Miles Mathis 'What is G?'

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light?

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Miles Mathis 'What is G?'

Unread postby pavlink » Sun Jan 27, 2013 11:55 am

What is G?
by Miles Mathis

...
I will refer you to my UFT paper for the full derivation of the separated equations. Suffice it to say, here, that gravity is expressed only by acceleration. Gravity is the acceleration of a length or a differential. This means that the gravitational “pull” of a body is determined only by its radius. Density, and therefore “mass”, is only a concern of the foundational E/M field. Which is to say that density considerations enter Newton’s equation only through the E/M field. Two spheres that are the same size have the same gravitational field, by definition. If they have different total fields according to Newton’s equation, it is because their densities are different; and their total fields are different only because one has more constituent quantum particles, and therefore more photon radiation.


This means that if the Earth were denser, you would weigh less, not more. You weigh less on the Moon not because it is less dense, or because it has less mass, but because its foundational E/M field is stronger. And its foundational E/M field is stronger because the Moon’s radius is smaller than the Earth’s. Although the Moon’s body is less dense, as a whole, its E/M field is more dense, on the surface. And this is simply because it has so much less surface area than the Earth (13 times less). You can’t just look at mass or density, you have to look at field lines; and the density of those field lines at the surface determines the strength of the foundational E/M field.

http://milesmathis.com/g.html
We live in a double star system.
We need to study double star systems.

Solar System as 4D energy vortex
http://files.kostovi.com/8835e.pdf
pavlink
 
Posts: 166
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 7:14 am

Re: Miles Mathis 'What is G?'

Unread postby Sparky » Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:24 am

This means that if the Earth were denser, you would weigh less, not more. You weigh less on the Moon not because it is less dense, or because it has less mass, but because its foundational E/M field is stronger. And its foundational E/M field is stronger because the Moon’s radius is smaller than the Earth’s. Although the Moon’s body is less dense, as a whole, its E/M field is more dense, on the surface. And this is simply because it has so much less surface area than the Earth (13 times less). You can’t just look at mass or density, you have to look at field lines; and the density of those field lines at the surface determines the strength of the foundational E/M field.
.


What??!! :? Which is it, magnetic field or e/m strength? :?

How does photon e/m create gravity?
"It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong."
"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one."
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire
Sparky
 
Posts: 3517
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:20 pm

Re: Miles Mathis 'What is G?'

Unread postby pavlink » Tue Jan 29, 2013 2:59 am

@ Sparky

The Electron Orbit
(the greatest hole in Quantum Mechanics)
by Miles Mathis

"It used to be that a person who could come up with a simpler, more transparent explanation was a better physicist. That is no longer the case. Now the person that can come up with the more convoluted, mysterious, wordy, and illogical explanation is the better physicist, since such an answer must seem more “profound.”


Of course, I would not bring up this problem and treat the opposition with such contempt if I did not have a better answer for it. Fortunately, I do, one that happens to be very simple and direct, as well as mechanical. I have shown in a series of papers that if we make the charge force mechanical, we must get rid of the messenger or virtual photon that is now said to mediate it. We must replace that virtual photon with a real photon, and give it mass equivalence. Moreover, we must make all force repulsive. There is simply no way to explain attraction mechanically, so we give up on attraction, at the foundational level. Underlying both electricity and magnetism, we have the charge field, or what I now call the foundational E/M field. Although electricity may be either positive or negative, the foundational E/M field is always positive. It is always repulsive. This means that all protons and electrons are emitting real photons, and that all protons and electrons are repulsing all other protons and electrons, via simple bombardment. Attraction is explained by noticing that protons repulse electrons much less than they repulse other protons. In this way, the attraction is a relative attraction. Relative to the speed of repulsion of protons with one another, electron appear to move backwards. If protons are defined as the baseline, then electrons are negative to this baseline.


Classically, this can be explained by the size difference alone. Due only to surface area considerations, electrons are able to dodge much of the emission of protons and nuclei, and so they seem to swim upstream."
http://milesmathis.com/elorb.html
We live in a double star system.
We need to study double star systems.

Solar System as 4D energy vortex
http://files.kostovi.com/8835e.pdf
pavlink
 
Posts: 166
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 7:14 am

Re: Miles Mathis 'What is G?'

Unread postby D_Archer » Tue Jan 29, 2013 4:13 am

Sparky wrote:
This means that if the Earth were denser, you would weigh less, not more. You weigh less on the Moon not because it is less dense, or because it has less mass, but because its foundational E/M field is stronger. And its foundational E/M field is stronger because the Moon’s radius is smaller than the Earth’s. Although the Moon’s body is less dense, as a whole, its E/M field is more dense, on the surface. And this is simply because it has so much less surface area than the Earth (13 times less). You can’t just look at mass or density, you have to look at field lines; and the density of those field lines at the surface determines the strength of the foundational E/M field.
.


What??!! :? Which is it, magnetic field or e/m strength? :?

How does photon e/m create gravity?


With field he does not mean magnetic field, just the field of the photons that are at the basis of the E/M field.

Regards,
Daniel
- Shoot Forth Thunder -
User avatar
D_Archer
 
Posts: 1170
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:01 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Miles Mathis 'What is G?'

Unread postby 303vegas » Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:12 am

Hows this for as simple theory on 'G': Static Cling. This must make me the bestest physicist. You may go about your business now... :lol:
love from lancashire!
User avatar
303vegas
 
Posts: 134
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 2:55 am
Location: Rochdale, england

Re: Miles Mathis 'What is G?'

Unread postby Sparky » Tue Jan 29, 2013 11:43 am

but because its foundational E/M field is stronger. And its foundational E/M field is stronger because the Moon’s radius is smaller than the Earth’s. Although the Moon’s body is less dense, as a whole, its E/M field is more dense, on the surface.


thanks , guys.....but I am still lost....

re: foundational E/M field? The E/M emitted from the moon/Earth? :?

Why would the moon's E/M be more dense? :?
"It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong."
"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one."
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire
Sparky
 
Posts: 3517
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:20 pm


Return to New Insights and Mad Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest