The Spaghetti-fication of the Brains of the Naïve.
NoEinstein
Black Holes by claiming that a human being falling into one would
first be stretched and pulled apart by the supposed gravity
differential, head-to-toe. That would be consistent with Newton’s old
Law of Universal Gravitation, which I have disproved. The rationale
seems to be that there will be a greater calculated value for the
force of gravity on a person’s head (assuming the fall is head first)
than would be the calculated force of gravity on the feet. Naïve
mentalities have believed that a greater and increasing pull on the
head than on the feet would surely pull a body apart… But that cannot
happen—not even in theory!
Those who explain spaghetti-fication, as above, are weak-minded
physicists, never structural engineers. The latter know that two
vector forces in the SAME direction can never impart more than a
nominal tension in a falling body. For supposition, only, do this:
*Gravitationally, pull a falling person’s head with ten thousand
pounds of force. The pull force on the head will supposedly be
greater than the pull force on the feet. But wait! The ONLY
resistance causing a tension over the length of the person’s body
would be the INERTIA of the person’s lower body! And the latter
inertia never changes. But there’s a proviso: Realize that gravity is
a body‘s resistance to flowing ether, and that isn’t determined by the
changing distances to the centers of mass! Also, since the falling
person would be moving at practically the same velocity as the flowing
ether of gravity, there would be no discernable increase on the
dynamic forces on the person’s body. No tensile force will ever
exceed the inertia of the person, no matter how close to the Black
Hole that person falls! The amount of stress would be comparable to
doing chin-ups. There isn’t much body elongation, there—perhaps .5”.
Physicists regularly ignore the requirement that there be a RESISTANCE
before a force of any magnitude can be applied. A classic example—
which I’ve often explained, is a theorem that I’ve also disproved—the
“Work-Energy Theorem”. Such supposes that because work, by
definition, is a force acting through a distance to move an object in
the desired direction, then work should accrue exponentially (sic) for
falling or accelerating objects in space. However, as explained in
the previous paragraphs, the maximum force that can be put on a body
in free motion is the unchanging inertia of the body. That causes the
kinetic energy to accrue LINEARLY, because the force can’t change for
any stated acceleration. The screwed-up Work-Energy Theorem can only
apply to distances of motion in which the resisting force increases
proportionately, say, 15 units of distance corresponding to a 15-fold
increase in the force that is required. That may be close to correct
for some spring types or air cylinders, but never for accelerating
bodies in free space. There, the vast majority of the distance of
travel is from the COASTING component which is always accruing. ***
Since coasting requires no increase in the force to keep increasing
the distance, then work-energy can only be increasing linearly as
well.
Physicists loath to do calculations like this: Assume that a 1” x 1”
square steel rod x 36” long is falling small end first toward the
Earth. According to Newton, the gravitational differential for such a
near Earth object would be no more than .000 000 001. If the ‘g’
multiple of a massive star is one trillion times greater, the maximum
inertial drag on the steel rod would be 1,000 x ½ the mass (or the
Earth weight of the rod) which equals 4,500 pounds of tension due to
the INERTIA of the back half of the falling rod. In a steel rod of
the above dimension, the inertial tension would elongate the rod about
1/16”—not enough to cause a catastrophic progression of elongation.
The velocity necessary to cause a trillion fold increase in inertial
resistance would be one trillion times the velocity of the free-fall
of objects on Earth. If the event horizon was located one light year
away from the center of the massive star, it would require only two
trillionths of a year for the object to traverse such distance… or
about 3/100,000th of a second. The elongation of any mass, even soft
rubber, would always be of near zero amounts. Anyone claiming to be
learned who even discusses such absurdities as science facts, doesn’t
possess even the most rudimentary understanding of statics, dynamics,
and strengths of materials.
Respectfully submitted,
— NoEinstein — AKA John A. Armistead on Google’s Political Forum.
P. S.: Please note that Black Holes have ZERO gravity, because there
is no energy escaping outward to replenish the downward flowing ether
that is required for there to BE gravity. ‘Pre black holes’, on the
other hand, have major gravities. So, the above treatise would apply
to those.
Sam Wormley
> Some of those science ‘wow’ shows have dramatized the huge gravity of
> Black Holes by claiming that a human being falling into one would
> first be stretched and pulled apart by the supposed gravity
> differential, head-to-toe. That would be consistent with Newton’s old
> Law of Universal Gravitation, which I have disproved. The rationale
> seems to be that there will be a greater calculated value for the
> force of gravity on a person’s head (assuming the fall is head first)
> than would be the calculated force of gravity on the feet. Naïve
> mentalities have believed that a greater and increasing pull on the
> head than on the feet would surely pull a body apart… But that cannot
> happen—not even in theory!
There is even measurable differential gravitation on the ISS. Here,
enjoy some educational entertainment.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/blackhole/program.html
PD
The gravitational differential is responsible for oceanic tides. Known
for hundreds of years.
