Handy andy

Just to be clear, are you saying it is not clear which is correct GR or FLRW. GR a localized curvature, FLRW greater curvature. Which would you think is most likely correct, based on what is observed. Does this also cover how you respond to an extremely small packet of energy which causes a gravitational disturbance such as a photon of light.

With reference to atomic clocks used in space as in gps systems. If two atomic clocks are in free fall, will they both read the same time. If an atomic clock is in free fall around this planet or the sun, would it read the same as an atomic clock at the other side of the universe regressing away from us in space at 3c.

Yes in lots of places in the world tourists don't know that it is not customary to tip, and that people are given a fair wage for their work. They assume that a tip is required as it is in their own culture, to allow the workers to make a living. I have found travelling there is sometimes two prices, particularly in south America, where the restaurants have a menu priced for locals and another for tourists, who also leave a tip, whereas the locals don't.

Agreed. Is it also true to say that any distortion of space causes gravity? and any source of energy or mass including photons distorts space? and that gravity causes all forms of energy or mass to move towards the most stretched area of space? Is it also true a photon can be represented as a wave, as can particles, and they all cause a disturbance or curvature of space around them? Is the curvature of space just another way of saying gravity or distortion of space.? Is gravity a measurable quantity or substance ? Is space curvature a measurable quantity or substance ? Is space a measurable quantity or substance ?

A clever individual posted this about the Gullstrand-Painlevé coordinates. "These can be interpreted as space flowing towards a mass". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gullstrand–Painlevé_coordinates Would it be better for me to have reworded "according to general relativity the contraction or expansion of space is the source of gravity". to according to general relativity the flow of space towards a mass or source of energy is the source of gravity?

I am going to get kicked for asking this. But is it not the case that fermions, bosons, all forms of energy and matter, distort space, thus causing a gravitational effect?. Is it not the case according to general relativity that the contraction or expansion of space is the source of gravity?.

There is a lot to be said for a minimum wage, and a basic income threshold before paying any tax. As mentioned above tipping is different globally, I have found some cultures take offence at being offered tips. In others particularly in north America and more commonly now in Europe it is expected. In addition to this in tourist spots the locals expect a tip from tourists, where as the locals rarely pay a tip for service. A disturbing development I found in the states last time I was there was the introduction of tipping envelopes for hotel cleaners. The price paid for a bed for the night is generally expensive already, to be expected to pay a tip on top is infuriating, and I think is tantamount to aggressive begging, to think that the cleaners aren't being paid properly. Tipping in Brazil, can involve tipping the waiter staff, and tipping beggars that walk in off the street and place there hand in front of your face whilst your eating, with the waiter staff standing by and watching. 10 years ago I only tipped for good restaurant service but on visiting America was shocked to talk to people and find they were earning less than minimum wage and expected to make a living from tips, including bar staff. I do not think that the tipping culture is a good thing, to me it is like having people coming up and grovelling whilst serving you, and it is demeaning. The idea that you pay extra for good service, should be included in the bill. If a business cant pay the minimum wage, it shouldn't be employing staff, and expecting them to make a living from tips when there are no customers. Obviously in a thriving business where tipping is common place, staff can earn a lot from tips, but in a failing business they don't.

Your title Best anti-theistic arguments and your first post is too difficult for your average confused theist to get their heads around. It is simpler to ask theists to define what their god is in one or two sentences. Various answers are generally forthcoming. Answer A Jesus is god, answer B God is everywhere etc. Answer A Jesus or Prophet ascended bodily into heaven, therefore Jesus or prophet went of in a space ship is the only logical answer. You then ask would they then worship an Alien from another planet if they landed on earth. Answer B is the god particle scientists sometimes try to uncover. As for your argument ref ethics, it is a nonsense to even engage in a conversation ref ethics with someone who supports religions, which include stories of genocide human and animal sacrifice, separating families and friends who do not believe in the stories etc. Why any one imagines the human race wants religion is a mystery, why religion evolved is fairly simple, it is to control groups of people. God is watching you must have been like security cameras today, if people think they are being watched they don't misbehave.

Ancient History shows that the science of astronomy has been used globally for millennia. The likes of Stonehenge is dated circa 2500BC http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/visit/places/stonehenge/history/ The history of Egypt originates according to the bible with one of Noahs sons being cursed (told to go away), after doing something not nice to his father and possibly mother, sodomy seemed popular in those days. He founded the Egyptian peoples . This was circa 3000BC to 3500BC, many temples all over Egypt are astrologically aligned according to various experts showing they used the science of astronomy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oldest_continuously_inhabited_cities . With the advent of cities arguably the science of agriculture and psychology started, agriculture to enable large numbers of people to be fed and psychology with the beginnings of religion used to control large numbers of people. The Stones of Stenness arguably predates Stonehenge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_Stones_of_Stenness again it is aligned with the stars to indicate the seasons, mid winter, mid summer etc. The village of Scarae Brae in Orkney predates the Egyptian pyramids and is dated circa 4500BC. Speculation Alert: (The Egyptian religions may be predated by the Hindu religion, I have not been able to find a reliable date for the beginnings of Hinduism, the gods keep on reincarnating. The similarities between many world religions would arguably suggest it is the same successful stories repeated over millenia, as a tool to control people. Religion is still a successful tool used today to control "rude ignorant people" (Albert Pike Morals and Dogma) that don't know any better) Within the Egyptian pyramids what are thought to have been early batteries have been found. The Zodiac at Denderra in Egypt is thought to predate the temple complex dated circa 1500BC, it is not known how they managed to melt such a large area of volcanic glass and carve or melt the zodiac into it. It is difficult to make a copy of this artefact with todays technology. http://www.crystalinks.com/DenderaTempleComplex.html (note crystal links may not be a reliable website:) ) The science of war, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_War was written circa 500BC by a Chinese fella, but talks about methods and weapons most likely used by the Greeks or Egyptians. Greece being just across the sea from Egypt they were neigbours and therefore most likely traded ideas with each other. The sun god Ra is analogous to sky god Zeus, they both come down from the sky. The science of genetics, Charles Darwin was a pigeon fancier and bread pigeons, selective breeding of pigeons is possibly 10000 years old, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pigeon_keeping . All the worlds variety of pigeons originate with the rock Pigeon.

Without using maths looking at your diagram you have two north poles facing each other they will repel. The moon has no magnetic field, would you expect the moon to stay in orbit with your theory. Rather than just drawing out a diagram in a thought experiment, try an experiment with some iron filings on a piece of paper and a couple of magnets you will see the flaw in your diagram. It does not matter how hard you push two north poles at each other they will always repel. You could also use a finite elements package, which incorporates maxwells equations, to show your idea is wrong. Maxwell was unable to incorporate gravity into his mathematical model.

You wont believe this but I used to be a pro I have just forgotten a lot more than I know now. What I am proposing to create is a momentary very high DC impulse voltage, with reference to ground, lots of times a second, to continually shock the air around the voltage source. I do not propose to make it arc to ground as in a lightning strike. The ionization process can result in an avalanche production of anions and cations, which do not immediately recombine. By seeding the air with a a particle that is easily ionized the avalanche process will be initiated with less energy. This will ionize the air, and by repeatedly shocking it will drive the electrons away from the voltage source, due to the fact they have a lower inertia than the nucleus of the atoms they are released from. When I stated vacuum I did not mean a perfect vacuum, I meant at reduced atmospheric pressure, so that the likely hood of recombination is reduced, as in the ionosphere. We see sprites in the atmosphere above thunderclouds, positrons and electrons are blasted out into space from very large thunderclouds they do not immediately combine as they might in an ideal gas. I am particularly interested in the transient states of the ions, and the possibility of separating them using a magnetic field, to usefully use their charges. This separation is done successfully via magnetohydrodynamic generators as has pointed out above. Modulating a magnetic field through the ionized air will have the effect of separating the charges. The Van de Graaf only collects one polarity of ions, I want to collect both anions and cations from the atmosphere. I am not familiar with the Wimshurst but will take a look. As an aside (speculation thread possibly) lightning balls can exist at almost ground level and pass through walls, they do not immediately recombine, and consist of ionized particles, produced by lightning or plasma. I have no difficulty believing that hot electrons can pass through a wall but I do find it difficult to believe that molecules of gas can pass through a wall. It has now been proven that positrons are produced in thunderclouds on mass. It may actually be the case that lightning balls are a mixture of both positrons and electrons. Even more speculative, lightning balls have been observed to be much larger dimensions at higher altitude, ie visible to the naked eye a mile high etc. It is not impossible that the Tunguska explosion was a monster lightning ball, which exploded 5 miles up. The reason I state this is there is no crater, where a meteor struck. The object which was observed by eye witnesses was moving slowly. Huge high altitude lightning shows illuminated northern Europe for a week before the event. It is not impossible that a lightning ball was driven down from the upper atmosphere, and compressed as it descended, driving electrons and positrons into each other, releasing a lot of energy. It is also possible that the disaster at mecca was another explosion emanating from the very large thundercloud that was passing by, on a lot smaller scale than Tunguska, but killing a lot more people. Thanks for the replies.

