A change in Gravity killed the dinosaurs!

[Pincho Paxton]

My theory predicts that Gravity is a pressure from the Universe, not an attractive force. And for a few years now I have been deciding if that pressure has changed over time.

 

Since I was a child I have often wondered how T-Rex managed to get up off the floor if it fell over. It has those reduced arms, and a heavy back end. It looks like it would be hard work to get up. And since my gravity theory is channeled through bubbles like bubble-wrap which protects us from a huge pressure from the Universe I had been thinking that pressure on the dinosaurs may have been less. This would account for their huge size, and predict their downfall. But apart from their size I had little to go on. But this...

 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/08/110809104301.htm

 

... picture reminded me that they had three toes. Now my theory also predicts that pressure creates off-springs that are forced out of the Aether. Snowflakes for example are the 6 sided shapes produced by Aether pressure in cold conditions, and Aether pressure is Gravity, which is counter acted by magnetism (which is also Dark Flow). Another theory this week...

 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/08/110810085501.htm

 

... shows how alternating pressure from holes produces such crystals. And from all of my information put together, and the three toes of the dinosaurs which would fit inside our hand print. I can conclude that our extra two digits are a force pressure from extra gravity.

[Ringer]

I'm fairly certain snowflakes are hexagonal because of the properties of the hydrogen bonds in the water atom.

 

How is Aether pressure gravity, and what evidence do you have of this. In what way is gravity counter acted by magnetism and how does it affect your theory. Why isn't the bone density of all early animals much lower due to the lower pressure of gravity?

[Pincho Paxton]

I'm fairly certain snowflakes are hexagonal because of the properties of the hydrogen bonds in the water atom.

 

How is Aether pressure gravity, and what evidence do you have of this. In what way is gravity counter acted by magnetism and how does it affect your theory. Why isn't the bone density of all early animals much lower due to the lower pressure of gravity?

 

Hydrogen bonds are also the same release of pressure, and so are electrons in their creation of orbits.

 

Aether is much like a liquid, and is like a sea pressure, but much lower, but it is infinite, so creates infinite pressure. The pressure created the Galaxies, because the infinite pressure folds into Black Holes. The black holes cannot contain the material that falls into them, so the material is reduced in scale, and then escapes as magnetism (Dark Flow). The escaping pressure creates the bubble around the Galaxy. The pressure on the bubble then creates pounding waves. The pounding waves then create more pressure inside the bubble. The black hole spins the material out as a disc spiral. The spinning material creates more holes in the aether. The holes then allow more material inside, and creates suns, and planets. All of the atoms etc. The escaping materials create more bubbles. The bubbles now counteract more pressure. This ends up as a bubble wrap to protect us from the huge pressures of infinite Aether. The bubbles however are slightly unstable. A meteor, or comet for example can break through them. If something big happened to a bubble it would alter Gravity. The dinosaurs must have experience a break in the bubble chain, and the pressure must have suddenly dropped on them, and killed them.

 

The bone density must have been filled over time by high pressure which gives them the appearance of normal density as they have become filled by new material internally, and externally. Take a look at the creatures around us.. birds (light) have three toes. Camels (Heavy) have two pressurized toes. Elephants (very heavy) have compressed toes. Fish (Under pressure of the sea) have toes that have squeezed out as fins. Humans (in the middle) have the toes of Dinosaurs, but with the extra digits squeezed out.

Edited August 11, 2011 by Pincho Paxton

[swansont]

Since I was a child I have often wondered how T-Rex managed to get up off the floor if it fell over. It has those reduced arms, and a heavy back end. It looks like it would be hard work to get up.

 

How does a bird (especially a flightless one) get up after it falls down?

[Pincho Paxton]

How does a bird (especially a flightless one) get up after it falls down?

 

The effort increases with scale, there is a tipping point. Although evolution does throw out wobblies, like beetles, and tortoise. But I am more interested in the feet. Lets go for Emu feet, they are close to dinosaur feet, but the bottoms of the feet flatten out. The dinosaur imprints don't flatten out so much, but they are much greater in scale. To have curved soles suggests lower gravity. If you scale the Emu feet up you should end up with large, flat bases. Because pressure creates off-springs I suggest that you can scale feet up to suggest pressure. Maybe you can even scale that pressure up to get the amount, and scale of Galaxy spirals as well.

