Jump to content

GRAVITY ERROR? New Large-Telescope Measurements Show There Is A Serious PROBLEM With Existing Theories of Gravity, Dark Matter And General Relativity


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Carlos said:

Gibberish. You believe an old scientist who was proven wrong repeatedly, but don't believe him when he refers to space. That's ridiculous.

 

Tesla knew that Gravity was nonsense,that is why you never learned about him in school. Instead we were taught the theories (assumptions) of Copernicus, Newton and Einstein to embed in your brain the notion of gravity .
Tesla had it right, electromagnetic realm.

 

 

Edited by alexa
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Gravity explains everything that it is claimed to do. Quite how you can reference the aether when Michelson/Morley proved it didn't exist is baffling. Aren't you one of the space deniers? How in hell

Can I just politely ask why you joined this forum? It's just that you remind me of one or two previous members here, who very stoically defended the 'established' scientific beliefs and stifled any 'i

If Einstein was WRONG and things can very much "travel faster than the speed of light" then we may be WITHIN VERY EASY REACH OF MANY OTHER CIVILIZATIONS IN THE UNIVERSE.   This is why it is

Posted Images

18 hours ago, Carlos said:

No, really it isn't. Just because Tesla (ooooooo not Tezzy - the main man🙄) hypothesised about it, doesn't mean that countless scientists haven't disproven its existence

or he disproved them......🤫

 

Tesla papers were confiscated 

Tesla patents weren't allowed.....

 

i see your arogance is strong so don't be butt hurt 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, screamingeagle said:

or he disproved them......🤫

 

 

No he didn't Gravity is real, the aether is not. What do you mean "them"? We are talking specifically about gravity.

 

3 hours ago, screamingeagle said:

Tesla papers were confiscated 

Tesla patents weren't allowed.....

 

 

So they say. I'm sure there were some marvellous things that haven't surfaced, he was a very smart man, but sadly not right about everything.

 

3 hours ago, screamingeagle said:

i see your arogance is strong so don't be butt hurt 

 

 

You are a moderator, kindly act like one and desist with the insults and goading.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, alexa said:

 

Tesla knew that Gravity was nonsense,that is why you never learned about him in school. Instead we were taught the theories (assumptions) of Copernicus, Newton and Einstein to embed in your brain the notion of gravity .
Tesla had it right, electromagnetic realm.

 

 

 

No. Tesla didn't have it right, the aether does not exist and has been disproven almost every day all around the world in science experiments doing Michelson-Morley mock-ups. I somehow doubt that you were taught any of those subjects, your current knowledge is a little sketchy.

 

https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/special-relativity/michelson-and-morleys-luminiferous-ether-experiment/v/michelson-morley-experiment-introduction

 

It must be great for the fringe believers to think of this electric-universe and part of me wishes that it could have some validity, but it doesn't. There is simply no solid mathematical backup to this theory. Spacecraft routinely analyse the space they fly in and the solar wind exhibits none of the characteristics associated with what is claimed.

 

Anyway, how the hell can you be a believer of the electric universe when you deny space exists!??

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Carlos said:

It must be great for the fringe believers to think of this electric-universe and part of me wishes that it could have some validity, but it doesn't. There is simply no solid mathematical backup to this theory. Spacecraft routinely analyse the space they fly in and the solar wind exhibits none of the characteristics associated with what is claimed.

 

Anyway, how the hell can you be a believer of the electric universe when you deny space exists!??

 

Can I just politely ask why you joined this forum? It's just that you remind me of one or two previous members here, who very stoically defended the 'established' scientific beliefs and stifled any 'interesting' discussions into alternative theories by constantly 'debunking' them using what has already been 'officially established'.

 

I've looked into 'Electric Universe' recently and found it interesting. Ben Davidson of Suspicious0bservers does agree to an extent, but he says it is a 'plasma universe', not electric. Though electromagnetism does play a part. It does also offer some explanation as to why the best scientists in the world can't find this damned 'dark matter', because it doesn't exist.

 

Their Plasma Cosmology infomentary is a useful starting point:

 

What are your thoughts on this?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Grumpy Owl said:

 

Can I just politely ask why you joined this forum? 

 

 

Can I politely ask why you are asking? I don't see this question posed to other members? What about the ones who I am chiefly arguing against concerning the Earth? They seriously bring into disrepute the calibre of conspiracy theorists in general. Short answer because I felt like it. Long answer none of your business really.

47 minutes ago, Grumpy Owl said:

It's just that you remind me of one or two previous members here, who very stoically defended the 'established' scientific beliefs and stifled any 'interesting' discussions into alternative theories by constantly 'debunking' them using what has already been 'officially established'.