In the pacific ocean when all the boats in the same anchorage as me lost there GPS signals, it is not impossible one of them was using a Single Side Band Radio. I have heard of led switch panels lighting up when the boat next door uses an SSB Does any one have an opinion, ref how overhead electrical storms or other interference may affect the GPS signal. How do the military block the signal, other than switch it off. Does anyone have any sentient comments or questions on the link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Positioning_System posted by strange.

Excellent, thank you for the references, I am temporarily back in the UK for a month or so, and there are some University book shops only 20 miles away with actual text books written in English, I will see what they have, failing that I will get them of the internet. Many Thanks

Sorry I must have misread a thread where someone had worked on GPS for 15 years in Washington for the military. Why would there be a local GPS outage? That is an excellent link and answers most of my questions and mostly answers my next questions also. My next question was going to be does the moons gravitational field affect the clocks on satellites when they pass between the moon and earth. From the link you posted it will. I was also going to ask another question ref time dilation with a little thought experiment along the same lines, if a space ship was to travel from earth at constant speed towards the sun and then return to earth at the same speed, would the elapsed time towards the sun be different to the elapsed time on the return journey. Perhaps not going all the way to the sun to avoid being cooked. Again I think your link confirms this. Gravitational time dilation is different from time dilation under special relativity, could you explain this further? Are all these effects taken into account in GPS systems.? A Photons track can be bent by gravity, a change in a gravitational field causes time dilation, an atom goes to a higher energy level if it absorbs a photon, and to a lower energy level when it emits a photon as in a radioactive clock, could gravity be affecting the clock.

I understand a quantum entangled particle is restricted in its degrees of movement. If particle A rotates 90 degrees, particle B mirrors -90 degrees, but if particle A rotates j90 particle B does nothing . Almost like only restricted dimensional information is getting through, is any of this correct.

The loss of GPS was not an antennae problem, I carry 3 independent GPS on my boat, in the Pacific when the GPS failed I went around all the other boats in the anchorage 6 boats approx. All their GPS had lost position also, this lasted for about an hour, when the signal returned. I did not store the Navtex message received in the carribean, and I do not have the exact wording time or date. Sorry for the vagueness My Inmarsat phone system does have a GPS fix which it must have before being able to talk. It is completely independent of my other systems. Thank you for the links, again I will read them all. Would any one like to comment on differences in atomic clocks on GPS satellites in different orbits at different altitudes, orbiting equatorially and or over the poles or in different directions.? The earth is an oblate spheroid, would a satellite orbiting over the poles find a stable orbit.? @ SWANSONT I understand you are the undisputed expert on GPS on this forum, since you have worked on it for a number of years in Washington USA, not Washington County Durham UK. Perhaps you would like to lead the thread, and educate us all ref GPS systems and accuracy of atomic clocks etc. The subject is huge, and strangely it might take an expert to cast light on the nuances off the GPS operating system.

I have no further comment on this thread.

Global Positioning systems are extremely accurate typically <10m, assuming there is good satellite coverage. Satellites have both high and low orbit, Inmarsat coverage is particularly poor. I would like to start a discussion ref the reliability and accuracy of the various GPS networks. I am particularly interested in how the accuracy, or time, of the clocks may be affected if they are in different orbits around the planet, or at different altitudes or orbiting in different directions. For example if in orbit around the equator, at higher latitudes or perhaps orbiting over the poles. The reason the question occurs to me is that I use GPS in navigation off shore, and have had times when the GPS signal vanishes completely, in clear skys. Also 2 years ago leaving the Carribean a general notice came over navtex system that the GPS system may be down for an hour due to a reset. Obviously if a GPS reset is done over open ocean, it is safer than doing it in congested waters as there is less traffic etc.

The thing with special relativity I understand the math, I understand the reasoning, and I understand how people come to the conclusions they have. BUT I just DONT BELIEVE IT. I think SR is instrumentation error and a misunderstanding of the properties of space. Space can be stretched and warped, shrink and expand, it can bend light, it has memory of what has passed(double slit experiment) it has properties. Everything is in freefall in space, even galaxies. Space is not just an empty nothing. Invisible Pink Animals or IPA is better than IPU. Space (or a version of the aether) exists, and transmits all forces and makes up all matter. The expansion and contraction of space is the cause of gravity.