[Leader Bee]

Curved soles suggests to me that the ground the dinosaur stepped in when the fossil was made was soft when it happened.

[Pincho Paxton]

Curved soles suggests to me that the ground the dinosaur stepped in when the fossil was made was soft when it happened.

 

But the wider toes would still show up. Anyway the ground would be lighter as well under less gravity.There is a mis-match of what we see today.Take the Brontosaurus, that has elephant feet, but it is huge compared with an elephant.

Edited August 11, 2011 by Pincho Paxton

[Leader Bee]

Anyway the ground would be lighter as well under less gravity.

 

And so would the dinosaur itself and so everything, relatively speaking should work the same, no mass values have changed.

 

I dont think the compressibility of a material is affeced by gravity, rather Geologic materials are made up of two portions: solids and voids (or same as porosity). The void space can be full of liquid or gas. Geologic materials reduces in volume only when the void spaces are reduced, which expel the liquid or gas from the voids. This can happen over a period of time, resulting in settlement.

 

Less gravity doesn't mean more compressibility.

[mississippichem]

Hydrogen bonds are also the same release of pressure, and so are electrons in their creation of orbits.

 

Incorrect. A hydrogen bond is a strong dipole-dipole interaction between an electron deficient hydrogen and some other electronegative element. Nice try, I couldn't make this stuff up myself.

[Pincho Paxton]

And so would the dinosaur itself and so everything, relatively speaking should work the same, no mass values have changed.

 

I dont think the compressibility of a material is affeced by gravity, rather Geologic materials are made up of two portions: solids and voids (or same as porosity). The void space can be full of liquid or gas. Geologic materials reduces in volume only when the void spaces are reduced, which expel the liquid or gas from the voids. This can happen over a period of time, resulting in settlement.

 

Less gravity doesn't mean more compressibility.

 

Gravity is a directional force. If it is down to the Earth the feet go flatter. Now to visualise the foot change you have to go to the extreme. Imagine gravity being so weak that it changes directions to an outwards force. Now the tops of the feet elongate outwards (I know its odd). But by using the strange scenario, we can extrapolate that in the middle there is a round toed version.

[Leader Bee]

Gravity is an attractional force associated with mass, it cannot change direction to "outwards". If gravity weakens then things will still be attracted downwards but perhaps not as agressively as it could have been.

 

How do you suggest that gravity was to change direction? What mechanism do you have to explain this phenomenon?

 

I'd also imagine a creature evolving in a low gravity environment to be far less muscular than a creature evolved to deal with high gravity too and i'd hypothesise that it would have less need for rounded padding on it's feet than a heavy creature that needs to protect it's feet. I feel if anything that low gravity would mean more fragile flat feet than the other way around.

[Pincho Paxton]

Gravity is an attractional force associated with mass, it cannot change direction to "outwards". If gravity weakens then things will still be attracted downwards but perhaps not as agressively as it could have been.

 

How do you suggest that gravity was to change direction? What mechanism do you have to explain this phenomenon?

 

I'd also imagine a creature evolving in a low gravity environment to be far less muscular than a creature evolved to deal with high gravity too and i'd hypothesise that it would have less need for rounded padding on it's feet than a heavy creature that needs to protect it's feet. I feel if anything that low gravity would mean more fragile flat feet than the other way around.

 

Forget outwards gravity, its antimatter, and doesn't matter, I just needed an example.

 

Well the muscles would be related to the gravity, and the weight of the creature in that gravity. The elephant, and rhino are fat creatures. The T-rex is tall and slim.. again there is a difference. The brontosaurus is fat, but huge.. again a ratio that looks exact in proportion to the change in gravity. Triceratops is fat, but has normal feet. What about mammoth compared to elephant? The mammoth actually has longer feet!

 

You are using evolution for the feet without adding gravity to that evolution. You need both.

