Path: Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.supernews.com!news.supernews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 14:32:27 +0000
From: John Larkin <jjSNIPlarkin@highNONOlandtechnology.com>
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Re: anti-gravity? [OT]
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 07:30:38 -0700
Organization: Highland Tech
Reply-To: xx@yy.com
Message-ID: <3h5i2jttkoq431vb86kmg0oosit321os1p@4ax.com>
References: <v01ii2$3tno2$1@dont-email.me> <1qsepmy.1igbph81ebujn0N%liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> <v05u24$10qfa$1@dont-email.me> <1qsff0p.1yn91wsteto8wN%liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> <v0aha5$10ecs$1@gonzo.revmaps.no-ip.org>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 3.1/32.783
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 65
X-Trace: sv3-67zXirbDDmVsDtc1WhaVFVczczu4aNJHU1PeYIOOqVh0iPWObfSIZdCxGSi6prENhSjX44P2dMTpfkW!r5ZTE52xU7upSIV77gYW6zG62IqkKwReT+evIwxq734+VVohtwneUilBDLE+TpzG9+Z7ImG1mgde!4KWTLA==
X-Complaints-To: www.supernews.com/docs/abuse.html
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: www.supernews.com/docs/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 4009

On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 08:53:25 -0000 (UTC), Jasen Betts
<usenet@revmaps.no-ip.org> wrote:

>On 2024-04-22, Liz Tuddenham <liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Liz Tuddenham <liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> > jim whitby <news@spockmail.net> wrote:
>>> > 
>>> >> Looking for opinion of persons better educatrd than myself.
>>> >> 
>>> >> <https://thedebrief.org/nasa-veterans-propellantless-propulsion-drive-
>>> >> that-physics-says-shouldnt-work-just-produced-enough-thrust-to-defeat-
>>> >> earths-gravity/>
>>> > 
>>> > Has anyone come across the alternative theory of gravity which I first
>>> > heard of from P.G.A.H. Voigt?
>>> > 
>>> > It suggests that the current theory of gravity is rather like the idea
>>> > we used to have that there was force 'due to vacuum', rather than air
>>> > pressure.  It proposes that the real cause of the gravitational effects
>>> > we observe is not an attraction but a pressure.
>>> > 
>>> > The concept is that a force acts on all bodies equally in all dirctions.
>>> > When two bodies with mass approach each other, each shields the other
>>> > from some of this force and the remaining forces propel the bodies
>>> > towards each other.
>>> > 
>>> > I don't know how it would be possible to test whether this was in fact
>>> > how 'gravity' worked and whether it was possible to differentiate it
>>> > from the current theory, as the two would appear to have identical
>>> > observed effects.
>>> > 
>>> > 
>>> 
>>> Of course little things like the equality of inertial and gravitational
>>> mass (so that objects of different density fall at the same speed) donâ??t
>>> fit easily into such a picture.  
>>
>> If you postulate that the forces interact with mass rather than area or
>> volume, that is easily explained.
>>
>> Why do we assume that gravity is a pull based on mass, when it could
>> equally well be a push based on mass?
>
>Can you get there from Kepplers laws of planetary motion, or even vice-
>versa.
>
>
>If you assume that the Earth is flat and the Moon is painted on the
>firmament, then perhaps a push theory of gravity can be entertained, but
>it does not seem to work well with the majority understanding of nature.

The universe is a giant balloon with stuff painted on it. Or we live
in a planetarium.

Since gravity moves at the speed of light, none of the classic
equations of planetary motion are true. Lately the 3-body problem is
popular, but the finite speed of gravity complicates that too.

An object is not attracted to another object, but to where it used to
be. Objects are attracted to gravity waves.