[John-Erik]

All

I explained that BIG BANG and PIONEER are illusions and also gave a link. No one answered. This is bad style.

Our problems in physics are caused by:

• No ether
• No understanding of the wave model.
• Not observed that Newton’s law is an approximation

I give a link:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/364087638_Real_and_apparent_motions_of_light

Best _______________ John-Erik

PS

Allowing the ether means a simple possibility to explain BIG BANG and PIONEER as motions of the ether

DS

[John-Erik]

THE BIG BANG IS AN ILLUSION

Fatio presented an ether model that could explain gravity, but the model was abolished on false grounds, since the wrong assumption of ether collisions with matter was expected to cause aberration. However, ether particles are instead are instead ABSORBED by matter, so no aberration is caused since gravity instead is emerging inside matter due to the ether wind.

Absorption creates a radial ether wind causing gravity, and this ether wind causes a blue frequency shift when light is generated on a not moving celestial body. However, the same ether means a red frequency shift in relation to a not moving observer. These 2 shifts creates a red shift of second order together. Therefore, the radial ether wind creates second order Doppler effect. THE COSMOLOGICAL RED SHIFT IS THEREFORE AN EFFECT OF ETHER MOTION – NOT BODY MOTION.

John-Erik

See

https://www.academia.edu/90134483/The_Big_Bang_illusion_from_Newtons_mathematical_idealism

[Jerry]

Hi John-Erik.

You’ve mentioned abberation at various times within the forum. I somewhat researched a few topics you’ve named a few times, with the Pioneer spacecraft and such, though wasn’t sure what you had meant. I looked up the definition, which said, “a departure from what is normal, usual, or expected.”

How would you describe the type of abberation that you picture?

[John-Erik]

Aberration is a phenomenon in moving light, since observer motion transverse to light direction affects observed direction.

Gravity has been assumed to have aberration, but this is a mistake. The reason is that gravity does not move, and instead gravity emerges inside matter due to ether wind inside matter. Gravity cannot be real until after information exchange between the 2 bodies regarded, since gravity is a caused by the product of the 2 masses.

Fatio and Le Sage models were therefore abolished in error.

[Jerry]

Also, a few quick questions.

It sort of sounds as though ether exists “within” or “throughout” objects, that it would almost seem the ether could “go through” objects, similar to how ghosts walk through walls in movies and such. If objects absorb ether particles, why would ether “push” and cause their lengths to contract?

How could the ether (whether it is “stationary”, in motion at a constant velocity, or if it accelerates) cause a red shift? Did you mean it is caused by gravity, or possibly “falling ether”?

[John-Erik]

Big Bang illusion

Fatio and Le Sage explain gravity by a radial ether wind. The ether wind is not larger than light speed c. Therefore, no black holes.

Assume not moving observer and not moving celestial body. The radial ether wind causes therefore a blue shift in the ether frame, and this ether motion means a red shift is observed in the observer’s frame. so, we get red as well as blue shifts. Together this means a red shift of second order. So, cosmological red shift is caused by the motion of the ether.

With best regards from _________________ John-Erik

[Jerry]

Hi John-Erik.

How would you say the velocity of light works? Is it truly constant and always “clocks” at 186,282 m/s, regardless of however fast the light source, object in question, or observer travels?

or does the velocity of light vary, and is dependent upon however fast the light source, object, or observer travels?

or is the velocity of light relative to, or determined by, the position of the ether, whether it is stationary or if it is in motion within a given area?

[John-Erik]

Jerry

We must have an ether, and light is a behaviour inside that ether. Therefore, light speed is constant is relation to that ether. Light is therefore independent of the motions of the source, as well as of the observer.

With best regards from _______________ John-Erik

[John-Erik]

The matter in a body, A, causes an ether wind radial in relation to A, but not in relation to B. So, the deviation from symmetry in B causes gravity to emerge inside B. NO ABERRATION.

[John-Erik]

Jerry

Gravity from distant bodies is compensated due to the fact that we are in a free fall. Only small effects from Sun and Moon cause tides. Therefore, we get in horizontal plane 0.46 km/sec at the Equator and zero at the poles, and in vertical direction we have an ether wind if 11.2 km/sec, causing gravity and equal to the escape velocity.

MMX:s four errors:

1. Ether wind is 0.46 (not 30) km/sec in horizontal direction.
2. Assumed effect is compensated.
3. Assumed ‘half’ effect in reference arm does not exist.
4. Failure to fulfil prediction means no existing result (not zero result).

All these ideas are described in many articles available on many databases. Why do you not write my name on Google? This is described in detail there.<div>

With best regards from __________________________ John-Erik

</div>

[Jerry]

<div>Hi John-Erik.
</div><div>

</div>

“Gravity from distant bodies is compensated due to the fact that we are in a free fall.”

Does this mean that literally everything is in free fall? Wouldn’t a free fall mean a given object is falling towards something specific? I haven’t ever heard that point of view. Interesting. Does this mean our sun and the stars always fall towards other large physical phenomena? And that this even applies to whole galaxies (even though their positions seem more “unfixed”)? Does this also mean they all accelerate, the same way all objects falling towards the earth’s surface?

“Only small effects from Sun and Moon cause tides. Therefore, we get in horizontal plane 0.46 km/sec at the Equator and zero at the poles, and in vertical direction we have an ether wind if 11.2 km/sec, causing gravity and equal to the escape velocity.”

What is it that mostly causes the tides? The ether? Also, if the level of gravity experienced is equal to the escape velocity, what of how (to consider yet again) objects accelerate towards the earth as they fall or “give in to” the effect of gravity? How to determine the escape velocity, if how fast objects fall increases from the “start” until when it lands? Would we choose the lowest or highest point of momentum?

MMX:s four errors:

1. Ether wind is 0.46 (not 30) km/sec in horizontal direction.
2. Assumed effect is compensated.
3. Assumed ‘half’ effect in reference arm does not exist.
4. Failure to fulfil prediction means no existing result (not zero result).
   

“All these ideas are described in many articles available on many
databases. Why do you not write my name on Google? This is described in
detail there.”

To consider the first one. Doesn’t the ether’s “position” constantly reorient itself relative to the earth? That a reading on the interferometer at a certain time, is inevitably different than what it is, say, a few hours later? I didn’t understand what you meant with the other errors. I’d have to learn exact definitions for the words and their intentions within this context. I looked you up on Google and found a few articles or essays that sounded quite compelling, though I haven’t read much of them yet.

[Jerry]

Hi again, John-Erik.

What you wrote earlier reminded me of a few paragraphs I wrote a few years ago. It seems similar with what is focused upon, though more so asking questions without arriving at a specific viewpoint.

<font color=”#3d85c6″>What if for a given object, there is more than one seemingly dominant gravitational source? If both or all sources were to turn out as almost equal influences, ta<wbr>king into account the distance, density, velocity, etc., would the object travel somehow within a somewhat averaged out sum of those influences involved, of which wouldn’t appear to follow such a clear direction, or would the object inevitably fall directly and only towards the one with the highest influence, even if only slightly above all of the other influences? If so, does any of all the other gravitational sources affect the object at all? </font>

[John-Erik]

Jerry

Yes, you can say that everything is in a free fall, since the equivalence principle means that ether wind tells matter how to move, and thereby converts ether wind into acceleration.

Tides are explained by the fact that different parts of our planet are falling a little bit differently due to the fact that Sun and Moon contribute in range dependent way.

The mistakes regarding MMX are described in details in many of my articles. You must read them, since I cannot repeat all details here.

With best regards from _______________ John-Erik

[Jerry]

Thanks, John-Erik!

“You can say that everything is in a free fall, since the equivalence principle means that ether wind tells matter how to move, and thereby converts ether wind into acceleration.”

We seem to have different viewpoints regarding the equivalence principle. How does the ether affect the inertia of objects? I don’t see how ether wind is converted into acceleration. Maybe the cause of an object’s acceleration, and even that a bit sounds outlandish to me. 🙂

“Tides are explained by the fact that different parts of our planet are falling a little bit differently due to the fact that Sun and Moon contribute in range dependent way.”

Does that mean the only factor that cause the tides is the Sun and Moon? Would other stars and planets “far away” or even relatively “nearby” also affect the ocean tides? Also, would the ether contribute to the effect of the tides at all?

The mistakes regarding MMX are described in details in many of my articles. You must read them, since I cannot repeat all details here.

Cool. What topic names should I look for?

• This reply was modified 1 year, 3 months ago by  Jerry.

[Jerry]

Hi John-Erik.

Does that mean that the velocity of light does vary when viewed within, say, our earthly frame, since here we experience a variety of different motions all at the same time? Such as how the earth spins, while it orbits the sun, while our solar system travels here and there throughout the galaxy.

If the velocity of light is determined by the position of the ether, it would seem inevitable that from the earth’s frame of reference, light would seem to go through a large variety of velocities, that light would constantly vary from our earthly point of view.

Also, what is your view of the results of Michelson and Morley’s experiment, if it does or doesn’t prove the constancy of c?