Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #384929 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-06-03 11:09 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-06-24 10:13 -0700 |
| Articles | 8 on this page of 108 — 15 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Time and Gravity Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 11:09 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-03 15:38 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 09:35 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-05 13:20 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-04 06:34 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-04 09:36 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-05 05:03 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 15:35 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-07 15:52 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 11:26 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-08 10:42 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-06-08 01:55 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-08 22:24 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-06-08 23:24 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-10 01:24 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-12 10:19 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 08:17 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-08 22:39 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 15:52 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-09 05:13 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 11:39 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-10 07:23 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-06-10 13:14 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-11 06:35 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-17 11:09 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-18 06:46 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-06-19 12:02 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-19 14:17 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-20 05:59 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-20 15:45 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-23 22:39 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 16:06 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-24 07:09 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-24 07:49 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-06-24 09:52 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-24 17:31 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-24 13:17 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity A Nony Mouse <abc@cef.ghi> - 2016-06-24 12:57 -0600
Re: Time and Gravity alsor@interia.pl - 2016-06-24 12:08 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-25 04:35 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-24 20:12 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-24 20:31 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-06-24 23:48 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-25 08:13 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-25 09:04 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-25 13:33 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-26 03:34 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-27 15:33 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-27 23:58 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-28 08:26 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-07-11 06:30 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-07-13 09:50 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-13 07:40 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-07-14 07:14 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-19 05:54 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-19 06:04 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-19 07:03 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-25 14:00 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity "Dr. Bob John" <drbobjohn@hotmail.org> - 2016-06-25 18:31 +0000
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-25 05:02 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-25 13:32 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-07-12 06:30 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-12 08:27 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-13 09:07 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-24 07:23 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-20 14:14 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-26 03:24 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-26 15:59 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-27 04:25 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-27 14:27 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-28 00:43 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-28 08:43 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-28 22:10 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-28 16:22 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-29 08:06 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-06-29 05:47 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-29 19:18 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-06-29 10:28 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-07-08 09:36 +0200
Silliness about "growing earth" Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-07-08 10:45 -0500
Re: Silliness about "growing earth" Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-07-09 07:10 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Alejandro Bellucci <alejb@yahoo.info> - 2016-07-08 17:49 +0000
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-29 08:08 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-29 18:46 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-29 12:17 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-29 19:45 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-29 13:02 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-30 07:41 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-30 08:14 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-07-01 05:12 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-01 07:46 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-07-01 22:16 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-01 15:54 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-07-02 07:25 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-07-06 04:18 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 23:28 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-07-06 23:10 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-09 10:23 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-09 10:36 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-06-09 13:18 -0500
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-09 11:25 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-06-10 07:05 +0200
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-05 13:41 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2016-06-06 08:54 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-06 09:17 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-06 09:37 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-06 11:11 -0700
Re: Time and Gravity Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> - 2016-06-24 10:13 -0700
Page 6 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6]
| From | "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-09 11:25 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a49c958f-85b6-4b4c-a03d-69c1bb81d8e4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #385530 |
