Re: Eotvos.
- From: "em" <nootlanoo@dodiggerdo>
- Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 15:00:04 +1100
"N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc)" <N: dlzc1 D:cox T:net@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message news:METdf.86$6u6.7@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Dear em:
>
> "em" <nootlanoo@dodiggerdo> wrote in message
> news:4377e7d8$0$14479$afc38c87@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> "N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc)" <N: dlzc1 D:cox T:net@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
>> message news:x4Ldf.36$6u6.21@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Dear em:
>>>
>>> "em" <nootlanoo@dodiggerdo> wrote in message
>>> news:4377231f$0$26117$afc38c87@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>
>>>>> "N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc)" <N: dlzc1 D:cox T:net@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
>>>>> message
>>>>> news:vOqdf.8092$nh2.3709@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> I agree with you there that it is the tip of the iceberg,
>> as there is more to gather from this really astounding
>> fact.
>
> ... when/if it is fact.
A lot of effort and energy has been expended to find limitations and/or
error with GR. To date none has been found.
That is good enough for me. I'll I'll put my money on WEP EEP and GR and
declare them absolute.
>>>> Gravity is derived by the mediation of a messenger
>>>> particle?
>>>
>>> No, because it is still being described by "the field",
>>> there would be simply another dimension.
>>
>> I think an expanding Aether would overcome all need
>> to ascribe a need to suppose there exist other
>> dimensions.
> It would have to be expanding on very large scales, to avoid detection.
> And any such expansion would not be a Loretnz aether.
If every Aetheric particle in the universe was simultaneously expanding at
the same rate, in such manner that all rulers and units of measure, even the
wave length of light would also have to be effected by this expansion.
If the propagation of light was indeed mediated by say the propagation of a
longitudinal vacuum wave then as the particles of Aether increased in size,
so too would the frequency of any event be automatically carried with it.
No, it is not the Lorentz Aether, (nor Einstein's either), but then again if
Lorentz had of completed the task of unmasking the Aether, everybody would
have yelled, 'BINGO.'
>>>> It is an important outcome, either way it goes and
>>>> a null result is also important.
>>>>
>>>> But the silence does not bode well that a non-null
>>>> outcome was produced.
>>>
>>> I don't paint my self into that corner. Let's say we
>>> were talking about people that knew how somebody
>>> published on "cold fusion" before others could verify
>>> their results. Let's say that it is remotely possible
>>> that a non-null result was obtained, or that the
>>> nulling procedures for the various mass
>>> configurations was significantly system dependent
>>> (different procedures were required, at least in
>>> detail). Don't you think they'd hold their breath,
>>> and try it several times, before commiting their careers to public view?
>>>
>>> I can wait a bit longer...
>>
>> Wise move and I myself too consider be patient.
>> So... I just ask without committing. But... I say...
>> it does seems a little drafty in here. Do you suppose we are sitting here
>> waiting for a train
>> that is not coming?
>
> Who is waiting? I have things to keep me busy.
I was. I had given him the benefit of the doubt. Even though I considered it
would not come to anything, one has always to remain open here as we are
dealing with the mysteries of nature, physics and at the same time political
and institutional agendas, anything could happen.
>> Oh... and the other thing... what ever happened to that
>> GravityB probe?
>
> Being analyzed. Looking for a silly whilimeter. Right at the edge of the
> budget.
Cheques all cleared no doubt. (Sound of crickets in a hollow.) I thought the
offices were looking a little abandoned.
I heard they have been having a spot of software problems, system crashes,
reboots, etc.
>> When it was launched it was hailed as the most
>> expensive and with prominent fanfare, being of great
>> significance, etc, yet, once all the cheques had cleared and drawn, it
>> pretty well fizzled out into
>> mediocrity and obscurity.
>>
>> All you could hear were the crickets in the hollow.
>>
>> Do you think it may have done a Michelson and
>> Morley and produce results in conflict with the
>> designers anticipation?
>>
>> i.e.... like no frame drag or worst still, no
>> physical space/time curvature to speak of?
>
> Already been observed, documented, and published, involving much less
> money. Relativity and Lorentz aether are two sides of the same coin (a
> statement I'll no doubt get flack for). They both go down together, so
> hold on for the results.
Yes, I do not think space actually curves either as a gyroscope in orbit
will well testify.
I am thinking more the geodesic is not caused by a physical curvature of
space more so the expansion of space itself and the earth racing up to met
it.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Eotvos.
- From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
- Re: Eotvos.
- From: Joe Fischer
- Re: Eotvos.
- References:
- Re: Eotvos.
- From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
- Re: Eotvos.
- From: em
- Re: Eotvos.
- From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
- Re: Eotvos.
- Prev by Date: Re: Non-expanding universe
- Next by Date: Re: SR's FLAW in a NUTSHELL.
- Previous by thread: Re: Eotvos.
- Next by thread: Re: Eotvos.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