 

Stoically? How is it stoic or defending concerning the Earth being a sphere!? If I wanted to "defend" established theories I would have done so. I didn't realise that all alternatives no matter how absurd are considered worthy debate material, yet those that use more in depth referencing of current established items are singled out. Yes most are aware of the establishment scientific beliefs, but very few who hold opposing views understand them to a degree that would possibly negate their tendency to dismiss them.

      

47 minutes ago, Grumpy Owl said:

I've looked into 'Electric Universe' recently and found it interesting. Ben Davidson of Suspicious0bservers does agree to an extent, but he says it is a 'plasma universe', not electric. Though electromagnetism does play a part. It does also offer some explanation as to why the best scientists in the world can't find this damned 'dark matter', because it doesn't exist.

 

I agree that there are large holes in cosmology, but the bits filled in are quite astonishingly accurately backed up with solid mathematics. I cannot even find any mathematics that show a coherent alternative for an electric or even plasma universe. It has way way more holes in it than current cosmology, serious problems with basics such as protons from the Sun and the parts it does "fit" are very vague.

 

47 minutes ago, Grumpy Owl said:

 

Their Plasma Cosmology infomentary is a useful starting point:

 

What are your thoughts on this?

 

My thoughts are exactly the thing that led you to politely ask me why I joined. I have no wish to get into a debate about this. Carry on discussing it amongst fellow believers and those who think it carries weight.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The electric universe offers an interesting alternative to existing thinking and what little I know it solves problems that currently have been unsolved. Like for instance the surface temperature of the sun being cooler than the outer temperature. I for one would like to hear more as I would Tesla too. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Carlos said:

Can I politely ask why you are asking? I don't see this question posed to other members? What about the ones who I am chiefly arguing against concerning the Earth? They seriously bring into disrepute the calibre of conspiracy theorists in general. Short answer because I felt like it. Long answer none of your business really.

 

It's okay, I was only curious. To be fair, I agree with you on the Flat Earth stuff, and after my own consideration I do think that is all a bit of nonsense. But that is my own opinion.

 

I'm just a bit wary of folks who would join a 'conspiracy / alternative thinking' forum just to spend their time 'debunking' any discussions put forward with already 'established' mainstream thinking. As we've had similar characters doing the same before. Hope you understand my point of view.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Grumpy Owl said:

I've looked into 'Electric Universe' recently and found it interesting. Ben Davidson of Suspicious0bservers does agree to an extent, but he says it is a 'plasma universe', not electric. Though electromagnetism does play a part. It does also offer some explanation as to why the best scientists in the world can't find this damned 'dark matter', because it doesn't exist.

That is exactly the thoughts of Nassim Harrimen ,he said dark matter is bullshit and also says if you want to understand the universe think of plasma,he also claims that there is only two forces ,one being electromagnetic and the other gravity, but the big thing is he backs it up with math

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Grumpy Owl said:

I'm just a bit wary of folks who would join a 'conspiracy / alternative thinking' forum just to spend their time 'debunking' any discussions put forward with already 'established' mainstream thinking. As we've had similar characters doing the same before. Hope you understand my point of view.

 

I don't understand your point of view. Icke says question everything and that includes conspiracies. If you only discuss one side of the argument then you will never see the big picture - and of course that works both ways. I am not debunking anything I am offering evidence that suggests an alternative explanation.

 

Anyway, regarding gravity and dark matter, I think this baby will open up to better understanding:

 

https://sci.esa.int/web/jwst/-/james-webb-space-telescope-to-launch-in-october-2021

https://sci.esa.int/web/jwst/-/45759-fact-sheet

https://amazing-space.stsci.edu/resources/explorations/groundup/lesson/basics/g49/

 

I think it colossally significant that this telescope will sit in a gravitational point perfectly predicted by the current model and that has no feasible explanation by the electric/plasma model.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Diesel said:

The electric universe offers an interesting alternative to existing thinking and what little I know it solves problems that currently have been unsolved. Like for instance the surface temperature of the sun being cooler than the outer temperature. I for one would like to hear more as I would Tesla too. 

 

That is not an unsolved problem btw.

