 * NEW * BEDINI RPX BOOK & DVD SET: BEDINI RPX

2019 ESTC ALL SEATS SOLD OUT!
PRE-REGISTER FOR THE
2020 ENERGY CONFERENCE 1. ## With Reference to Tesla comments on Gravity

Tesla stated that the current notions of gravity do not account for the motions of bodies,

These notions are Newton's and Einstein's where by the gravitational force is produced in notable quantities by object of high "mass", ie the planet, where by the gravitational influence of the atmosphere on the exponential rate of decay in field strength over distance make it possible to create a sufficient approximation of the strength of gravity (the rate of acceleration) for different distances from the planets surface without having to consider the atmosphere.

The specific rate of decay in acceleration over distance is such that the acceleration decreases inversely proportionate to the distance squared. If we take the distance value (in feet) being at my current altitude, 920 ft to be distance one (D1), while the acceleration, A1 , is 9.8meters per second per second, while, D2 , is the cruise altitude of a aircraft, 30,000 ft, then the ratio being D2 over D1 squared is equal to the ratio of A1 over A2. In language the square of the ratio of a change in distance equals the inverse ratio of the reactive change in acceleration.

(D2/D1)² = A1/A2

The implications of the exponential form of the given relationship between distance and acceleration (due to gravity) is such that for change in distance by a equal value progressively increasing in net distance from the planets surface the associated changes in acceleration become progressively lower in the quantity of change, ie, the sensitivity of change in acceleration for the same change in distance at different distances from the planet (source) is more sensitive closer to the source while being less sensitive at a great distance from the source.

Where, D1, is 920 ft , D2 being , 30000 ft, A1 being, 9.8 m/s , A2, where the square of the ratio being D2 over D1 is , U.

(D2/D1)² = A1/U = A2

This gives the value for A2 being; 0.009216356 m/s

While the recorded value; 9.715 m/s ,at 30000 ft. (From; U.S. Standard Atmosphere Air Properties - SI Units).

This suggests to me that the atmosphere and/or eather play a role in the Earths gravitational (acceleration/pressure) environment.  Reply With Quote

2. Originally Posted by Sam J Batchelar Tesla stated that the current notions of gravity do not account for the motions of bodies,

These notions are Newton's and Einstein's where by the gravitational force is produced in notable quantities by object of high "mass", ie the planet, where by the gravitational influence of the atmosphere on the exponential rate of decay in field strength over distance make it possible to create a sufficient approximation of the strength of gravity (the rate of acceleration) for different distances from the planets surface without having to consider the atmosphere.

The specific rate of decay in acceleration over distance is such that the acceleration decreases inversely proportionate to the distance squared. If we take the distance value (in feet) being at my current altitude, 920 ft to be distance one (D1), while the acceleration, A1 , is 9.8meters per second per second, while, D2 , is the cruise altitude of a aircraft, 30,000 ft, then the ratio being D2 over D1 squared is equal to the ratio of A1 over A2. In language the square of the ratio of a change in distance equals the inverse ratio of the reactive change in acceleration.

(D2/D1)² = A1/A2

The implications of the exponential form of the given relationship between distance and acceleration (due to gravity) is such that for change in distance by a equal value progressively increasing in net distance from the planets surface the associated changes in acceleration become progressively lower in the quantity of change, ie, the sensitivity of change in acceleration for the same change in distance at different distances from the planet (source) is more sensitive closer to the source while being less sensitive at a great distance from the source.

Where, D1, is 920 ft , D2 being , 30000 ft, A1 being, 9.8 m/s , A2, where the square of the ratio being D2 over D1 is , U.

(D2/D1)² = A1/U = A2

This gives the value for A2 being; 0.009216356 m/s

While the recorded value; 9.715 m/s ,at 30000 ft. (From; U.S. Standard Atmosphere Air Properties - SI Units).

This suggests to me that the atmosphere and/or eather play a role in the Earths gravitational (acceleration/pressure) environment.

For all of the above..i can say that standard Physics books have no definition for Mass ,Time, & Energy and Teslian wisom does really sheds some light on it..
Rgds,  Reply With Quote

3. My presentation at the recent conference, Hacking the Aether, goes into all the mechanics at work on gravity, defining energy, showing the mechanism of inertia, what time actually is, etc... in a very simple way.  Reply With Quote

4. Originally Posted by Aaron Murakami My presentation at the recent conference, Hacking the Aether, goes into all the mechanics at work on gravity, defining energy, showing the mechanism of inertia, what time actually is, etc... in a very simple way.

Is that presentation available currently (free or to purchase) anywhere? Originally Posted by Faraday88 For all of the above..i can say that standard Physics books have no definition for Mass ,Time, & Energy and Teslian wisom does really sheds some light on it..
Rgds,

Yes, the physics of today seems to care more for the complications and implications of fundamental principles rather than the principles themselves being clearly understood, with reference to the variable "mass" I understand can be re-stated as volume (as in particle volume). Volume being linearly proportional to weight or pressure (of gravity).

I would like to emphasise the comparative difference in individual gain (understanding) as a product of individual effort to ascertain information about nature as opposed to relying on the efforts of others.  Reply With Quote

5. Originally Posted by Sam J Batchelar Is that presentation available currently (free or to purchase) anywhere?

Yes, the physics of today seems to care more for the complications and implications of fundamental principles rather than the principles themselves being clearly understood, with reference to the variable "mass" I understand can be re-stated as volume (as in particle volume). Volume being linearly proportional to weight or pressure (of gravity).

I would like to emphasise the comparative difference in individual gain (understanding) as a product of individual effort to ascertain information about nature as opposed to relying on the efforts of others.

It's in queue to be released. All videos are going to be released according to the order the cameraman gets them into his computer for editing. All conference videos are paid downloads except for panel discussions and some special presentations.  Reply With Quote

6. Originally Posted by Sam J Batchelar Is that presentation available currently (free or to purchase) anywhere?

Yes, the physics of today seems to care more for the complications and implications of fundamental principles rather than the principles themselves being clearly understood, with reference to the variable "mass" I understand can be re-stated as volume (as in particle volume). Volume being linearly proportional to weight or pressure (of gravity).

I would like to emphasise the comparative difference in individual gain (understanding) as a product of individual effort to ascertain information about nature as opposed to relying on the efforts of others.
I fully agree with your views....Understanding is absolutely Individualistic...the masses cannot be educated...there is no mechanism to teach the masses... there is only self learning...the masses are compelled upon by situation to gather a learning in that way...that's how things are...
Rgds,  Reply With Quote