Gravitational Potential Energy

[Marc Hamen]

hello all,

Aaron, I like this thread of Einstein, I'm lol, because you completely reason , yes Einstein considering the Ether differently, in the book " Ether and theorie of relativity" 1920 , transcription of the conference in Leyde ( Germany) , in French transcription sorry by M. Solovine, your explanation is clear. Einstein say : "This ether should not be conceived as being endowed with the property that characterizes the environment ponderable, ie as consisting of parts which may be tracked over time: the notion of movement must not be applied to him. " But Einstein have no known the Photophorese experiment and why is a vortex.

On my works with the gravity, I'm utilizing 2 different gravitational mechanics potential , one is Earth and others is Moon. Have the same on my circuit, JB have the best simple oscillator radio circuit, Raymond Kromrey have a good paper, but not full :
http://www.google.fr/url?sa=t&rct=j&...Eh-HRupu3uI4ZA


The time reference, is different, the Ether have a big problem. the virtual particle ( vortex in the matter ) have a problem. Andrei Sakharavov say the " The Metric Elasticity of the space governs the action of vacuum fluctuations" and he have a good explanation.

If you have 3 points in the space, in a linear system, not effects. But in a no linear, its curved the space time, and the time have not the same reference with this 2 first metric and the stress tensor of energy.

Your works is very good Aaron, best regards for all.



MH

[tachyon]

Ok.. a note for the trees is that "dead" trees don't suck up water the same as living trees while all other functions work the same, if you point down a branch of a plant you have submerged it's roots in water this plant will die faster compared to a plant that has it's branch vertical to the ground and pointing up contrary to common hydrodynamics.. finally barotropism is something of admire since seeds don't have enough energy in them to always grow up straight from the ground and no solid explanation has been given yet. Also a/c current promotes plant growth with other types of EM waves having better results than others.. I believe now that this is why the silly experiment with heavy metal and classical music worked it's because classical music has more suitable harmonics. So plants are electrical in a sense.. as we are.

The first UFO's in earth are the plants and trees.

[Aaron Murakami]

ΕΝ ΑΡΧΗ ΗΝ Ο ΛΟΓΟΣ.. Aristotele was right? And I dont mean what they learn you in physics courses but the true meaning of his words... I personaly think that newtonian mechanics are correct for macroscopic phenomena but some people are saying the aristotele has hidden words inside his writings .

I seriously don't think aristotele was so dumb to think that because a ball on a moving boat with steady speed would fall on the same spot he made the assumption that this applies to every other phenomena.. the algebra that ancient Greeks made up were incredibly HARD to invent.. they needed superminds to make that happen. There must be a double meaning of his words..

For me aether is a vogue word.. with the same logic there might be a lot of types of aethers.. or aether might be a dimension we may be missing that explains gravity..

I also believe that it's useful to have an intuitive mind because math is very abstract and tends to confuse people but nevertheless science without math is like sea without water.

I thought of an experiment , let's say you have a conical shape the has a tiny hole in it's top center then you place base at the surface of water and you vibrate it, will water squirt out of the hole? Will the repetition rate of the oscillation make a difference? What if you submerged the conic section? How do plants and trees suck up the water thousands of feet high? It cannot be due to evaporation of water from the leaves and hydrodynamic differences.

Yes, Aether is a vague word, originally it was the "air" that the Olympians breathed in the upper atmosphere.

As a tribute to this ancient concept, Aether is still in use as this "primordial" substance but in recent times, it is a general reference to the sub-atomic "stuff" that everything comes from.

For some, they believe it is neutrinos, some say it is virtual photons (bi-polar), to me it is like a 1-dimensional bi-polar massless electrostatic charge that is in a constant flux.

Intuition always has to be a part of any real science because not everything has an explanation that can be realized at the intellectual level - much of it you have to simply grok.

All the water movement in a plant has its roots in electrical activity - but trees also pull water from the air and put it in the ground.

Aether is gravity - mass does displace it and the Aether rebounds back in the direction where it was displaced from. I have never seen an experiment, electrical, gravitational, etc... that cannot be explained by this model.

For example, a very interesting experiment is DePalma's spinning ball experiment. A spinning ball will go up faster and higher and will fall faster than a ball that is not spinning if the same force is used to launch them into the air. Therefore, Einstein is wrong.

DePalma has his own explanation for it, but my model predicts the experimental end result perfectly and is completely different from DePalma.

As the mass is rotating around an axis that is perpendicular to the ground, the mass of the object is moving into the Aether at 90 degrees to the direction of the gravitational Aether. Therefore, some of the Aether is pushed or deflected towards the outer edge of the mass and that means that there is less Aether that can push on the mass in the middle of the object. Therefore - the inertia is reduced on the inside of the mass. That is one thing happening. The second is that by virtue of having a smaller diameter towards the middle, it is traveling less distance per unit of time encountering less Aether. So both of these effects together reduce the inertia of the mass.