I will go with the IPU.

After a bit of reading it seems the muon experiment i suggested above is already claimed as a proof for ng Relativity. I don't think SR is anything but instrumentation error. Time travel is science fiction and people of a weirdo persuasion who think they can predict the future. Space is expanding and contracting and is the cause of gravity, and free fall through space. Free fall of galaxies moving apart in an expanding space, and free fall of bodies near a planet.

Ref the cosmic back ground radiation a I would not be the only one stating it is not evidence for a big bang, Alfven for instance a nobel prize winning plasma physicist thought the big bang theory was nonsense and put forward far more plausible theories. He new a lot more about hot plasma than most people as I am sure you are aware. You state that "there is no evidence or theoretical reason to think that space itself can generate radiation (this would appear to violate conservation laws)". I would state that space is continually expanding and distorting and has it has done for an eternity, and matter evolves slowly rather than with one, or multiple gigantic big bangs. "Laws are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men" What I mean by overlooked in the double slit experiment is that no where is it explained, how the wave effect is produced even when single photons are shot at the double slit multiple seconds apart still producing the wave effect. Clearly the wave effect is due to waves in space, and space must have some memory of what has passed. What people do not point out that there are waves in space, as every photon passes by. They all leave a trace in their path. The only explanations given are generally on a purely mathematical basis, where the underlying explanation is obfuscated by the math. Not one mention of space the medium which the photons pass through is mentioned. I agree someone is making up ad hoc theories to explain stuff, then coming to compromises to include other theories . When all the evidence points to one huge overlooked thing, that has been pointed out in the past by more than just me. When the biggest most dynamic thing in the universe that caries all forces etc is not considered in any theory, then those theories are at best approximations, closed systems. For me and many people in the past, the huge overlooked thing and the biggest most dynamic thing in the universe is space, which I and others refer to as the aether or ether you can use either ether or aether I noted on the explanation one of the links about special relativity given earlier on this thread by your self the ether was mentioned. Various ether theories have existed in the past, the newest I think is string theory. But it loses itself in complex maths, all things are waves or vortices made of space, is equivalent to all things can be expressed as strings vibrating in space. Thanks for coming back Did you have an opinion ref the Muon experiment I suggested.

I read Einstein made observations then developed theories and developed experiments to confirm them, which I would have thought would be the logical thing to do, rather than developing a theory not based on observations. Big Bangers claim back ground radiation to be the result of a super hot start to an expanding universe. I stated earlier, when a particle decays it gives of radiation, when space expands it may also give off radiation. From this point of view I would claim background radiation as proof of the expansion of space. However it has already been claimed, how would one prove this? The difficulty I perceive with devising a test to explain time dilation, is that it has already been claimed as proof for special relativity. Think Think Think OK how about really looking at what space is, General relativity predicts expanding space and contracting space in black holes, I assume you have no problem with this. Next looking at the double slit experiment which I think has been glibly over looked by science, leaving us with wave particle duality. Light (or an electron) as it moves through space compresses the space in front of it and stretches space behind it. The movement of the photon of light (or an electron)through space leaves a disturbance in space around its path. Gravity or the contraction and expansion of space can bend the beam of lights trajectory. I am guessing you will accept this is all fair analogy so far. When applied to a radio active clock the electrons passing through space will be affected by the movement of space, in both the vertical and the horizontal, and therefore affect the clocks accuracy. If we view the electron as a dipole or a donut to give it shape and spin, the muon would look similar but bigger Ref the muon decay, a muon is an unstable particle, with a very short lifetime, with similar properties to an electron. I view all particles and all matter as being stable waves or vortices consisting of space. An unstable particle also exists of vortices in space. From the double slit experiment we know space has a memory of what has passed, and therefore must have inertia of sorts. If a particle has the same charge as an electron it must have the same spin, if it has a significantly larger inertia it is more likely to fall apart. The muon life time is extended when moving quickly. In which directions is the muon moving with reference to the gravitational field, in the experiments you are referring too.???? If the muon is in free fall with reference to gravity (the contraction of space towards a mass) it will have less disturbance and may survive longer, if it is accelerated against gravity (space) its lifetime may be reduced. Therefore I would suggest an experiment on muon decay to accelerate the muon against the gravitational field of the planet, and another to have it in free fall, or moving with the flow of gravity. Do you have any references to the experiments already conducted? Gravity is like that it causes things to go into free fall. Thankyou all for your input. I may be losing my access to wifi for a couple of days, but "I will be back"

