What is the difference between the "implosion field" and the 'gravity field' of the planet?
They take up the same space.
¶
Those "alternate geometries" can be graphed in common electrical units with an hexagonal matrix.
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_e_smile.gif)
The net field is the difference between implosion and outrush.seasmith wrote:Kevin, "The memory field of this planet is a net implosion field, ... there is no gravity to shield"
What is the difference between the "implosion field" and the 'gravity field' of the planet?
They take up the same space.
¶
Those "alternate geometries" can be graphed in common electrical units with an hexagonal matrix.
That was wonderful to read, and I fully accept and realise how strange I must sound.webolife wrote:I am in complete agreement with Kevin's hexagonal matrix describing the fundamental geometry of space.
I further agree and stated in a previous post, that the centropic pressure field is the basic reason for entropy, a "net implosion" describes every interaction of objects at every scale from atoms to astronoms![]()
Centropy = Entropy
Which are remarkable statements since I have repeatedly admitted I can't understand most of what Kevin says.
Some questions:comingfrom wrote: The speed of light is such a reliable constant, that the SI metre has been based upon it since 1983.
299,792.485 km/s
Paul
The quote itself is an exoreference (looking outside of one’s self). The various systems, subsystems, molecular, atomic, digestive, respitory and beyond that are coordinating into the whole of one’s very own human body, even in sleep, far surpasses the “’probability mechanism of physics’”. With great confidence the “house of cards” is in much trouble and recognized to be so by its very own. This is not “reliable” by any means and they know it. Why does the following exist and what does it mean?A single group of atoms existing only in one copy produces orderly events, marvelously tuned in with each other and with the environment according to most subtle laws … we are here obviously faced with events whose regular and lawful unfolding is guided by a ‘mechanism’ entirely different from the ‘probability mechanism’ of physics.
Is the above just another one of those “anomalies” requiring the author of the first referenced work to say that “The definition of the speed of light needs refining.”? Where does the “reliable” aspect come into play? Instead, it looks like regularly moving and manipulating the goal post to fit theoretical concepts is the only real "constant" in all of this.Abstract
Contrary to the assertion of Special Relativity, the speed of light is not always constant relative to a moving observer. The Global Positioning System (GPS) shows that the speed of light in the Earth Centered Inertial (ECI) non-rotating frame remains at c relative to the frame—but not relative to an observer or receiver moving in that frame. When a GPS receiver changes its translation speed relative to the ECI frame, the speed of light measured relative to the receiver changes. A crucial experiment of the constancy of the speed of light relative to a moving receiver could be conducted in the following way: Let two GPS satellites and two airplanes be positioned in a straight line. Let the two airplanes travel at the same speed directly toward one of the two satellites and directly away from the other satellite. The travel time differences of GPS signals arriving at the two airplanes is measured and recorded with the airplanes flying first toward one of the satellites and then flying the opposite direction toward the other satellite. The travel time differences obtained as the airplanes fly in opposite directions are compared. If the travel time difference is the same when the velocity of the airplanes is changed, then the speed of light is indeed constant relative to the moving airplanes, otherwise it is not. The calculation using the GPS range equation and the results of a Real-Time Kinematic (RTK) differential GPS test have shown that the constancy of the speed of light relative to moving airplanes is not correct. The change of the time difference could reach about 10 ns for subsonic airplanes and 30 ns for supersonic airplanes. The result of this crucial experiment is not only important scientifically, but also indicates the possibility of a new way to directly measure vehicle speed relative to the ECI frame. Conducting a Crucial Experiment of the Constancy of the Speed of Light Using GPS - Comments on Ashby's "Relativity and the Global Positioning System
Light We see by is but a tiny part of an occurrence , IMHO it is not TRAVELLING, it occurs relative to the meeting of an opposing slightly variant pressure.Webbman wrote:since the speed of light is completely dependant on the density of the medium it is travelling through, the lower the resistance the higher the speed. A form of conductivity but for light.
the only way to do this is to move away from large masses, i.e outside the solar systems and even outside the galaxies have different speeds of light than within them.
your not seeing through time just distortions caused by local electromagnetic influences.
Consider an alternative perspective:Webbman wrote:if that were the case there would be no heat in the universe, just magnetism.
also electricity wouldn't need light and plasma to travel the expanses.
since there is heat and we do require light and plasma for electricity to move (in addition to magnetism) we can conclude that the aether, which I think you are referring to, is not a perfect conductor and not evenly distributed.
all these things are reliant on the alignment and density of the base material which is why when we look into the universe we see great amounts of stranding everywhere we look, from the cosmos to your own body.
most certainly not a perfectly packed solid.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests