Scientists Admit, Embarrassingly, We Don’t Know How Strong The Force Of Gravity Is

https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/scientists-admit-embarrassingly-we-dont-know-how-strong-the-force-of-gravity-is-bdabdcc6b2f7
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

What causes the pressure difference? What is the opposite and equal of push? 

What is your ether?

What is your “quantum” reference terminolog. Wouldn’t  you not consider the Wave to be a Spiral in a 3D universe but it implies 2D and the math but CONfirms it? 

Meaning is in the mind of the beholder.

How does a spinning Top defy “push” ?

What is the “push” or where does the pressure differiential come from to stop this ‘push’ we call Enertia? 

CONfusicious says, beware pseudo theorists. They are everywhere.

Hi Norman,

> On 17 Jul 2019, at 18:59, Norman Wootan [email protected] [EVGRAY] <[email protected]> wrote:
> https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/scientists-admit-embarrassingly-we-dont-know-how-strong-the-force-of-gravity-is-bdabdcc6b2f7 <https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/scientists-admit-embarrassingly-we-dont-know-how-strong-the-force-of-gravity-is-bdabdcc6b2f7>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android <https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_AndroidEmailSig__AndroidUsers&af_wl=ym&af_sub1=Internal&af_sub2=Global_YGrowth&af_sub3=EmailSignature>
Thanks for the heads up:

1) There is not a single attracting force in the universe. How should attraction come about? What we perceive as attraction is actually always a push due to pressure differences.
2) A fluctuating constant G simple means fluctuating ambient ether pressure while we travel through the galaxy. That's to be expected! 
3) "... which governs quantum interactions, has a value of 1.05457180 × 10^-34 J⋅s" Why is nobody (not everybody) stumbling over this non-sense! Joules * seconds!? Are you serious? What the hack should that be? The constant h simply gives the energy of a single wave ([h] = J). If you multiply this with frequency (N oscillations per seconds) you get the wattage of the beam. It's P = hf, not E = hf. Man! :-(

I wonder when these university guys will start to draw (more meaningful) conclusions ...  

Best wishes,

 Andreas

Hi Andreas,

1) Definitely! We just have to dismiss the relativity theories of Einstein. Einstein said that if there is just one error in one of his relativity theories they all fail. Then why do we still use them?! The old as well as modern 'aether' theories give much better explanations.
2) I wonder if the signal speed of vacuum c fluctuates at the same rate. That speed is dictated by the permittivity and permeability of vacuum. Even that vacuum has those physical properties should make a bell ring that vacuum isn't empty space. T.J.J. See demonstrated the forces acting when accelerating or decelerating the speed of light through different media like glass and water or mercury and glass. The theory also fit for waves traveling through different gases (balloons in air) or through liquids like water. The Rhythmodynamics theory is just a modern theory using the technology of today for the experiments and simulations.

 I'm preparing a W.B. Smith experiment. That's the Smith coil: http://www.treurniet.ca/Smith/SmithCoil.htm http://www.treurniet.ca/Smith/SmithCoil.htm. The Smith coil (aka caduceus coil or tensor coil) is supposed to generate electromagnetic 'smoke rings' interlocking the tempic electric and magnetic fields phase locked to form torus 'particles.' The particles act instantly as they carry their own time with them. They're said to be controllable by nerve signals or the mind. Smith when trying to communicate with the ETs by using the coil observed the fluctuations between our time frame and the time frame of the ETs. The time frames didn't follow the same rate which made it hard to tune in.


"I wonder when these university guys will start to draw (more meaningful) conclusions ... "
That will only happen when they get funding for true science. Just look at Ivor Catt's struggle with the Royal Society. The professors or researchers make a living from selling books that will have to be rewritten. They just follow the money. Alternative researchers funding their own projects can do almost as they like. Just look at the Flat Earthers doing fake science even though accidentally ending up disproving their own flat earth theory: https://wiki2.org/en/Behind_the_Curve https://wiki2.org/en/Behind_the_Curve.

Some I. Catt resources: http://www.forrestbishop.mysite.com/ http://www.forrestbishop.mysite.com/.

Regards
Ole
 

---In [email protected], <freeen2012@...> wrote :

 Hi Norman, 
 On 17 Jul 2019, at 18:59, Norman Wootan nwootan@... mailto:nwootan@... [EVGRAY] <[email protected] mailto:[email protected]> wrote:
 
 https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/scientists-admit-embarrassingly-we-dont-know-how-strong-the-force-of-gravity-is-bdabdcc6b2f7 https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/scientists-admit-embarrassingly-we-dont-know-how-strong-the-force-of-gravity-is-bdabdcc6b2f7
 Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_AndroidEmailSig__AndroidUsers&af_wl=ym&af_sub1=Internal&af_sub2=Global_YGrowth&af_sub3=EmailSignature




 

Thanks for the heads up:
 

 1) There is not a single attracting force in the universe. How should attraction come about? What we perceive as attraction is actually always a push due to pressure differences.
 2) A fluctuating constant G simple means fluctuating ambient ether pressure while we travel through the galaxy. That's to be expected! 
 3) "... which governs quantum interactions, has a value of 1.05457180 × 10^-34 J⋅s" Why is nobody (not everybody) stumbling over this non-sense! Joules * seconds!? Are you serious? What the hack should that be? The constant h simply gives the energy of a single wave ([h] = J). If you multiply this with frequency (N oscillations per seconds) you get the wattage of the beam. It's P = hf, not E = hf. Man! :-(
 

 I wonder when these university guys will start to draw (more meaningful) conclusions ...  
 

 Best wishes,

 

  Andreas