertical line should be the 'axis of time' and this line is in a 
vertical position above the Central Park (and stays there).

If we sail to Hamburg, this line gets tilted in respect to the own 
vertical on the ship. Now we sail 90° to the East and what was formely 
horizontal is now vertical. (Actually the tangent to the surface in New 
York is parallel to the vertical somewhere 90° in the East).

90° in respect to the axis of time is called 'spacelike'.

This is an exchange of timelike to spacelike.

If matter is actually 'timelike stable patterns', the matter is gone in 
a distance 90° away.

This is a mutual relation, since the harbour 'sinks behind the (event-) 
horizon' for an observer on a moving ship, while the ship does similar 
for an observer in the harbour.

Sinking behind the event horizon may actually look dramatic and 
unpleasant, but the people on the ship think similar about you and your 
planet.


TH

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


#364010

Fromkefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com>
Date2015-09-13 16:05 -0400
Message-ID<bmlbvatf81fkcvv81etv4eodum4tg2pgbd@4ax.com>
In reply to#364007
On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 21:48:36 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:

>Am 13.09.2015 15:52, schrieb fuller.david@hotmail.com:
>> Along the axis of time those spheres are, what we call 'matter'. In
>> respect to another axis, the sphere is like a tiny helical screw and
>> those are, what we call radiation.
>>
>> So if a space ship was at a black hole trying to maintain its position in a gravitational acceleration of .866 v of c , the inside of the space ship would be hotter than the surface of the Sun from the space ship's counter acceleration to balance against the gravitation  of the black hole?
>>
>> A severe case of "the bends" would result as soon as acceleration was ceased.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decompression_sickness
>>
>> Yes, the passengers would have had their molecules Stratified like a centrifuge long before.
>
>A black hole is a good example.
>
>Such a structure (the black hole) is an example of 'curvature of spacetime'.
>
>Now we could use the surface of the Earth as some kind of analogy and 
>see, how spacetime behaves.
>
>This is a little abstract, but not that difficult.
>
>Lets start at New York (for example) and let us sail with a ship to the 
>East (maybe to Hamburg).
>
>Now the vertical line should be the 'axis of time' and this line is in a 
>vertical position above the Central Park (and stays there).
>
>If we sail to Hamburg, this line gets tilted in respect to the own 
>vertical on the ship. Now we sail 90° to the East and what was formely 
>horizontal is now vertical. (Actually the tangent to the surface in New 
>York is parallel to the vertical somewhere 90° in the East).
>
>90° in respect to the axis of time is called 'spacelike'.
>
>This is an exchange of timelike to spacelike.
>
>If matter is actually 'timelike stable patterns', the matter is gone in 
>a distance 90° away.
>
>This is a mutual relation, since the harbour 'sinks behind the (event-) 
>horizon' for an observer on a moving ship, while the ship does similar 
>for an observer in the harbour.
>
>Sinking behind the event horizon may actually look dramatic and 
>unpleasant, but the people on the ship think similar about you and your 
>planet.
>
>TH

        The captain of the Bismark said, "I don't sink so".



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


Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5  Next page →

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


csiph-web