Edited August 11, 2011 by Pincho Paxton

[Leader Bee]

You said:

You are using evolution for the feet without adding gravity to that evolution. You need both.

 

 

I said:

I'd also imagine a creature evolving in a low gravity environment to be far less muscular than a creature evolved to deal with high gravity too and i'd hypothesise that it would have less need for rounded padding on it's feet than a heavy creature that needs to protect it's feet. I feel if anything that low gravity would mean more fragile flat feet than the other way around.

 

I'm not sure how I didnt include gravity in that explination?

 

Furthermore,

Elephants in general are the largest existing land mammals,

 

In general, the Asian elephant weighs between 3-5 tons (6,615-11,025lb); however the smaller Sumatran subspecies weight range begins at 2 tons (4,000lb). By contrast, the African elephant weighs between 4-7 tons (8,820-15,435lb)

 

Source: http://www.honoluluzoo.org/indian_elephant.htm

 

A typical estimate for T-rex is 5 - 7 tons (Example here: http://news.stanford.edu/news/2002/march6/tyrannowalk-36.html and here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2004/trextrans.shtml ) so a Male african Elephant and a "typical" T-rex roughly weigh the same.

 

In general, heavy animals like this have a lot of padding on their feet to spread their weight which causes less damage to joints and has other useful features like not sinking too much in soft ground or sand. T-rex has a disadvantage here, being bi-pedal it can only spread it's weight over 2 limbs instead of 4 and yet we still see rounded indentations in the fossil image you linked.

 

Regardless of the above, this still doesn't explain your postulation that a change in gravity killed the dinosaurs.

Do you have any evidence for the existence of Aether? My understanding is that Le Sage's theory of gravitation (that deals with gravitational Aether) and other competing theories for Aether are non-viable within modern science.

Edited August 11, 2011 by Leader Bee

[mississippichem]

Do you have any evidence for the existence of Aether? My understanding is that Le Sage's theory of gravitation (that deals with gravitational Aether) and other competing theories for Aether are non-viable within modern science.

 

I agree. Pincho Paxton must first establish the existence of the aether before he can say anything about how it affects gravity.

 

Pincho Paxton: Are you familiar with the Michelson-Morley experiment?

[Pincho Paxton]

I agree. Pincho Paxton must first establish the existence of the aether before he can say anything about how it affects gravity.

 

Pincho Paxton: Are you familiar with the Michelson-Morley experiment?

 

Yes I based my Aether theory on that experiment. The photon should move from its direct orbit to the Earth based on the Aether no being in motion with the surrounding planets.

 

I not only fixed that problem I also fixed relativity, and the bending of space-time like this..

 

Atoms are a pressure in the Aether that has folded the Aether into a negative mass state... tiny holes in the Aether that the Aether can move into. If the Aether moves into holes in atoms it then creates a motion towards the centre of those atoms. This creates an angular momentum towards the Earth... Gravity. The Morley experiment didn't account for the photon travelling towards the point of least resistance in the Aether.. atom holes. If the Earth is moving, and the Aether is travelling into atom holes, all that is happening is that a new hole is moving in front of the photon. Just like loading a 6 shooter, the photon can just continue on its path. This also creates the exact same bending of space time as gravity moves into the Earth.

Edited August 11, 2011 by Pincho Paxton

[Leader Bee]

what is the probability of the hole occuring infront of a photon? if a hole doesn't appear does light just get blocked, does it slow down what happens to the light that should be getting to us? This phenomena should be observable as dark patches in the sky.. no?

[Pincho Paxton]

what is the probability of the hole occuring infront of a photon? if a hole doesn't appear does light just get blocked, does it slow down what happens to the light that should be getting to us? This phenomena should be observable as dark patches in the sky.. no?

 

The photon was pointed towards the Earth in that experiment. If you point the photon in another direction, the area of least resistance is in the new direction.. the bending of space-time, the movement of Aether towards holes creating such a bend. It's like throwing a ball through a waterfall into a cave.. there is a force that can be overcome by speed.