On Thursday, June 9, 2016 at 1:18:43 PM UTC-5, tjrob137 wrote: > On 6/8/16 6/8/16 10:13 PM, Thomas Heger wrote: > > That is: Globally falling sea-levels at a rate of about 4m per millennium. > > This rate is changing and is actually accelerating. But currently we seem to > > have this rate. > > It is simply derived from the Lake Trajan near Rome. > > You are intellectually dishonest. It OUGHT to be obvious that a GLOBAL > conclusion cannot be derived from a SINGLE lake. When you only read articles > that say what you want to believe, that is not honest, and the result is USELESS. > > Looking at global data, it's clear that global sea levels are rising slowly, and > your "4m/millennium fall" is CLEARLY WRONG. > > Of course it is well known that Europe as a whole is slowly rising (post-glacial > rebound), faster than sea level, and this accounts for Roman and ancient Greek > harbors being inland today. This is much more widespread than just one lake > (though not universal -- e.g. Venice). > > > > [... further nonsense based on the above errors and dishonesty] > > > Tom Roberts ((4 * pi * (10^(-7))) / (c * ((pi / 10)^2))) / (c^2) = 4.72550264e-31 http://vixra.org/pdf/1310.0191vC.pdf Radiation density = 4.63e-31 kg/m^3
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-10 07:05 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <drv058F9st2U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #385530 |
Am 09.06.2016 20:18, schrieb Tom Roberts: > On 6/8/16 6/8/16 10:13 PM, Thomas Heger wrote: >> That is: Globally falling sea-levels at a rate of about 4m per >> millennium. >> This rate is changing and is actually accelerating. But currently we >> seem to >> have this rate. >> It is simply derived from the Lake Trajan near Rome. > > You are intellectually dishonest. It OUGHT to be obvious that a GLOBAL > conclusion cannot be derived from a SINGLE lake. When you only read > articles that say what you want to believe, that is not honest, and the > result is USELESS. > > Looking at global data, it's clear that global sea levels are rising > slowly, and your "4m/millennium fall" is CLEARLY WRONG. > > Of course it is well known that Europe as a whole is slowly rising > (post-glacial rebound), faster than sea level, and this accounts for > Roman and ancient Greek harbors being inland today. This is much more > widespread than just one lake (though not universal -- e.g. Venice). > > Actually I came to the idea from other observations. It have been mainly the features of the Atacama desert in Chile and adjacent regions in Peru. The former harbour of ancient Rome was used as measure, since the date of its building and its relation to the water of the Mediterranean Sea is exactly known. So the relation of the land and the water has changed in the past two millennia. Since 'hight' is also 'relative', we had to discuss the question, what measure had changed in the past. You claim, that Italy has risen 8m in the last 2000 years, because of "post-glacial rebound". (->plate tectonics) In the other corner we have my assumption: sea-levels fall over long periods of time.(->growing Earth) To make post-glacial rebound at least somehow plausible, we would need at least some sort of ice age in Italy. But to the best of my knowledge, the ice stopped somewhere much further in the north. It is also not assumed, that countries lift for no obvious reasons, since the Earth is mainly covered with rock, from which we know, it has a tendency to drop. My assumption is based on the idea of a spreading surface of the planet, which would create rifts and cracks, into which the water flows. This would make sea-levels drop. And do we find rifts and cracks at the bottom of the ocean? Actually we do, and there are many and some are quite deep (like Mariana trench). Since the process is assumed to have existed also in prehistoric time and very long ago, we would expect such cracks from earlier in much higher places. And, sure, such cracks are all over the place (now called 'canyons'). And do we find former sea-floor in high places, too? Sure, it's not that difficult, but you can see the Atacama desert as former sea-floor. E.g. you can identify former shores and rounded hills, that once might have been islands. We also find petrified Guano (Chile saltpeter) at these hills. Then we find sand and pebbles and a lot of other things, we would expect at the bottom of the sea. What is't there is water. The ocean is actually much lower now (more than 1000m) and the place is the driest desert on Earth. So, how did that happen? Well, plate tectonics assumes, that at the coast of Chile is a so called 'subduction zone', where the floor of the Pacific is vanishing under South America. But the age of the sea-floor does not fit to this assumption. It also moves into the opposite direction. This is possible to see at the Hawaii islands chain. The youngest island is the most eastern island, hence that plate moves westwards. Growing earth has a different explanation: growing Earth. Since if the Earth would grow, then there is more surface and this surface gets covered with cracks. This would allow the water to flow to lower location and that would make the surface of the ocean drop in relation to the land. This process would leave former ocean-bottom behind, where former oceans have vanished. So we find shells on mountains or sand in high places (like e.g. Sahara or Goby desert). Also former reefs fall dry and are now islands (like Atolls). So, after all, I think GE is much more convincing than Plate tectonics. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-05 13:41 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fbdf924d-d8e1-490c-8ef3-41f23f398b91@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #385026 |
Thomas Heger wrote: This was needed to prove a certain idea I had, called 'structured spacetime': https://docs.google.com/present/view?id=dd8jz2tx_3gfzvqgd6 Spacetime is assumed to be real and have internal structure, what we call matter. This kind of system could be created, if pointlike 'elements' of spacetime would behave similar to complex numbers, but in volume. http://oi68.tinypic.com/xfn9rt.jpg ((5^3) * (10^(-8))) / ((4 * pi) * (10^(-7))) = 0.99471839432 1 / ((5^3) * (10^(-8))) = 800000 (It's actually little tricky. But you could read my 'book', which has a lot of illustrations.) T H
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-06 08:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1a5ab053-2b90-4898-a273-9b1a94036457@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #385026 |
On Saturday, June 4, 2016 at 5:03:15 PM UTC-10, Thomas Heger wrote: This could be estimated by the location of the former > harbour of ancient Rome. Today it's Lake Tranjan near airport Fiomicino > and 8m above sea-level I was at Fiomicino in 1999, before I realized that time is defined by gravity: 1 second = 4 pi aVmk / heG where a is Bohr Radius, V is proton volume, m is proton mass, k is Couloomb;s Constant, h is Planck's Constant, e proton charge, G Newton's Universal Gravitational Constant. 1 second is defined by gravity, which is the basis of all electromagnetic and nuclear activities.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-06 09:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3010a72d-72cb-447b-a294-c52b528d67f2@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #385115 |
Alan Folmsbee wrote: 1 second is defined by gravity, which is the basis of all electromagnetic and nuclear activities. (8 * (376.1777735^4)) / (160.2 gHz) = 1 seconds 160.2 gigahertz * gravitational constant = 10.6918762 160.2 gHz * (G / 10) = 1.06918762
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-06 09:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <cb7baf47-1cf4-4b48-89f1-4207c635d0bb@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #385124 |
Alan Folmsbee wrote: 1 second is defined by gravity, which is the basis of all electromagnetic and nuclear activities. (8 * (376.1777735^4)) / (160.2 gHz) = 1 seconds ((376.1777735^4) * octave ) / (160.2 gHz) = 1 seconds 160.2 gigahertz * gravitational constant = 10.6918762 160.2 gHz * (G / 10) = 1.06918762
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-06 11:11 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c6de641d-4271-4850-9f0d-015f7042d1a4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #385115 |
Alan Folmsbee wrote: 1 second is defined by gravity, which is the basis of all electromagnetic and nuclear activities (1 / (((4 * pi * (10^(-7))) / (376.730313^2)) * 0.5^0.5)) / (160.2 gHz) = 0.997019735 http://i57.tinypic.com/294ksba.jpg
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-24 10:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1a979722-2a30-40d6-b420-2c56400bca4b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #384929 |
dfdf
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web