So when the spinning ball is thrown up into the air, it is deflecting gravitational potential away from it meaning there is less of a gravitational push on the mass and it can move up with with less gravitational resistance. Therefore, for the same input, it will be able to go higher, faster. Then on the way down, the same deflection is happening as it "parts" the Aether it is falling through meaning it can and will fall faster - faster than any free fall speed limit.

The ball that is not spinning will be launched up and the Aether is moving through all the mass giving the normal full gravitational resistance so it will go up slower and not as high and on the way down, it is limited to normal falling speeds.

This Aetheric gravitational model consistently predicts, with accuracy, all these kinds of experimental outcomes more than any other model and that is why I stick with it. If I see something that advanced it, then great but I have yet to see anything that contradicts it. It perfectly explains light bending towards large objects, gravitational attraction between 2 large bodies, gravitational waves, etc... and it even explains all the energy gains in the Velijko mechanical oscillator and all other mechanical amplifiers. It describes why you can generate electricity from a spinning magnet with contacts between the axle and the edge of the magnet, etc...

SpiningBall(Understanding)

That is DePalma's explanation of what causes the spinning ball results, but I respectfully disagree with analysis.

[tachyon]

ΕΝ ΑΡΧΗ ΗΝ Ο ΛΟΓΟΣ.. Aristotele was right? And I dont mean what they learn you in physics courses but the true meaning of his words... I personaly think that newtonian mechanics are correct for macroscopic phenomena but some people are saying the aristotele has hidden words inside his writings .

I seriously don't think aristotele was so dumb to think that because a ball on a moving boat with steady speed would fall on the same spot he made the assumption that this applies to every other phenomena.. the algebra that ancient Greeks made up were incredibly HARD to invent.. they needed superminds to make that happen. There must be a double meaning of his words..

For me aether is a vogue word.. with the same logic there might be a lot of types of aethers.. or aether might be a dimension we may be missing that explains gravity..

I also believe that it's useful to have an intuitive mind because math is very abstract and tends to confuse people but nevertheless science without math is like sea without water.

I thought of an experiment , let's say you have a conical shape the has a tiny hole in it's top center then you place base at the surface of water and you vibrate it, will water squirt out of the hole? Will the repetition rate of the oscillation make a difference? What if you submerged the conic section? How do plants and trees suck up the water thousands of feet high? It cannot be due to evaporation of water from the leaves and hydrodynamic differences.

[Aaron Murakami]

The relative density of the aether in relation to a mass determines exactly how fast light will move through that region.

That density determines the motion of all mass through it and also determines how fast the clock will tick in that region.

Einstein was wrong, but you are stating the wrong thing(s) that he is wrong about and having time linked to motion of mass through space is not one of them.

I know it's en vogue to smash Einstein lol, but at least do it with things he was actually wrong about.

If you understand what I posted, you'll see I'm not saying what Einstein said.

By virtue of being able to calculate Power, P = W/t, the rate that time flows is absolutely relative to the local Aetheric density.

And when you know that inertia is a back emf equivelant (mass is the inductor), it's indisputable - it's common sense.

If you have a bowl of water and let a rubber band powered propeller loose, it will spin fast. That is like low density aether, low gravity or low inertia. The motion of this propeller in the water analogy is the movement of mass through the Aether. The rate at which this motion can happen is limited by the aetheric density. Light travels faster in this space compared to an absolute benchmark reference point.

If you have a bowl of gelatin and let the propeller go, it will spin slower. That is high density aether, high gravity or high inertia. The rate at which this motion can happen is reduced and in this area of space, light will travel slower compared to the absolute reference point.

If there is an observer in both areas, it will look like time is normal to that person in their own area, because since light is also at a speed that the aetheric density will permit, their conscious awareness is also subject to the same density and will be proportionately slower as well. So, it will simply look normal.

This is NOT Einstein's relativity - E does not equal mc2. MASS IN AN INDUCTOR and mass has zero energy stored - what is being inducted when the mass is accelerated? When you know what that means, you know what time is.

When you charge a battery with Bedini's circuits, it is a TIME CHARGE. What do you think that means? The inductive spike is POTENTIAL, which is a TIME CHARGE. Why? You are charging the battery with time potential or POTENTIAL TIME. It is a POTENTIAL for time to exist! When you force that potential to perform work, motion is enabled.

The greatest trick Einstein ever pulled was to convince others that Dayton Miller's experiments were flawed. What I explained overturns Einstein's manipulation - it does not agree with it. Again, if you dispute Einstein, at least do it for what he was actually wrong about - otherwise, it just looks like your opposing Einstein just for the sake of disagreeing with him.

