Ether

[John-Erik Persson]

Shafiq Khan

Yes, you are right. The ether exists, and is needed to explain gravity. However, no attraction exists between two bodies. Instead gravity EMERGES inside matter due to the ether. Abolishing the ether is the reason for the fact that we have not explained gravity.

John-Erik

[Jerry Harvey]

How could ether particles that travel almost c into every direction cause the "force" of gravity though?  How could it cause the attraction of objects?  

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "npa-relativity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to npa-relativit...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/npa-relativity/CAECQJUCZ-HyF1JPEeJHtNObcABH4d0Lg%2B5b2EztjcKfvyN1MOA%40mail.gmail.com.

[John-Erik Persson]

Jerry

How could it cause the attraction of objects?  

I said that there is no attraction between bodies. The ether is everywhere and can deliver momentum to matter. So. gravity can emerge inside matter, when ether particles are absorbed, and ether particles deliver momentum to matter. So, gravity does not move.

Ether particles move with the speed c in relation to the ether.

John-Erik

[Jerry Harvey]

Okay. How does the ether cause the "illusion" of attraction?  Particles that travel into everything direction couldn't seem to accomplish that.

[matterdoc]

Please see  http://vixra.org/pdf/1206.0056v2.pdf

Nainan     www.matterdoc.info

[Jerry Harvey]

Hi John-Erik. 

Thanks for the links.  I can't find there any explanation of how gravity actually occurs though.  How would ether particles that travel into every direction, and "the reversible capturing and

escaping", and absorption and such, cause the effect of gravity? Could you please explain the mechanics of how this process works?  

On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 7:16 PM John-Erik Persson <joer...@gmail.com> wrote:

Jerry

I told you how gravity is caused one hour ago.

More details follow in attachments.

John-Erik

[John-Erik Persson]

Jerry

I repeat my two articles explaining why SRT is wrong, since Michelson was wrong in 1887 in conflict with the wave model, and the Lorentz transform is in error, since Einstein in 1905 invented another explanation to the same error.

The  behavior of atomic clocks is explained in Instability in atomic clocks.

John-Erik