Re: Nobel Prize for David Thomson?!

From: David Thomson (news5_at_volantis.org)
Date: 12/27/04 

Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2004 19:53:01 -0600

"Franz Heymann" <notfranz.heymann@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:cqnen0$t5$3@titan.btinternet.com...
> Your understanding of gravitation is at least as flawed as your
> understanding of the rest of physics.
> Guess what! The gravitational force acts on energy.

Your understanding of energy is at least as flawed as your understanding of
the rest of physics. Guess what! Energy is merely a unit of work. There
is nothing for gravitational force to act on. You might as well say that
force acts on velocity and resistance.

The gravitational force can act only on mass. Now, even according to your
understanding of physics, the photon has zero mass. If the photon has zero
mass, then it has zero energy, because energy is equal to mass times the
speed of light squared, as you see it.

>> Now if you really
>> wanted to know how light bends around massive objects, you might ask
>> me for the answer, because I have it.
>
> Too late. I already know that light travels along a geodesic.

No you don't. Your physics has denied the existence of Aether. There is
nothing for you to call a geodesic. But if you are going to accept the
geodesic, then you have to accept the full quantification of the Aether and
the laws of physics that results from it. In that case, I have the correct
explanation for how the geodesic forms.

>> As for dark matter, it exists mainly near massive objects. There is
> more
>> dark matter near Earth than there is in the emptiness of space. But
> it
>> can't be detected because dark matter exists outside of the Aether.
> The
>> Aether is what gives structure to the angular momentum of dark
> matter by
>> imparting the qualities of charges to it.
>
> You don't know what you are talking about.

You just enjoy knocking people. How many times have you told someone that
they didn't have a theory until they could quantify it? Now that I have
presented a fully quantified Aether Physics Model, why don't you take the
time to read it?

Dave

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Nobel Prize for David Thomson?!
    ... > Your understanding of gravitation is at least as flawed as your ... > understanding of the rest of physics. ... Your physics has denied the existence of Aether. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Nobel Prize for David Thomson?!
    ... > Your understanding of gravitation is at least as flawed as your ... > understanding of the rest of physics. ... Your physics has denied the existence of Aether. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Article: A Century of Einstein
    ... to the physical properties of the aether, ... [the kinetic energy of the electron] W so ... with GR an almost as abstract theory of gravitation, ... classical pre-relativistic physics, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Article: A Century of Einstein
    ... to the physical properties of the aether, ... [the kinetic energy of the electron] W so ... with GR an almost as abstract theory of gravitation, ... classical pre-relativistic physics, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Is physics a science?
    ... science and technology. ... It is whatever physics wants it to be. ... >>>aether would do, as long as it has certain basic properties, and test ... >> physicists to explain it to them. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)