Curvature isn't energy
BURT
motion. Mass becomes acceleration by Gamma. Mass accelerates into
kinetic energy. The speed is of the space flow.
Mitch Raemsch
NoEinstein
Dear Mitch: If an object being acted upon by gravity is free to move,
then, such object will be set into motion. In lieu of there being a
very great differential angular velocity between the smaller object
and the larger one, or there being more than one nearby massive
object, the smaller object will freefall according to Newton’s Law of
“Universal” Gravitation. Mass does NOT “become” acceleration!
Falling objects are accelerated, but there is zero conversion of the
mass in the process! Falling objects manifest increasing kinetic
energy, adding one weight multiple per second of fall. But all
objects “poised” to fall already have a KE equal to their own weight!
My formula for kinetic energy shows such: KE = a/g (m) + v/32.174
(m). Lastly, the object’s speed is: the distance of fall per second.
For all near Earth falling objects, the ’speed’, or velocity, varies
LINEARLY. Mitch, you should forget about relativity and… “gamma”.
Both are concepts conclusively disproved by yours truly. — NoEinstein
—
BURT
Gamma is the math of the universe.
Mitch Raemsch
extremesou...@yahoo.com
if a partical is ionized it's subjet to move withing the laws
magnetical contrants so a partical can be acclerated by a magnetical
dragging effect to 99.9 percent the speed of C
black hole can twist the field lines together like a handful of twist
ties, they store energy similar to that of a twisted spring,
producing corkscrew-shaped magnetic fields inside the plasma jets on
each end of the accretion disk excess jets of ionized gas or plasma
moving at up to 99.9 percent of the speed of light are released.so its
no so much the gravity but the enegy stored in the twisted manetic
field lines accelerating the ionized gas to such speeds
NoEinstein
>
> - Show quoted text -
Dear Rusty: The velocity limiter of charged particles is: the ETHER
that fills even vacuum tubes. Ether is polar and will clump like
magnets to charged particles. The faster the particle, the bigger the
clump of ether dragging it. The latter is like trying to push a
rubber peg into a tight hole: The harder you push, the more resistance
you get.
There is no such things as a gravity "warping" of space-time. When I
discovered that M-M lacked a CONTROL, that shot down the "rubber
rulers" explanation of Lorentz; which shot down Einstein's premise of
relativity and of space-time varying near massive objects. I have
also found proof that black holes have ZERO gravity. The gravity
shuts off when "nothing can escape". That's why there could never
have been a Big Bang. But I still appreciate that you replied,
Rusty. — NoEinstein —
Where Angels Fear to Fall
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/1e3e426fff6a5894/898737b3de57d9e6?hl=en&lnk=st&q=Where+Angels+Fear+to+Fall#898737b3de57d9e6
Cleaning Away Einstein’s Mishmash
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/5d847a9cb50de7f0/739aef0aee462d26?hl=en&lnk=st&q=#739aef0aee462d26
Dropping Einstein Like a Stone
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/989e16c59967db2b?hl=en#
Replicating NoEinstein’s Invalidation of M-M
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/t/ac6fcd9b4e8112ed?hl=en
extremesou...@yahoo.com
>
> Cleaning Away Einstein’s Mishmashhttp://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/5d847...
>
> Dropping Einstein Like a Stonehttp://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/989e1...
>
> Replicating NoEinstein’s Invalidation of M-Mhttp://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/t/ac6fcd9b4e8112ed?hl=en- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
all im saying is that magnetic can move particles with a net charge
without interaction of gravity .I not one to buy into gravitational
warping I believe through research its more of displacement of space
time in relation to mass has a direct effect on gravity what if we
could get a dense enough object like a burnt out star that collided
with another and broke apart with a more of a cone shape instead of a
sphere it would still have a massive gravity field but I believe it
would have gravations quite different than of what a would be
observed around a sphere shape.
BURT
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> all im saying is that magnetic can move particles with a net charge
> without interaction of gravity .I not one to buy into gravitational
> warping I believe through research its more of displacement of space
> time in relation to mass has a direct effect on gravity what if we
> could get a dense enough object like a burnt out star that collided
> with another and broke apart with a more of a cone shape instead of a
> sphere it would still have a massive gravity field but I believe it
> would have gravations quite different than of what a would be
>
> - Show quoted text -
Gravity is spherically symmetric.
Mitch Raemsch
NoEinstein
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> all im saying is that magnetic can move particles with a net charge
> without interaction of gravity .I not one to buy into gravitational
> warping I believe through research its more of displacement of space
> time in relation to mass has a direct effect on gravity what if we
> could get a dense enough object like a burnt out star that collided
> with another and broke apart with a more of a cone shape instead of a
> sphere it would still have a massive gravity field but I believe it
> would have gravations quite different than of what a would be
>
> - Show quoted text -
Dear Rusty: The force which draws a pith ball to a rubber comb which
has been rubbed, is flowing ether. A deficiency of internal ether
within the comb occurs when the comb was rubbed. My "varying ether
flow and density" explanation is this: An ether deficiency, whether in
a heavy celestial object, or a comb, is a "low pressure" area. The
falling ether, that is gravity, passes the comb and flows toward the
comb, somewhat, until its static charge is neutralized. The "shape"
of the dense object is only partly responsible for the gravity
forces. There can be preferred passages for ether flow within the
mass. The "Big Spot" on Jupiter stays in that location because the
materials below form a preferred path for the gravitational ether
flowing down. Sunspots are magnetic storms where the materials being
thrown out are in conflict with the ether constantly flowing down. In
both cases, gravitational ether is simply flowing down to replace
energy being lost from radiant energy outward. — NoEinstein —
NoEinstein
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > all im saying is that magnetic can move particles with a net charge
> > without interaction of gravity .I not one to buy into gravitational
> > warping I believe through research its more of displacement of space
> > time in relation to mass has a direct effect on gravity what if we
> > could get a dense enough object like a burnt out star that collided
> > with another and broke apart with a more of a cone shape instead of a
> > sphere it would still have a massive gravity field but I believe it
> > would have gravations quite different than of what a would be
> > observed around a sphere shape.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Gravity is spherically symmetric.
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Dear Mitch: "There you go again!" But wrong, again. — NoEinstein —
BURT
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > all im saying is that magnetic can move particles with a net charge
> > > without interaction of gravity .I not one to buy into gravitational
> > > warping I believe through research its more of displacement of space
> > > time in relation to mass has a direct effect on gravity what if we
> > > could get a dense enough object like a burnt out star that collided
> > > with another and broke apart with a more of a cone shape instead of a
> > > sphere it would still have a massive gravity field but I believe it
> > > would have gravations quite different than of what a would be
> > > observed around a sphere shape.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Gravity is spherically symmetric.
>
> > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Gravity is round geometry.
Mitch Raemsch
NoEinstein
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > all im saying is that magnetic can move particles with a net charge
> > > > without interaction of gravity .I not one to buy into gravitational
> > > > warping I believe through research its more of displacement of space
> > > > time in relation to mass has a direct effect on gravity what if we
> > > > could get a dense enough object like a burnt out star that collided
> > > > with another and broke apart with a more of a cone shape instead of a
> > > > sphere it would still have a massive gravity field but I believe it
> > > > would have gravations quite different than of what a would be
> > > > observed around a sphere shape.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > Gravity is spherically symmetric.
>
> > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Dear Mitch: "There you go again!" But wrong, again. — NoEinstein —- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Gravity is round geometry.
>
> Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Dear Mitch: In your dreams, perhaps. Gravity has all of the
variations of storm systems on Earth. Ether flows from highs to
lows. —— NoEinstein ——
BURT
>
> > > > > all im saying is that magnetic can move particles with a net charge
> > > > > without interaction of gravity .I not one to buy into gravitational
> > > > > warping I believe through research its more of displacement of space
> > > > > time in relation to mass has a direct effect on gravity what if we
> > > > > could get a dense enough object like a burnt out star that collided
> > > > > with another and broke apart with a more of a cone shape instead of a
> > > > > sphere it would still have a massive gravity field but I believe it
> > > > > would have gravations quite different than of what a would be
> > > > > observed around a sphere shape.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > Gravity is spherically symmetric.
>
> > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > Dear Mitch: "There you go again!" But wrong, again. — NoEinstein —- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Gravity is round geometry.
>
> > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Dear Mitch: In your dreams, perhaps. Gravity has all of the
> variations of storm systems on Earth. Ether flows from highs to
>
> - Show quoted text -
I think it is a Perfect Sphere.
Mitch Raemsch
NoEinstein
Dear Mitch: Then, continue to be contented in your own little world.
One curious question: For someone with a pet idea about everything,
what is your motive for making so many posts? Are you trying to
change people's minds? Or are you just wishing that the world know
that you see things uniquely? If the reason is the latter, the
majority of readers on sci.physics have already gotten your message
loud and clear. — NoEinstein —
BURT
>
> - Show quoted text -
You are in denial. There was an Einstein.
Mitch Raemsch
NoEinstein
Dear Mitch: Yes. And he was a MORON. — NoEinstein —
extremesou...@yahoo.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
Gravity is spherically symmetric
I think that’s not true, but since most celestial bodies are symmetric
due to the root cause of the Coriolis force or fictitious force (or
pseudo force), in which the motion of an object is explained by the
real impressed forces, together with inertia. In a rotating frame, the
Coriolis force, which depends on the velocity of the moving object,
and centrifugal force, which does not depend on the velocity of the
moving object, this is why all celestyial bodies are symmetric but if
you could make a large enough body with enough desity and
gravitational field it’s gravations would not be spherically
symmetric.
BURT
>
> - Show quoted text -
space geometry is round horizontally and straight vertically
Mitch Raemsch
NoEinstein
Dear Mitch: There is no such thing as space being... "straight". —
NoEinstein —
NoEinstein
>
> - Show quoted text -
Dear Rusty: Yes... no... yes... no... YES! :-) — NoEinstein —
BURT
In the direction of gravity there is.
Straight geometry.
Mitch Raemsch