---------------------------------------------------------------

"The effect [of ether-drift] has persisted throughout. After considering all the possible sources of error, there always remained a positive effect." — Dayton Miller (1928, p.399)

"My opinion about Miller's experiments is the following. ... Should the positive result be confirmed, then the special theory of relativity and with it the general theory of relativity, in its current form, would be invalid. Experimentum summus judex. Only the equivalence of inertia and gravitation would remain, however, they would have to lead to a significantly different theory."
— Albert Einstein, in a letter to Edwin E. Slosson, 8 July 1925 (from copy in Hebrew University Archive, Jerusalem.) See citations below for Silberstein 1925 and Einstein 1926.


"I believe that I have really found the relationship between gravitation and electricity, assuming that the Miller experiments are based on a fundamental error. Otherwise, the whole relativity theory collapses like a house of cards."
— Albert Einstein, in a letter to Robert Millikan, June 1921 (in Clark 1971, p.328)


"You imagine that I look back on my life's work with calm satisfaction. But from nearby it looks quite different. There is not a single concept of which I am convinced that it will stand firm, and I feel uncertain whether I am in general on the right track."
— Albert Einstein, on his 70th birthday, in a letter to Maurice Solovine, 28 March 1949 (in B. Hoffman Albert Einstein: Creator and Rebel 1972, p.328)

[tachyon]

The greatest trick that Einstein ever pulled was convincing people that the rate of the flow of time is related to the rate of motion through space. +1

[Aaron Murakami]

You seem to be operating from the assumption that the big bang happened and that the universe is expanding and will eventually 'die' of entropic heat death.

Which is probably why you think it necessary to explain cold negentropic processes in terms of time. If entropy is unidirectional in time then negentropy can only happen in backwards or reversed time?

The big bang never happened. If the universe was going to die of entropic heat death it would have happened hundreds of quadrillions of years ago. Something that has no center and no edge cannot be expanding.

The greatest trick that Einstein ever pulled was convincing people that the rate of the flow of time is related to the rate of motion through space.


So there is no need to explain entropy and negentropy in terms of time. Both processes occur in times forward direction. As do all processes that we percieve and experience.

It is much clearer to think about processes in terms of Yin and Yang. Cold and Hot. Balance.

Sorry, I'm not sure where you come off with that interpretation of what I said. I don't believe in the Big Bang Theory and Einstein isn't behind convincing anyone that the flow of time is related to the rate of motion through space. You're misinformed here.

I gave you the proper distinctions - you can take them or leave them.

[bluestix]

that does not contribute to the entropy of the universe

You seem to be operating from the assumption that the big bang happened and that the universe is expanding and will eventually 'die' of entropic heat death.

Which is probably why you think it necessary to explain cold negentropic processes in terms of time. If entropy is unidirectional in time then negentropy can only happen in backwards or reversed time?

The big bang never happened. If the universe was going to die of entropic heat death it would have happened hundreds of quadrillions of years ago. Something that has no center and no edge cannot be expanding.

The greatest trick that Einstein ever pulled was convincing people that the rate of the flow of time is related to the rate of motion through space.


So there is no need to explain entropy and negentropy in terms of time. Both processes occur in times forward direction. As do all processes that we percieve and experience.

It is much clearer to think about processes in terms of Yin and Yang. Cold and Hot. Balance.

[Aaron Murakami]

Hot "negative entropy" - this is a simple regauging process in all "overunity" machines. A ball bouncing back up is regauging itself and is a form of "self ordering". Yet, it is contributing to entropy of the universe.

A bunch of ants that work together to form an ant hill - that is a classical open dissipative system that is demonstrating a self ordering process. It is a negative entropy process, yes it actually is a "hot" form of it since it is moving forward in time and still contributes to entropy of the universe.

Hot negative entropy would be any self-ordering process that contributes to the entropy of the universe. It isn't an oxymoron, it is a clear distinction.

----------------

To talk about cold negative entropy, we have to define time.

Time is simply the progression of movement through the Aether in forward time. A clock doesn't measure time, it simply shows motion in increments. What determines the rate of this progression of movement? The density of the Aether. If an object sped up towards the speed of light, mass being an inductor, the Aether will induce a counter potential that resists the movement of the relatively forward or oncoming Aether and that is inertia. But the relative density of the Aether in relation to the mass is such that movement has slowed down and at that great speed, time will tick slow from an absolute reference point. That is because the progression of movement is being limited and therefore, in that area, light will also be slowed down proportionately from an absolute reference point. But to that area, it will appear to be normal speed since all of perception is subject to that higher Aetheric density - including our conscious awareness.