NoEinstein
> On 3/9/11 9:06 PM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
> > Some of those science wow shows have dramatized the huge gravity of
> > Black Holes by claiming that a human being falling into one would
> > first be stretched and pulled apart by the supposed gravity
> > differential, head-to-toe. That would be consistent with Newton s old
> > Law of Universal Gravitation, which I have disproved. The rationale
> > seems to be that there will be a greater calculated value for the
> > force of gravity on a person s head (assuming the fall is head first)
> > mentalities have believed that a greater and increasing pull on the
> > head than on the feet would surely pull a body apart But that cannot
> > happen not even in theory!
>
> There is even measurable differential gravitation on the ISS. Here,
> enjoy some educational entertainment.
> http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/blackhole/program.html
Dear Sam: Objects in orbit behave differently from objects free-
falling to their doom in super-massive pre Black Holes. As I've just
explained, the ether flow that IS gravity will have a velocity closely
matching the velocity of the object. A one-direction tension on one
end; and a lesser same-direction tension on the other end will NEVER
cause a pull-apart stress between the two ends! Much of my New
Science, including my clarification why there can never be...
spaghettification, has resulted from watching many of those lame-brain
Nova programs. Investigators will probably determine that Jews are
responsible for the absolute proliferation of misinformation about
science. Other than being above average musicians and artists, have
Jews ever done anything to justify their incestuous, 'secret society'
existence? — NoEinstein —
NoEinstein
Folks: Tides are determined by the shapes of the oceans and the
varying cross-sections of those. The supposed "pull" of the Moon's
gravity doesn't cause a consistent near-side bulge of sea level. I've
proved that gravity is a PUSH on the opposed sides of attracting
objects. The following link explains that in more detail. — NE —
There is no "pull" of gravity, only the PUSH of flowing ether!
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/a8c26d2eb535ab8/efdbea7b0272072f?hl=en&
Sam Wormley
> Folks: Tides are determined by the shapes of the oceans and the
> varying cross-sections of those. The supposed "pull" of the Moon's
> gravity doesn't cause a consistent near-side bulge of sea level. I've
> proved that gravity is a PUSH on the opposed sides of attracting
> objects. The following link explains that in more detail. — NE —
>
Oooo--Major point of ignorance on your part, John.
http://www.co-ops.nos.noaa.gov/restles1.html
NoEinstein
Sam: No cut and paste link not actually written by you will be read.
If you disagree with any of my New Science, explain why is your own
words. Your IQ is being evaluated by the readers, not the IQ of the
author of some shallow article you found. — NoEinstein —
NoEinstein
>
Folks: I was able to develop my New Science, in large measure,
because of my exceptional ability to visualize concepts, and even to
visualize concepts regarding invisible things like the mechanisms of
gravity and of light. I've realized for a long time that the ether
flow of our Solar system is a spiral shape. But the orbits of the
planets are closer to circular. The planets would have crashed into
the Sun after just a short period of time, if they had had spiraling
orbits. What that means for the "Pull" (sic) of gravity, is that the
ether that's pushing on the "back side" of the Earth to counter the
centrifugal force of orbit, is actually acting at, like, a five to ten
degree angle to the tangent of orbit, rather than axially toward the
center of the Sun.
The Earth has its own unique ether flow system with the Moon. Such
obeys the "right-hand-rule", as for most of the planets. The Earth-
Moon ether flow is like a "paddle swirl" seen by one canoeing on a
gently curving river. That swirl will move, as a whole, matching the
orbit of the Earth. So, the flow of the river (the solar spiral)
continues to press on the backside of the Earth-Moon spiral. What
this means for the tides is that the major ether flow toward the Earth
will be 85 to 90 degrees off axis of the bulge of the tides. That is
close to what is observed. Increased ether flow will depress the
oceans, causing the oceans to bulge further around. These are the
first insights of mine into the weather-like systems that are ether
flow in solar systems. — NoEinstein — AKA John A. Armistead
> There is no "pull" of gravity, only the PUSH of flowing ether!http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/a8c26...
Sam Wormley
> Objects in orbit behave differently from objects free-
> falling to their doom in super-massive pre Black Holes.
Explain your statement to me mathematically, John!
NoEinstein
Sam, how about you explaining why higher gravity, closer to the Earth
(or the converse) is counter to any part of my New Science. It's a
science fact that falling objects are experiencing zero 'g's. And
zero 'g's won't pull anyone apart, even when falling toward a supper
massive, pre-Black Hole. If you have any evidence to the contrary,
paraphrase your arguments for everyone to see. Math isn't needed to
refute arguments that have never even been made! — NoEinstein —
Sam Wormley
Try not to be so stoooped, John.
http://www.co-ops.nos.noaa.gov/restles1.html
NoEinstein
Sam: Your calling me stoooped is no more valid than your spelling!
And, I do NOT read links to the words of others. But 'nice try' to a
loser like you. — NE —
Sam Wormley
Hey no problem, John. Your losses are your own.
NoEinstein
Sam: If you are keeping score, few will care whether you win or
lose. But for your general information, your status quo game of
science has long been over! — NoEinstein —
Eric Gisse
[snip all]
The guy who can't even figure out a high school physics experiment is
waxing poetic about the aether and how great he is at visualizing
concepts. Nice.
Like I said, John. As soon as people stopped giving you attention
you'd move right on to posting more dumb shit in a new spot for fresh
attention. We already know you are an idiot so why do you have to
belabor the point 50 goddamn times a day?
Sam Wormley
> Sam: If you are keeping score, few will care whether you win or
> lose. But for your general information, your status quo game of
> science has long been over! — NoEinstein —
I don't keep any score, John. And it's good to know your perspective
on science.
NoEinstein
Eric: You are like a 78 rpm record... stuck in the groove. It is YOU
who have not explained nor linked-to any high school science
experiment confirming KE = 1/2 mv^2. Since such equation directly
violates the Law of the Conservation of Energy-Mass, you will never
succeed in your pitiful attempt to salvage the fraudulent "genius" of
Einstein—the quintessential stupid Jew. But one must admire you
determination to defend the errant. — NoEinstein —
NoEinstein
Sam: If you had my perspective on science, you wouldn't worship the
status quo which I have so easily disproved. Why are you that way? —
NoEinstein —
Eric Gisse
You must be so lonely. You are asking people to repeat themselves just
so you have someone to talk to.
Sam Wormley
I am the way I am, because I can read and learn and understand.
NoEinstein
>
Eric: Your hope is that the readers of my posts have such short
memories that they won't recall how many times you have failed to back
up your "high school" claims with facts. Most should realize that
your new posts (if any) have not been named and linked too. If you
have even one of those, I will gladly read it. But I will NOT read
any links to the "make science interesting" posts of high school
teachers or others. You have claimed KE = 1/2 mv^2 is accepted
science. State your proof, even your recollection of an experiment,
and I will easily grind that nonsense into dust! — NoEinstein —
NoEinstein
Sam: You can read... maybe. But learn and understand—never! — NE —
NoEinstein
>
Folks: My hunch is that Eric Gisse is pinned to the boob-tube
watching tall NUTS running back and forth and waving their arms in the
air. Those like Barack Obama, who place more importance on
recreational STUPIDITY than on stopping the economic downfall of the
USA, are a portion of the populace without the smarts to function well
in a free enterprise economy. The attention to basketball... is in
inverse proportion to the IQ of the spectators! — NoEinstein —
NoEinstein
>
Folks: There can be little spaghettification of the brains of those
like Eric Gisse, who has none! — NE —
NoEinstein
>
Those interested in understanding how true science is figured out and
confirmed should carefully read this original post. Spaghettification
never happens except to the brains of the gullible. Reasonable
thinking readers have nothing to fear! — NoEinstein —> Folks: There can be littlespaghettificationof thebrainsof those
NoEinstein
>
Folks: The NOVA type media loves to have "experts" talking about the
gravity of Black Holes (sic) holding galaxies together. And
explaining how the Big Bang (sic) sent matter outward so fast that the
Universe will get colder and colder until it dies (sic). Those of you
who MIGHT have been impressed by the weird death by spaghettification
should be heartened to know that such a thing doesn't happen in
nature. And there is a limit to the amount of star "ingestion" a
super large star can have, before the gravity shuts off all together.
It's even likely that the radiant energy in the inner portions of
galaxies is so high that life never can get started around any of
those central stars. And it's likely that galaxies can... 'collide'
without destroying all of the planetary systems around all of those
stars. Learn about my New Science folks! The simple truth is that
the Universe is a wonderful place! — NoEinstein —
Sam Wormley
> Learn about my New Science folks!
Buzz off troll!
>
>
> +------------+ +---------------------------------------------+
> | PLEASE | | BEST TO IGNORE ATTENTION SEEKING TROLLS |
> | DO NOT | | LIKE JOHN ARMISTEAD -- THEY DRY UP AND BLOW |
> | FEED | | AWAY WITHOUT FEEDBACK |
> | DA | | |
> | TROLLS | | http://www.angelfire.com/space/usenet/ |
> +------------+ +---------------------------------------------+
> | | | | | |
> | | | | | |
> | | | | | |
> | | | | | |
> | | | | | |
> `\ '/ / ' / `\ '/ / ' / `\ '/ / ' /
GO-HERE .NL
Black holes are like the governments of the universe. Without them the
planets would all come crashing together in one anarchistic orgy of
death. People wouldn't be able to feed themselves without a
government.
:-)
NoEinstein
>
Sam: I am a stay-in-one-place guy. Trolls move around trying to
"catch" any fish that will bite. Are you... frightened by the
prospect of spaghettification? If so, you are brainless in that realm
of logic, too! — NE —
NoEinstein
>
If you say so, GO-HERE.NL. The star distribution data for the center
of Andromeda has a starless zone around the center from when the
gravity of the pre Black Hole shut off. I had reasoned that would be
the case just one week before I found the proof in an astronomy book
in my local library. People like Stephen Hawking should seek it out.
That data disproves every notion he has ever had about Black Holes—
which have ZERO gravity! — NE —