Thanks for confirming my sneaky suspicion it has all been done already, and thanks for link. I did not note however any experiment doing the same measurements over the poles, but I guess this has been done also and confirms space is only being dragged in the direction of rotation, as I expected. I think you are wrong. A mathematical model should describe what is happening, it is not just an analogy, or an equation without meaning. Equations describe what is happening or going to happen, unless its probability, then its just best guess. Most models are based on a closed system, and only take into account the most significant components, and ignore the rest to simplify the model. You missed or ignored a question above. Would you say a fair analogy for the increase in speed of galaxies in the universe is they are in free fall moving away from each other and don't feel any acceleration, other than from their own local gravitational fields.?? Controversially but I think is still on thread ref the concept of space (the aether being a substance) I am slowly getting up to speed on special relativity. Einstein formed his theories based initially on observations and then by experiment. I still have a long way to go on SR, thankyo for all the links, there is masses of reading there that will keep me going for some time. However I still have this nagging doubt in my head ref atomic clocks, and accuracy when moving through space. My understanding is atomic clocks are not radioactive because they do not rely on atomic decay. Simply, they have an oscillating mass and spring like an ordinary clock. They are normally oscillating in space which is contracting and passing through it and causing gravity. Space exists in and around the nucleus of an atom and the surrounding electrons. Once the clock starts moving horizontal to the contraction of space, the space in and around the nucleus will be moving in the opposite direction to the horizontal movement, this may affect the oscillation and cause the oscillation to slow down, this is not time slowing, it is the clock slowing. I know the oscillation is not exactly a parallel to the balance wheel and hairspring of a clockwork watch, or a pendulum clock, but the fact is that both use oscillations to keep track of passing time. If a wind is blown over a pendulum it will slow it down similarly if space is moving in two planes across an atomic clock it will slow the oscillation. This is not time slowing down as popularly thought it is an instrumentation error. What is the easiest way to do this, has it already been done. Most of my ideas seem to have been confirmed already.

Strange posted some links a few posts back Much as I worry about encouraging your nonsense, you might want to read about the Gullstrand-Painlevé coordinates. These can be interpreted as space flowing towards a mass. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gullstrand–Painlevé_coordinates http://jila.colorado.edu/~ajsh/insidebh/schw_waterfall.html This waterfall is exactly how I am viewing gravity to work. For the purposes of designing an experiment to quantify this movement of space, firstly I need to know how fast space is contracting. I suggested in one of the earlier posts that the bending of light as it passes a star of known mass at a known distance from the star should enable a rate of contraction of space. More measurements of light at different distances from the star would enable a curve to be formed around the contraction of space. This could then be verified in a M-M experiment being carried out in the vertical orientation as shown on the utube videos above. A further experiment could be carried out to ascertain if space is not only contacting towards the earth, but revolving with it also. I have been given a lot of things to read up, and need to look further into the operation of the atomic clock, because this experiment might step on the special relativity experiment. What I am considering here is taking too aeroplanes and flying them opposite ways around the equator, and comparing their clocks with a clock on the ground, I would then like to repeat the experiment over the poles, and again compare the clocks. Clocks on satellites at different latitudes or moving around the planet on different trajectories might show differing times, but this you say needs to be discussed under a different thread. At the current time I have a lot of things I need to study. I need to get up to speed on my gozzintos again for starters to pursue the proposed experimental ideas above, also I have a sneaky feeling some one has done this all already, so I could be wasting my time. I am learning a lot from this forum, a lot of thought provoking concepts have occurred to me, that it seems have already been discussed, but are not mainstream, I wonder why this is. It seems my concept of space has already being dreamt up by other folk already, has had some of my ionisation ideas from the other thread. I don't think gravity is to do with magnetism. I view it as being due to the contraction and or expansion of space. Space contracts around a mass and expands when free of the influence of masses. From your aether point of view, I view the aether as representing space. Space has properties, it carries all forces, and makes up all matter. I also think there are extra dimensions in space, as you have pointed out above, extra dimensions exist under string theory. If something depresses you just walk away, and find something else to do. If you re run down try a guiness with a whiskey chaser, it should do the trick:)