Edited August 11, 2011 by Pincho Paxton

[mississippichem]

Yes I based my Aether theory on that experiment. The photon should move from its direct orbit to the Earth based on the Aether no being in motion with the surrounding planets.

 

That experiment is widely accepted to have been the nail in the coffin for aether theories. So how is it that you are using this experiment to give the opposite conclusion? Explain the mechanics, with mathematical justification, of how your aether theory is in line with the MM experiment.

Edited August 11, 2011 by mississippichem

[Ringer]

Aether is much like a liquid, and is like a sea pressure, but much lower, but it is infinite, so creates infinite pressure. The pressure created the Galaxies, because the infinite pressure folds into Black Holes. The black holes cannot contain the material that falls into them, so the material is reduced in scale, and then escapes as magnetism (Dark Flow). The escaping pressure creates the bubble around the Galaxy. The pressure on the bubble then creates pounding waves. The pounding waves then create more pressure inside the bubble. The black hole spins the material out as a disc spiral. The spinning material creates more holes in the aether. The holes then allow more material inside, and creates suns, and planets. All of the atoms etc. The escaping materials create more bubbles. The bubbles now counteract more pressure. This ends up as a bubble wrap to protect us from the huge pressures of infinite Aether. The bubbles however are slightly unstable. A meteor, or comet for example can break through them. If something big happened to a bubble it would alter Gravity. The dinosaurs must have experience a break in the bubble chain, and the pressure must have suddenly dropped on them, and killed them.

 

 

I asked how this is so and I asked for evidence. This is nothing but mind wandering rants. How about you show why your theory of gravity is better than the current one. Then come up with some evidence of aether, then you can give predictions on how the holes form. Then give evidence about how those holes form into different celestial bodies. How your theory explains the appearance of heavy atoms more so than a pressure of a dying star. So at the moment you have nothing to back the statement that dinosaurs must have experienced anything.

 

The bone density must have been filled over time by high pressure which gives them the appearance of normal density as they have become filled by new material internally, and externally. Take a look at the creatures around us.. birds (light) have three toes. Camels (Heavy) have two pressurized toes. Elephants (very heavy) have compressed toes. Fish (Under pressure of the sea) have toes that have squeezed out as fins. Humans (in the middle) have the toes of Dinosaurs, but with the extra digits squeezed out.

 

So fossilized bones happen to be filled after death with stuff that is virtually identical to bone? Birds are not always light, Ostriches can weigh up to 300 pounds, although they don't have the hollow spots that flying birds have. Even then birds can weigh quite a bit in comparison to their skeletal system. Then you can look at all the animals that are light with hoofs, sheep, goats, etc. Also, fish had fins long before dinosaurs were around so the change in gravity would have nothing to do with that. So could you cite evidence to any of this? I have no idea what your last statement means.

 

[Pincho Paxton]

That experiment is widely accepted to have been the nail in the coffin for aether theories. So how is it that you are using this experiment to give the opposite conclusion? Explain the mechanics, with mathematical justification, of how your aether theory is in line with the MM experiment.

 

+1 mass

-1 negative mass

 

Mass can bump mass.

 

Negative mass can bump negative mass.

 

Mass moves into negative mass.

 

Negative mass can move through positive mass.

 

Negative mass can create a hole through positive mass allowing positive mass to enter positive mass through that hole.

 

Positive mass bumps out an electron, and positive mass shrinks by that electron mass.

 

Negative mass bumps out a positron, and negative mass expands by the mass of that positron.

 

Negative mass is a hole that positive mass can move into, it is an atom.

 

 

This is a Turing machine, and...

 

+1

0

-1

 

....is the Trinary code that creates everything.

 

+1 mass

 

-1 Negative mass

 

0 = zero space.

 

Zero space is a location that is empty.

 

All mass can move into zero space.

 

Zero space is a Black Hole. It is the area of least resistance for mass, and negative mass.

 

Mass has to fold into negative mass if it shrinks to negative.

 

Negative mass can expand into mass if it becomes positive.

 

That's the logic commands. It's a solid computer program.

Edited August 11, 2011 by Pincho Paxton