|
Patlal
You ask too many questions


Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 3 hours, 52 minutes
|
You'll need 15 minutes to understand that gravity technically doesn't exist 1
#26977454 - 10/09/20 06:35 PM (3 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Good old Einstein. Gravity is an illusion.
Watch this and get learnt.
--------------------
|
Brian Jones
Club 27



Registered: 12/18/12
Posts: 12,340
Loc: attending Snake Church
Last seen: 6 hours, 11 minutes
|
Re: You'll need 15 minutes to understand that gravity technically doesn't exist [Re: Patlal] 1
#26977524 - 10/09/20 07:34 PM (3 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
It is my understanding that gravitational force is known but not understood. I would compare it to evolution being accepted even though we don't know how life began.
-------------------- "The Rolling Stones will break up over Brian Jones' dead body" John Lennon I don't want no commies in my car. No Christians either. The worst thing about corruption is that it works so well,
|
stimpson
a superhero buddha



Registered: 02/08/05
Posts: 1,331
Loc: ny
Last seen: 1 month, 5 days
|
Re: You'll need 15 minutes to understand that gravity technically doesn't exist [Re: Brian Jones] 1
#26977584 - 10/09/20 08:19 PM (3 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
so... ok, there must be some degree of validity to this since it seems that astrophysicists base cosmological calculations/models on Einstein's equations... although, do you know any astrophysicists? have you ever been to the NASA HQ? there might be some unsaid things going on behind the scenes...
anyway, so i understand the concept of light SEEMING to bend because of the offset resultant of the time it takes for the photon to travel between two objective points in a matrix. but that doesn't cause the objective matrix itself to bend, that just means that the straight line between two objective points in the matrix at the instant that the photon ejected becomes not a line between the observing point on earth and the location of the star, but a line between a point from which the earth has moved and from a point at which the star has moved. hypothetically there is still a rigid, xyz coordinate set matrix from an objective perspective.
this concept of space time, thus, if the xyz coordinate set becomes curved, must not be pervasive but finite and dependent on a point in motion. an indefinitely curved coordinate set would confound all measurements absolutely. in other words, you would start with a rigid xyz coordinate set and alter it continuously as time passes, based on measurements between a stationary point and another travelling point, which then is not a point, it is a mass in motion.
that still doesn't explain gravity as an illusion though, the way i'm understanding it presently. if the concept is that masses on the surface of the earth are stationary and the earth is propelling into them, the force inward toward the center of the earth would not be pervasive around the entire earth... unless you are proposing, somehow, that the matrix is travelling inward toward the center of the earth into a black hole.
secondly, if you are rejecting the concept of gravity that would go for the earth and sun as well. your argument would then be that the earth and sun are travelling in a straight path through an objective, rigid xyz coordinate set and it would only SEEM that the earth is rotating around the sun because... because... because why? because in the time it takes the photons that leave the surface of the sun, travelling straight in the xyz coordinate set at the position in which the earth will arrive at in the future, the earth and sun have travelled straight by the distance of an entire earth orbit around the sun?
hm, the other confound factor is the position of the moon. the moon is relatively close to the earth. so the argument would be that both the moon and the earth are travelling straight and their positions are not changing with regard to one another... wait, so that confounds it. because even if it would only appear that the moon is rotating around the earth, based on this concept, you would never see the moon from certain positions on the face of the earth. right? you would only see the moon from one side of the planet, and you would see it all the time. is that right?
set me straight here.
-------------------- uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuhhhhhhhhhhhmmmm... ... ... ok.
|
stimpson
a superhero buddha



Registered: 02/08/05
Posts: 1,331
Loc: ny
Last seen: 1 month, 5 days
|
Re: You'll need 15 minutes to understand that gravity technically doesn't exist [Re: stimpson] 1
#26977600 - 10/09/20 08:28 PM (3 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
also, and if you can, explain the essential different between this "space time" and a series of rigid xyz coordinate sets in series along an array, with positions ON THE ARRAY, t0, t1, t2, t3
in other words, time would not be a dimensional measurement from within the xyz coordinate set but an objective measurement from outside the dimensional system. i mean, you could posit that there are dimensions at each point in the xyz coordinate set, dimensions along arrays, like a dimension of charge or something, if everything is ultimately electricity, and a dimension of polarity, etc.
but the time "dimension" would not actually be a dimension per say but... iono what you would call that, other than an array of dimensions.
you know, like a 3d animation. like a model.
but so, what is the essential difference between space time and THAT?
it's gotta be that the xyz coordinate set is based on measurements from, say, a position of earth relative to an incoming, moving photon or something. right?
-------------------- uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuhhhhhhhhhhhmmmm... ... ... ok.
|
stimpson
a superhero buddha



Registered: 02/08/05
Posts: 1,331
Loc: ny
Last seen: 1 month, 5 days
|
Re: You'll need 15 minutes to understand that gravity technically doesn't exist [Re: stimpson]
#26977653 - 10/09/20 09:19 PM (3 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
unless he's talking about setting projected digital space on the surface of the earth. then, yeah if you somehow figured out how to set a static frame of xyz coordinates in a cube around the earth floating exactly through space via satellites or something at the exact same speed as the earth, then it would be rigid.
but personally, i have conceptualized setting up projected digital space, or 5G, or whatever you want to call it, NOT pervasively, but instead specifically, like in metropolitan areas. i mean, it's in metropolitan areas where it would serve it's purpose most immediately anyway. have you ever been on a construction crew that digs? those fuckers don't ever know what the hell is under the ground, even after they call in all the utility companies to mark things out. you know how many times i have seen an excavator operator crack open a water main or gas main or old antiquated utility line and go "whoops, there was no flag, how was i supposed to know??" meanwhile the site engineer is off flirting with all the mexican dudes. jesus.
anyway, you would definitely want to set up like routers or something. 8 of them, in all four corners of a cube. 4 at the four corners of the lowest extent of your matrix, and 4 at the heighest extent, on poles or something. you would probably want to set up zones, like do this for each city block or something, at least initially. it would be more attainable that way anyway.
why haven't we done this yet again? it probably wouldn't even be that expensive to do on a basic level, especially if you were using landbased routers and not worrying about cell phone reception from steel structure, etc.
somebody explain to me what we are doing again besides buying hybrid casino chicks and inflating the economy for the black market. plz, just tell me. no seriously, i want to know, tell me.
-------------------- uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuhhhhhhhhhhhmmmm... ... ... ok.
|
Northerner
splelling chceker


Registered: 07/29/12
Posts: 14,141
Loc: FNQ
Last seen: 10 minutes, 48 seconds
|
Re: You'll need 15 minutes to understand that gravity technically doesn't exist [Re: stimpson]
#26977750 - 10/09/20 10:55 PM (3 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I've watched this channel a lot, but this video is unconvincing.
Scientists can register the curve of light through space because of the gravity of objects and then detect invisible rogue planets that have abandoned their suns... for example. Mass attracts mass. Even light has mass.
Convincing toss, but still toss.
--------------------
The nearest we ever come to knowing truth is when we are witness to paradox.
|
|