With less density, motion happens quicker from an absolute reference point.

Being that time is simply the progression of this movement of mass through the Aether - that is forward time.

Mass in forward time exerts an outward displacement on the Aether.

If we look at an electromagnetic coil, when it is charged, the magnetic field is condensed and polarized Aether. The density of that Aether is quite high compared to the ambient Aether. that magnetic field displaces the Aether just like an object with mass but with way more density. That is forward time phenomena.

When the coil is turned off, the ambient Aether doesn't just rebound back to where it was displaced, it gets sucked into a vacuum at negative pressure and time is reversed at that point. The potential for time to exist is locked up in the potential of that spike. That spike is an example of a cold negative entropy effect. And that self ordering potential is a negative entropy event that does not contribute to the entropy of the universe, it subtracted from it. Just one example of a real time reversed process. (the spike is potential and not work but there actually is a small amount of work associated with it since there is some detectible current)

Any circuit that can perform work with "cold electricity" has time reversed potential moving towards the point of resistances instead of away from it. That is not contributing to the entropy of the universe, that is also subtracting from it. That is an example of real negative work. That is happening when a resistor goes cold instead of hot, etc...

[Aaron Murakami]

The flow of time is unrelated to entropy and centropy. Both entropic and centropic processes exist in times forward direction.

Yin and Yang.

First, please define TIME in your own words.

"Negative entropy" can happen in BOTH time forward and reverse directions.

One type of negative entropy is hot and one is cold where time is flowing forward or reverse respectively.

When I said REAL negative work is when time is flowing in reverse - that is literal and is a reference to cold negative entropy.

With hot negative entropy - time is flowing forward and that is where things can also "come together", however, it is still forward dissipative work with time flowing forward.

[bluestix]

The only time real negative work can be done is if there is a reversal of entropy, dissipated heat work reverses and condenses and becomes cold and time is flowing backwards.

The flow of time is unrelated to entropy and centropy. Both entropic and centropic processes exist in times forward direction.

Yin and Yang.

[andrew_paul111]

Gravitational potential at a location is equal to the work per unit mass that is done by the force of gravity to move an object to a fixed reference location.Gravitational potential energy is the energy stored in an object as the result of its vertical position or height.

solar energy for homes

[tachyon]

What happened to that formula? Was that a graphic the server pulled?

quoted from pappas website:

Ptotal=Pg +Pa =ρgh+∫0 ρ(-ga)dh=ρgh+ρ(-mean(ga))h=ρgh-ρ(Ga)h=ρ(g-Ga)h,

where mean(ga)=Ga is the integral mean value of ga.

[tachyon]

hmm... to the bright young fellow above if 1-1=0 then why do satellites rotate around the earth if the only energy spent is during launch? most orbits last for months or years before they descend without any energy input except for the launch.. where is this energy coming from? This has to do with circular and inert motions..

the tricky part is converting a one axis kinetic energy to the other axis kinetic energy without loosing the kinetic energy

[Aaron Murakami]

The conventional idea that there is negative work is completely erroneous.

It is built upon the foundation that reinforces the fictitious belief that systems are isolated from external forces that can contribute anything.

This prevents us from seeing the reality that conventional science is simply using their "negative work" concept to hide the fact that gravitational potential can actually contribute and perform work.

Lifting work and dropping impact work are BOTH heat events. They are both POSITIVE work events that contribute to the entropy of the universe.

During the lift, there is no reversal in entropy happening, there is no cooling effect happening to any positive heat occurrence, time is not flowing backwards and because of these facts, lifting work is POSITIVE work and is measured in POSITIVE joules of energy.

During the drop, same thing - we have real heat on impact dissipating the gravitational potential.

To find total work done, we add the POSITIVE heat events. We can't add any negative work events because there are none happening. And we get 2x the lifting work plain and simple.

The -1 + +1 = 0 does not have anything to do with work being done. That is dealing with vectors. THAT IS NOT WORK.

Here's a simple example...

If we start up a car and drive up the hill, we used x joules of energy in gasoline. At the top of the hill, we have x potential energy.

If we roll down the hill, we can choose to use gas if want but we could also coast. In any event, when the car comes to a stop, there is POSITIVE work happening.

If -1 + +1 = 0 was a true measurement of work done, then we have to say that the car did negative work going up the hill!

Look at your gas tank before and after you go up any mountain pass and try to tell me negative work was being done.

Hmmm, smoke coming out the tailpipe, engine so hot you can't touch it, all the "frictional resistance" between the road and the tires, etc... negative work? It's MAGIC!

All anyone has to do is look at W = Fd. Is the result of this formula negative or positive?

The answer is positive and we don't have to look any further than that in order to show that the conventional teaching is a figment of the imagination and has no basis in reality.