 

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/06/150617091757.htm

 

More on the micro eruptions that that study references:

 

https://www.inverse.com/article/60947-plasma-jets-heat-up-sun-atmosphere

Link to post
Share on other sites

in science daily they give a  long explanation on the mechanisms involved

 

(How can the temperature of the Sun's atmosphere be as high as 1 million degrees Celsius when its surface temperature is only around 6000°C? By simulating the evolution of part of the Sun's interior and exterior, researchers have identified the mechanisms that provide sufficient energy to heat the solar atmosphere. A layer beneath the Sun's surface, acting as a pan of boiling water, is thought to generate a small-scale magnetic field as an energy reserve which, once it emerges from the star, heats the successive layers of the solar atmosphere via networks of mangrove-like magnetic roots and branches)

 

In the above summary, the four words  (is thought to generate ) indicates that they have a theory as to whats going on however the topic is far from done and dusted as far as I can see

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, peter said:

in science daily they give a  long explanation on the mechanisms involved

 

(How can the temperature of the Sun's atmosphere be as high as 1 million degrees Celsius when its surface temperature is only around 6000°C? By simulating the evolution of part of the Sun's interior and exterior, researchers have identified the mechanisms that provide sufficient energy to heat the solar atmosphere. A layer beneath the Sun's surface, acting as a pan of boiling water, is thought to generate a small-scale magnetic field as an energy reserve which, once it emerges from the star, heats the successive layers of the solar atmosphere via networks of mangrove-like magnetic roots and branches)

 

In the above summary, the four words  (is thought to generate ) indicates that they have a theory as to whats going on however the topic is far from done and dusted as far as I can see

 

This is a very strong solution to a problem. It works, is feasible and via computer replication it works. You cannot say categorically DOES generate until the hypothesis has been tested. That's why they chuck things in space with scientific instruments(such as Parker). Could you direct me to the electric universe explanation and help compare the language used to express it?

 

I'll help you out with my search:

 

https://www.everythingselectric.com/sun/

"Is the temperature a way of observing or inferring the potential differences of electrons and other stuff? Especially the incredible Transition Region that is only 60 miles wide but the temperature goes up or down from 500,000 Centigrade to only 8000 Centigrade. Does this show 'Electric' Potential Difference?"

 

https://www.electricuniverse.info/electric-sun-theory/

 

"In 1972, Ralph Juergens wrote:

“The known characteristics of the interplanetary medium suggest not only that the sun and the planets are electrically charged, but that the sun itself is the focus of a cosmic electric discharge — the probable source of all its radiant energy.”


Earl R. Milton recalled Juergens’ concept of an “electric” sun:

“In August 1972 Ralph Juergens introduced the concept of the electrically powered Sun. He was inspired by Immanuel Velikovsky’s contention that electromagnetic forces played a crucial role in sculpting the surfaces and shaping the orbits of the bodies of the solar system; by Melvin Cook’s attempts to unify the electromagnetic and gravitational fields;  and by the voluminous literature of Charles Bruce intimating that the phenomena observed in stellar atmospheres could be described adequately by an electrical discharge model''.
“Juergens, however, went farther than all of his preceptors in electrifying both the cosmic bodies and their interactions. He perceived the astronomical bodies as inherently charged objects immersed in a universe which could be described as an electrified fabric. The charges appearing locally on cosmic bodies, he posited, arose from the separation of positive ions and electrons on a galactic scale. Later, he discussed both the problems arising if the solar interior is truly the source of stellar energy and the nature of the phenomena observed as the solar photosphere."

 

Would you agree it is a little vague in its detail? Now of course you cannot dismiss any hypothesis simply for that reason but it stays just that until somebody offers something a whole lot more verifiable. Do they have computer models for instance? 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Carlos said:

Would you agree it is a little vague in its detail? Now of course you cannot dismiss any hypothesis simply for that reason but it stays just that until somebody offers something a whole lot more verifiable. Do they have computer models for instance? 

I don't necessary subscribe to the electric universe theory ,I was mearly pointing out that the reason for the sun's higher temperature for the  corona was not done and dusted

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, peter said:

I don't necessary subscribe to the electric universe theory ,I was mearly pointing out that the reason for the sun's higher temperature for the  corona was not done and dusted

 

np. I don't think anything is done and dusted concerning reality. Though much of it is proven to a significant degree, there still remains the possibility of a far better theory that better explains everything. Electric theory has issues that prove it cannot be correct.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Carlos said:

Electric theory has issues that prove it cannot be correct.

Well to be honest, I can't comment on those issues you speak of as I only have a general understanding of the theory behind the electric universe, however I did find it interesting ,for no other reason than the temperature differential between the sun's surface and corona  which has had me  perplexed for a good while

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
3 hours ago, amy G said:

https://scontent-lax3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/119020837_1522642894586420_3644933775346651392_n.jpg?_nc_cat=106&_nc_sid=825194&_nc_ohc=pEY6NaLgCiMAX_ZkxuJ&_nc_ht=scontent-lax3-2.xx&oh=45776da4df33f926694ffde9bac675e4&oe=5F87E923

 

I have become convinced that the belief in gravity is the error.

I was right ,you are the reason we haven't been back to the moon

Edited by peter
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/30/2020 at 3:14 AM, Carlos said:
  On 8/30/2020 at 2:06 AM, Grumpy Owl said:

I've looked into 'Electric Universe' recently and found it interesting. Ben Davidson of Suspicious0bservers does agree to an extent, but he says it is a 'plasma universe', not electric. Though electromagnetism does play a part. It does also offer some explanation as to why the best scientists in the world can't find this damned 'dark matter', because it doesn't exist.

Like you ,I also find this very interesting,also with regards to dark matter when they came up with this hypothesis they had the weight of the proton in the standard model was too small by 4% ,however they are getting closer now.

The other thing I find interesting, is these grandiose installations they build , they spend 7 billion on the LHC with the pretext of finding the Higg's Bo-son, and low and behold a couple of years after it comes on line they find it according to the media, but if you read the scientific papers they have found a particle in the correct gev range that they think could be the higgs boson,but their not sure, but the media would have you believe otherwise and it was money well spent. Then we have the gravity wave detector, it just comes on line and detects the first ever gravity wave and the explanation was that two black holes in the center of their respective galaxies  collided producing the gravity waves and it just happen to go past the earth  at the right time to detect it ,how lucky. One problem ,over the eons galaxies have been colliding all the time and since there is a black hole in the center of each galaxy ,how come we don't detect these things, more often ,I could be wrong but we have only detected one  to date.

 I Understand probability and the vastness of the universe, however I would still have to ask the question ,is there an alternative motive for actually building these rather large monstrosities?

I haven't got a clue but I feel it's an interesting question none the less

Edited by peter
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 8/23/2020 at 12:06 AM, Carlos said:

Gravity explains everything that it is claimed to do.

No, Earth-Moon Lagrange L1 was in the wrong place according to theory (from the Apollo mission).

 

On 8/23/2020 at 12:06 AM, Carlos said:

Quite how you can reference the aether when Michelson/Morley proved it didn't exist is baffling

Being unable to measure something is not the same thing as proving that it doesn't exist.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 8/6/2020 at 11:41 PM, Mikhail Liebestein said:

 

The theory of gravity at planetary level, solar system level works perfectly well. If it didn't satellites wouldn't exist. Your fluid density tube is also easily explainable based on material density.

 

The only challenges with gravity I am aware of are at beyond galaxy scale and involve dark matter. 

Clocks on GPS satellites need constant adjusting to offset the effects of GR (but ~38^-6s/day, yet sufficient to render position data unreliable within ~2 min, apparently..)

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/24/2020 at 9:36 AM, theo102 said:

Being unable to measure something is not the same thing as proving that it doesn't exist.

 

True (up to a very rare point), but not being able to measure something with things that are way beyond capable of measuring them do prove it doesn't exist. This experiment is performed routinely in colleges and universities. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/29/2020 at 9:48 AM, Carlos said:

...the aether does not exist and has been disproven almost every day all around the world in science experiments doing Michelson-Morley mock-ups. I somehow doubt that you were taught any of those subjects, your current knowledge is a little sketchy.

I somehow doubt that you were taught any of those subjects, your current knowledge is a little sketchy.

 

https://scontent-lax3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/119995869_10217931461470763_2896760065163135046_n.jpg?_nc_cat=109&_nc_sid=825194&_nc_ohc=vSi2DzZMfPYAX8v61gX&_nc_ht=scontent-lax3-1.xx&oh=4f54ac5cedb88aac5a390655d06a5d1b&oe=5F8EDF39

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, amy G said:

I somehow doubt that you were taught any of those subjects, your current knowledge is a little sketchy.

 

https://scontent-lax3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/119995869_10217931461470763_2896760065163135046_n.jpg?_nc_cat=109&_nc_sid=825194&_nc_ohc=vSi2DzZMfPYAX8v61gX&_nc_ht=scontent-lax3-1.xx&oh=4f54ac5cedb88aac5a390655d06a5d1b&oe=5F8EDF39

 

 

Dude, aren't you a space denier too? Because if you aren't, how the blazes do you explain all the space travel and satellites??

 

Regarding my "sketchy knowledge" - I've forgotten more stuff than you have ever learnt. The speed of light is not constant - Sagnac dismissed. 

 

Dirac - you found a scientist who supports the aether? From 1951-4?  My knowledge is just fine, yours...not so much.

 

p.s. Did you cut and paste that from a facebook page?

Edited by Comedy Time
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Comedy Time said:

 

True (up to a very rare point), but not being able to measure something with things that are way beyond capable of measuring them do prove it doesn't exist. This experiment is performed routinely in colleges and universities. 

Measurement depends on your model of the phenomena being reliable as well an your instrumentation being accurate.

 

Edited by theo102
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...