carty
Freethinker
Posts: 1 
|
Gravity
Mar 30, 2016 21:19:14 GMT 1
cal likes this
Post by carty on Mar 30, 2016 21:19:14 GMT 1
Hi everyone,
I am new to this so bare with me. As for gravity, to me it is just an observation of what happens. To say that that this situation just happens due to weight or density is simplistic. The answer is to be discovered. Mainstream science invented an imaginary 'force' that emanates from all atoms. This does not work if look close. I understand that the Earth appears flat and that it changes my world view, also I see that many questions need to be asked. Eric Dubay ridiculed a proposal that the Earth continually moves upward, this is from a thought experiment of Einstein involving a lift moving up producing the same effect as gravity, not bad but incorrect as Eric says. I have recently read 'The Final Theory' by Marc McCutcheon a much ridiculed amateur science writer. He explains brilliantly in detail how 'gravity' can be expressed as an internal 'dimension' (expansion) within each electron. Whether this fits into a Flat Earth view I don't know as yet it is definitely worth looking into. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Gravity
Mar 30, 2016 21:34:46 GMT 1
cal likes this
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2016 21:34:46 GMT 1
Thanks for joining us and welcome to the forum. I don't know much about the subject, and I just replied because I wanted to welcome you as there are few active members right now, and I don't know if anyone would have replied. Certainly I have reasoned about gravity less than you. I can confirm what you said about Eric Dubay, because I have also heard him say just that (ridiculing the theory proposed by the Flat Earth Society). Of course as you certainly know Eric Dubay always talks about "buoyancy" and "density" as a substitute for gravity. I haven't even looked into those concept. I did a little reasoning actually on gravity, within this thread, but nothing that you don't already know: fsr.boards.net/thread/186/big-lies-atmosphere-gravity-refractionI have been so much on YouTube that I even forgot how to read an entire paragraph as long as yours. I hope someone else will address your reasoning, probably a subject cal is interested in, also because he has a scientific background. |
|
cal
Freethinker
Concave & Flat
Posts: 145
|
Post by cal on Apr 3, 2016 23:47:44 GMT 1
Hi everyone,
I am new to this so bare with me. As for gravity, to me it is just an observation of what happens. To say that that this situation just happens due to weight or density is simplistic. The answer is to be discovered. Mainstream science invented an imaginary 'force' that emanates from all atoms. This does not work if look close. I understand that the Earth appears flat and that it changes my world view, also I see that many questions need to be asked. Eric Dubay ridiculed a proposal that the Earth continually moves upward, this is from a thought experiment of Einstein involving a lift moving up producing the same effect as gravity, not bad but incorrect as Eric says. I have recently read 'The Final Theory' by Marc McCutcheon a much ridiculed amateur science writer. He explains brilliantly in detail how 'gravity' can be expressed as an internal 'dimension' (expansion) within each electron. Whether this fits into a Flat Earth view I don't know as yet it is definitely worth looking into. Welcome cartyGood introductory topic. Yes, I too agree that the popular theory of gravity was "invented" by the elite. Isaac Newton came up with a very good approximation for gravity with his formula F=Gm 1m 2/r 2 , however this formula is based on the unproven assumption that atoms/masses attracts each other. The best proponent I have seen for this is Maurice Cotterell. Check out his article: How Gravity Works. However, the father of gravity himself, Isaac Newton, expressed in a 1675 letter to Robert Hooke, "I myself do not understand those properties of gravity." I read in Jan Lamprecht's book, Hollow Planets, about another theory by Leonhard Euler--possibly the greatest mathematician who ever lived. He suggested that gravity could be caused by a low pressure area between the objects. While I don't buy his theory, I believe that he is on the right track. Gravity is probably caused by a force of repulsion rather than a force of attraction. This force would come from the ether which emanates from the centre of a concave Earth in all directions. Check out the works of Airy, Sagnac, Michelson-Morley, etc. That is why the force of gravity would be directly proportional to the mass of an object and inversely proportional to the square of the distance. Thanks for your brief introduction of Marc McCutcheon's theory. Can you provide some links to his work(s)? Best Regards, Cal |
|
