Re: Gravity vs. Universal Acceleration
« Reply #120 on: December 28, 2013, 10:44:42 PM »
Hi all,

my first contribution here.  I have spent some time in recent weeks reviewing the discussion put forward by Rowbotham in his book and to date I have not found any flaws.  I should add that I don't fully understand the vertical gun experiments yet.  I feel honour bound to inform readers of this contribution that I have been fully exposed to the traditional education system and hold a science degree with a physics major, an engineering degree with a mining major and an MBA.  I am a consulting mining engineer and company director.

If I accept Rowbothams view that the earth is stationary i.e. not accelerating ad infinitum, then one explanation of gravity which I find compelling is that it is in fact an electromagnetic effect.  One piece of supporting evidence for this is that microgravity has been demonstrated in an intense magnetic field.  I recently watched a video demonstration of this effect which starred a nylon nut, a spider and an ant.  If I can find the link again I will post it.

Until my reading of Rowbotham's book, I was being drawn to the models provided by the adherents of the "electric universe" model.  Applying concepts about the nature of electromagnetics to the flat earth model may prove instructive.

I am delighted to see the return of FE thinking.  I smile each time I look at Port Philip Bay in Victoria Australia.

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 5607
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: Gravity vs. Universal Acceleration
« Reply #121 on: December 30, 2013, 11:34:04 PM »
https://directory.eoportal.org/web/eoportal/satellite-missions/g/goce

This link describes many technical elements of the GOCE craft including the challenges anticipated in getting accurate readings. It never mentions magnetic fields as an issue. Based on this it is safe to assume that magnetic fields were not a significant concern.
You don't get races of anything ... accept people.

*

Offline Tintagel

  • *
  • Posts: 531
  • Full of Tinier Tintagels
    • View Profile
Re: Gravity vs. Universal Acceleration
« Reply #122 on: January 02, 2014, 04:40:51 AM »
Hi all,

my first contribution here.  I have spent some time in recent weeks reviewing the discussion put forward by Rowbotham in his book and to date I have not found any flaws.  I should add that I don't fully understand the vertical gun experiments yet.  I feel honour bound to inform readers of this contribution that I have been fully exposed to the traditional education system and hold a science degree with a physics major, an engineering degree with a mining major and an MBA.  I am a consulting mining engineer and company director.

If I accept Rowbothams view that the earth is stationary i.e. not accelerating ad infinitum, then one explanation of gravity which I find compelling is that it is in fact an electromagnetic effect.  One piece of supporting evidence for this is that microgravity has been demonstrated in an intense magnetic field.  I recently watched a video demonstration of this effect which starred a nylon nut, a spider and an ant.  If I can find the link again I will post it.

Until my reading of Rowbotham's book, I was being drawn to the models provided by the adherents of the "electric universe" model.  Applying concepts about the nature of electromagnetics to the flat earth model may prove instructive.

I am delighted to see the return of FE thinking.  I smile each time I look at Port Philip Bay in Victoria Australia.

Welcome to the FES forums.  :)  I'd like to see the video in question.  Stationary earth with gravity models exist, but I believe most of the folks who hold this theory also subscribe to the notion that the earth in an infinite plane, since the direction of "gravity" is always down and not toward the centre of the disc. 

I find the infinite plane model interesting and don't completely discount it, as it solves some problems that the disc model presents.  However, in order for aetheric lensing / electromagnetic acceleration to bend light sufficiently to create the southern sky, in my opinion, a disc is necessary, so I tend to lean toward it, with a universal accelerator accounting for gravitational effects.

Re: Gravity vs. Universal Acceleration
« Reply #123 on: January 03, 2014, 01:28:54 PM »
Ummm...  No.  The gravitational influences of the sun and moon (tidal forces) can and do affect the actual value of g (the local gravitational field).  With a scale sensitive enough, you can actually measure the changes of g during the course of a day.

The concern isn't about rapid fluctuations, it's about how the local environment can affect readings.  The magnetic field of the earth, atmospheric pressure and buoyancy, tidal forces from the sun and moon are not rapid fluctuations, but can all have some tiny effect on the weight of the reference mass.  The real question is which of those influences are significant enough to affect the actual reading?

According to Wikipedia the daily gravitational fluctuation caused by the Sun and the Moon is only 0.000002 g0.  I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the scale used in the experiment is not capable of detecting this magnitude of gravitational shift.

Also, it is ABSOLUTELY about rapid fluctuations because the scale is tared.  When you tare the empty scale, it compensates for all of the magnetic fields and atmospheric pressure and tidal forces, etc...  So, these forces would have to change, between the time that the scale is tared and the time that the gnome's weight is calculated to have an effect of the gnome's reading.  Here is an example to illustrate:  The scale is tared with a 10g weight on it, so the scale resets itself to 0.  You place the gnome on the scale next to the 10g weight and take a reading.  Does the scale show the weight of the gnome or the weight of the gnome plus 10g?  It shows only the weight of the gnome.  The weight would have to be removed or more weight added BEFORE the reading was taken for it to be affected.  Tidal forces and atmospheric pressure, et al. just don't change enough in 10 seconds to affect the readings, so it's a moot point.  Which is actually the WHOLE reason for taring a scale, to make all of those things moot.


Which brings me to Tom's point about all of these wind-swept areas where all of the experiments have been performed.  It's Occam's Razor, once again.  What's more plausible?  That the Earth's gravitation field is causing the weight fluctuations to match the Gnome's position on the Earth or that in EVERY place the the gnome was weighed, there just happened to be a gust of wind that was exactly and correctly altering the readings of the scale to match what is predicted by the gravitational calculations?  That's pretty amazing timing by all of that wind in all of those different places on all of those different days, even inside buildings, wouldn't you say?