Thornhill's Latest Gravity Presentation

[willendure]

Just float some aluminium on a magnet, anti-gravity right there.

Hmmm, I just tried it and the aluminum just sat on the magnet. Darnit!

I have this amazing anti-gravity device I am using right now - its called a chair. I sit on it, and gravity does not cause me to fall onto the floor any more. You should try it.

[D_Archer]

Just float some aluminium on a magnet, anti-gravity right there.

Hmmm, I just tried it and the aluminum just sat on the magnet. Darnit!

I have this amazing anti-gravity device I am using right now - its called a chair. I sit on it, and gravity does not cause me to fall onto the floor any more. You should try it.

You are flooding this thread with messages that are neither here nor there, it is called obfuscation.

You said something about metal such and such but is not very clear which argument from Thornhill you are addressing?

About the Aluminium, a simple charge outflow from a magnet can float Aluminium. This means charge is a physical substance, according to Miles Mathis it is photons. That is what the magnet does, the molecules are aligned creating charge channels (all matter recycles photons, but if molecules are aligned there is more charge through the axis). Why would aluminum float? Because of its molecular structure, instead of channeling the charge through it deflects it more and channels to the side. ( http://milesmathis.com/magnet.html and http://milesmathis.com/per4.pdf )

It was semi-sarcastic because, is it really anti-gravity? Yes and no, i think you are smart enough to figure that out.
---

ps. i am still digesting the Thornhill talk, he has E/M to work with, so he looks at what the electrons do, but to really solve this gravity problem and tying it to matter, we should incorporate the physical charge photon from Miles Mathis. The Earth has charge outflow at the surface, could this create the dipole moment? This would remove the circular reasoning.

Regards,
Daniel

[LunarSabbathTruth]

....
I have this amazing anti-gravity device I am using right now - its called a chair. I sit on it, and gravity does not cause me to fall onto the floor any more. You should try it.

Yes, and it is the electrical force that keeps your body from penetrating into the chair, and the chair legs from penetrating into the floor.

- joe

[willendure]

....
I have this amazing anti-gravity device I am using right now - its called a chair. I sit on it, and gravity does not cause me to fall onto the floor any more. You should try it.

Yes, and it is the electrical force that keeps your body from penetrating into the chair, and the chair legs from penetrating into the floor.

- joe

Yes, and it is the gravitational force that is pulling me down, and being balanced out by the support of the chair. When two forces cancel each other out, there is no acceleration.

That is why I used this example - to mix sarcasm with the fact that different types of force can work against each other. So perhaps a sheet of aluminium can be held up by a magnet. Wonderful, now you have a force induced by a magnet opposing the force induced by gravity.

That does not make gravity an electrically induced force.

[willendure]

You said something about metal such and such but is not very clear which argument from Thornhill you are addressing?

Sorry, I can't give the exact time in the video without watching it again, but it is there. He uses the argument that we would expect a sheet of metal to shield the electrical force - but in this case it does not because the atomic distortion would daisy chain through it. I point out that this daisy chaining of the London force only works when atoms are in close proximity. So suspend the sheet of metal (in a vacuum if you must), and see if it shields gravity. It won't.

[willendure]

You are flooding this thread with messages that are neither here nor there, it is called obfuscation.

C'mon... I posted 3 or 4 clear arguments against this theory, each in a separate post to keep things nice and clear.

Yes, my sarcastic remark about the chair being an anti-gravity device was more obscure. But now you see, its a play on your magnet and aluminium foil argument, which is as much an anti-gravity device as my chair is.

[willendure]

Here is a thought experiment for you:

What would happen if I did possess an gravity shielding device and used it on myself? Would I float stationary above the ground? I don't think so. If I were to remove the gravitational influence of the planet from my body, I would move in a straight line at my present velocity. Since my present velocity is tangential to the surface of the earth, I would actually begin to float up higher and higher into air, at a faster and faster rate of climb, as my present velocity diverges from the spot on the earth where I currently am, as that spot moves round with the rotation of the earth.

So if something floats above a magnet, but remains stationary relative to the room in which you are conducting the experiment - its not shielding gravity. It is applying a force that is working against gravity, and the gravity is still present.

[querious]

ps. i am still digesting the Thornhill talk, he has E/M to work with, so he looks at what the electrons do, but to really solve this gravity problem and tying it to matter, we should incorporate the physical charge photon from Miles Mathis. The Earth has charge outflow at the surface, could this create the dipole moment? This would remove the circular reasoning.

Sorry, but that is just utterly ridiculous. Charge outflow creates dipole moments, which attract the moon? Dipoles don't even create a 1/r2 force, like gravity.

And besides, dipoles still create an electric force, which would be noticeable with a charged piece of foil.

And the circular reasoning is inherent is Wal's "explanation" of gravity, as HE presented it.

[perpetual motion]

Why don't you folks try (air pressure) instead of this gravity thing. If it wasn't
for the air pressure, this planet would look like Mars. No gravity required!
At 14.7 PSI at sea level, I would think this is all that is required to keep things
from floating, levitating, weightlessness, etc., etc., this seams more logical
than these invisible (???) WAVES.

[Osmosis]

That explains why vacuum chambers are bolted to the floor!

[Zyxzevn]

And the circular reasoning is inherent i<n> Wal's "explanation" of gravity, as HE presented it.

I agree with querious that gravity is the weakest part of the ideas presented by the Electric Universe.

Problems with Einstein's Gravity
Electric and magnetic forces can work independent of gravity.
So I think that the EU does not need a different approach on gravity for most of the EU-theories to exist.

Why is Thornhill introducing a new gravity model?
Because he thinks that the mainstream model is wrong.

Some scientific experiments have confirmed some of the concepts of Einstein's gravity.
But based on the observations that are presented in the Thunderbolts videos, it seems that Einstein was
wrong about the curvature of space/time. From the GPS-video, it does seem that clocks are different
due to gravity, but space does not curve.

There are many different opinions on gravity on this forum. But I'll focus on the presentation.

Thornhill's gravity

From the simple model of an atom, It seems plausable that there is a dipole effect caused by the
shift of the nucleus. The shift is caused by the pull of gravity on the heavier nucleus. The orbit
of the electron stays the same in this model.

This dipole-effect causes a new force, which is electrical.
This dipole-effect also create a pulling force on the nucleus in the same direction.
So we have a new shift.
But now it is caused by electrical force.

And in the presentation it seems that this electric force equals gravity.

This seems like circular reasoning.

First we have a force on the nucleus' weight, and then we have a force on the next nucleus' charge.
This is actually a chain-reaction. And according to some calculations, this very weak force could
be very close to the force of gravity.

But it still does not explain gravity very well.
Electric forces can be shielded. Shielding is caused by electrons moving around, instead of the nucleus.
This can weaken the chain-reaction. It will even stop if the electrons connect back to the first dipole.
A metal has free electrons and can shield electric forces this way,
So according to Thornhill's presentation it seems that one could stop Earth's gravity, by putting a
metal wire deep into the ground.

From other material presented by Thornhill, he relates gravity to particles that are smaller than electrons.
These smaller particles might be related to quantum-physics and such.
This model makes more sense to me.

And to bring mainstream and EU together:
It might be possible that gravity is related to what mainstream currently calls "virtual particles".

[Zyxzevn]

Just adding this video which shows what electric forces can do in space.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NbCzbDdd-g

[willendure]

Just adding this video which shows what electric forces can do in space.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NbCzbDdd-g

1:25, "they are attracted, because they are opposite charges".

If they were the same charge, they would repel. And that is where gravity is different to electrical forces, because gravity only attracts. Yes, both newtons gravity law and coulombs law have the same form, with a 1/r^2 drop off, but differ in that one has a minus sign and the other does not. So you see, electricity and gravity have similarities, but qualitatively different physics.

[Pi sees]

Why don't you folks try (air pressure) instead of this gravity thing. If it wasn't
for the air pressure, this planet would look like Mars. No gravity required!
At 14.7 PSI at sea level, I would think this is all that is required to keep things
from floating, levitating, weightlessness, etc., etc., this seams more logical
than these invisible (???) WAVES.

How does the 14.7 PSI at sea level come about in the first place?

If your speculation was true, then we'd expect an object to weigh less - or even to float - when placed in a vacuum chamber. Is there any experimental evidence for or against this? I distinctly recall seeing a video in high school showing that a feather and a brick dropped inside a vacuum chamber will fall at the same rate (i.e. 9.8m/s^2).

[perpetual motion]

Lets say that this 14.7 PSI just leaves this planet for some unknown reason, what
do you think would happen? Forget about all life suffocating and try to think
logically as to what will happen to everything above ground level as to where it will go, with the earth spinning at it's present velocity.
Now this is kind of my own,PET PEEVE, as someone on this forum calls these types
of observations. I will say that it is the magnetosphere that is holding this air
pressure down to this PSI number. If more power comes into this entity it would
squeeze more tightly and this PSI would go up, making animals and plants have
to work harder to grow and move along.
I'am sorry, I forgot to put atmosphere in the first sentence.
Vacuum chambers,just mean that there isn't any gas for resistance to form.
Besides do they know if they are pulling EVERY GAS out of this chamber. What if
there is a gas that likes to cling to the surface of their chambers. I have no idea as to what these chambers are made out of.
By the way, does anyone on this site know what the barometric pressure is in
OUTER SPACE, as NASA calls it?