Height Vs. Gravity Vs. Electromagnetism?

[crashcow]

Hello there. I've lurked off and on here on the Thunderbolts Forum for some time now, though I've not actually posted before today. Last year, I had an unexpected opportunity to exchange a few emails with Wal Thornhill regarding a question I'd had about dust devils - but this was mostly due to my being a little too shy to post my questions here on the forum. While I was pleasantly surprised to find myself chatting with Wal, I felt a bit uncomfortable troubling him with a question I could perhaps just as easily have posted here.

Well, recently I had a thought that I thought I'd share with you - but please, bear in mind that however keen I am to better understand, I'm just a layman - and no doubt there's any number of things I've overlooked or even completely misunderstood (hence my tendency to lurk).

At some point, I'd read that Earth's gravity - which is typically thought of as being constant - could be altered by a change in the Sun's positive charge. This was in the back of my mind when recently I read an article online about certain changes in human stature from the Renaissance to the present day (that on average, we're all taller than humans from five hundred years ago). Of course, there's any number of factors involved - nutrition, genetics - but I found myself wondering whether a slow, subtle change to the Sun's positive charge (and consequently, Earth's gravity) over hundreds of years (and dozens of generations) could also have an effect on average human height?

Now, that's really all I have. It's a thought, a question - but I'm in no position to do anything but wonder. If anyone has any insights they'd care to impart (or perhaps if this very idea has already been discussed on a prior thread and I managed to miss it) I'd be happy to hear back.

Thanks all, and good day to you.

[altonhare]

Hey crash, welcome to the forum.

It seems your theory is that an electrical alteration in the sun may alter its gravitational influence on the earth, which in turn may alter our height. You seem to be saying that, if the sun's gravitational influence increases, it increases more at my head than at my feet, causing my body to "stretch"? Or perhaps the sun's gravitational influence decreases, further unbalancing the total gravitational force on me in favor of the earth, which would favor humans to grow larger in overall stature (including height) to compensate for the extra load.

In the former case (stretching) what you're referring to is often called the gravitational "tidal force". This is purely a result of the inverse square nature of gravity's influence. If you were to approach a black hole feet-first, eventually your legs would stretch and break off from your body because the force of gravity is so much greater down there than at your torso/head. As far as small fluctuations in the sun's gravitational influence, the amount it would take to actually stretch our bodies seems, to me at first blush, to be very large.

In the latter case I, again, find it unlikely that (otherwise barely detectable) fluctuations in the sun's gravitational influence would be strong enough to actually stimulate the selection of bigger people. In fact, bigger people would feel the extra weight even more, although alternatively they may have more muscle to counter it, the net result is that a larger human would be less efficient than before I believe. Additionally this kind of selection probably takes longer than a few hundred years, but I'm no biologist.

[junglelord]

I think that gravity is cyclic every six months. I also believe that TT Brown clearly showed the constantly changing effects of gravity from the motion of the planets and the sun. This grand clockwork mechanism while not maybe visible on a yearly basis, is none the less occuring at the domain that it influences and can be measured. Tides being a prime example.
We are water...and our bones float in a tensional sea, a tensegrity, which is a liquid crystal medium.
I am positive that gravity increase up to Mid November. It crosses the Zero axis in December and we start to get taller until the Summer Solstice, when again we cross the zero axis and gravity begins to weigh us down a little more.

[crashcow]

Hi altonhare, thanks for responding. Hmm. I hadn't thought in terms of bodies "stretching" - but as you said, "unbalancing the total gravitational force...would favor humans to grow larger in overall stature".

I'd wondered whether (over a great length of time, I suppose) people's stature could increase were Earth's gravity to become gradually lighter. And I suppose what I'm really wondering is if there's any way for us, in the here and now, to be able to tell whether Earth's gravity has ever changed, over any protracted period of time?

[altonhare]

And I suppose what I'm really wondering is if there's any way for us, in the here and now, to be able to tell whether Earth's gravity has ever changed, over any protracted period of time?

By "earth's gravity" do you mean the gravitational influence of the earth itself, or the gravitational influence of all bodies in the universe on the earth itself? The former only changes with earth's mass (as far as we know) but the latter changes as the earth moves toward and away from the sun and as the moon orbits (as JL pointed out with ocean tides). It also changes as the solar system moves toward and away from the Milky Way's center. Additionally it changes as... you get the idea.

[crashcow]

I think that gravity is cyclic every six months. I also believe that TT Brown clearly showed the constantly changing effects of gravity from the motion of the planets and the sun. This grand clockwork mechanism while not maybe visible on a yearly basis, is none the less occuring at the domain that it influences and can be measured. Tides being a prime example.
We are water...and our bones float in a tensional sea, a tensegrity, which is a liquid crystal medium.
I am positive that gravity increase up to Mid November. It crosses the Zero axis in December and we start to get taller until the Summer Solstice, when again we cross the zero axis and gravity begins to weigh us down a little more.

That hadn't occurred to me, thank you junglelord.

[kevin]

crashcow,
Welcome, I am an antique dealer for my sins, and clothes and hats are something I sell many of, it is very difficult to find silk top hats of a size that is now required, our heads have become larger.
At this place,
http://www.eastriding.gov.uk/sewerby/hall/amy.html
There was an exhibition permanately housed of clothes through the ages, the size increase was very noticable when they were all in glass cases one after the other, we are giants now compared to the 1600's.

My own opinion of gravity is not the accepted, I consider that gravity is a consequence of resonant fields interacting and interfereing with each other, and that gravity is in all directions at once, but has a net attraction to the surface area , where ever the surface is.
Thus we have shape and form , and can move, if it were this nonesense of a pull, everything would be pancake like, sludge on the surface.
The alterations are constant, and as junglelord stated TT Brown had many underground shielded lab's constantly monitering all of this, especially sidereal, with a specific direction of return signal involved.
The sun will have it's own resonant spherical radiating signals, the planets are circulating (As such) in them, and each sphere will have it's own resonant signature.
The moon is in one of the earths circulations, and the moon will have it's own, the consequences of all of this are detectable by odd balls such as myself via dowsing, as the local flow patterns are distorted by each of the other circulations.

I have personally lifted off the surface, and been thrown with no force through the air, strangely it makes you really happy.

I therefore am on the trail of the non-existant gravity, hopefully very very soon the world will know of the ability to operate with this system, not to overcome gravity, but to litterally interact with that which creates the consequences.
we can lift ourselves out of the gloom we have been pushed into, if certain people have the courage of their fine words, fingers crossed.
Kevin

[crashcow]

By "earth's gravity" do you mean the gravitational influence of the earth itself, or the gravitational influence of all bodies in the universe on the earth itself? The former only changes with earth's mass (as far as we know) but the latter changes as the earth moves toward and away from the sun and as the moon orbits (as JL pointed out with ocean tides). It also changes as the solar system moves toward and away from the Milky Way's center. Additionally it changes as... you get the idea.

I suppose I meant the gravitational influence of the Earth itself (with respects to the positive electromagnetic charge of the Sun). But I gather from what you've written above that I've got it wrong. Ah well. Thanks for weighing in.

[crashcow]

Kevin, thank you. I noticed much the same with regards to costumes (especially coats of armour) dating back to the Elizabethan era. It seemed to me as though people were literally smaller some 500 years ago, and while this was noted in the article I'd read (sorry but I'm drawing a complete blank as to where I read the article originally) it was written off as being entirely due to changes in nutrition and in genetic selection - but from the back of my mind came thoughts about a gradual change in Earth's gravity, much and all as it appears I'm wrong.

Thanks again!

[junglelord]

No, according to the EU theory, you got it bang on.
The earth was possibly once not the satellite of the sun.


In that respect we all agree to the conclusion...lighter gravity.

[bboyer]

Kevin, thank you. I noticed much the same with regards to costumes (especially coats of armour) dating back to the Elizabethan era. It seemed to me as though people were literally smaller some 500 years ago, and while this was noted in the article I'd read (sorry but I'm drawing a complete blank as to where I read the article originally) it was written off as being entirely due to changes in nutrition and in genetic selection - but from the back of my mind came thoughts about a gradual change in Earth's gravity, much and all as it appears I'm wrong.

Thanks again!

Dang, well this is cool! I just figured it was only me that had wondered about that. I remember from my pre- and teen years, going to museums or visiting certain historical places where they had representative period clothing laid out, and I recall thinking how small everyone must have been ... or maybe it was just the "famous" ones <lol>. And some of these outfits were from American colonial times. And, yeah, I'd seen suits of armor and they weren't at all the size I'd imagined they would have had to have been.

[saturnine]

Interesting. Now what about animals? If there is some external factor gradually affecting our size, other creatures should be affected as well.

[junglelord]

Men were men in the days of old...if you could not wear a suit of armor then you were, well I do not know what you were.

[Grey Cloud]

Hi folks,
Most of the height difference issue, at least in the modern era, can be put down to diet etc(nurture rather than nature).
I think I'm correct in saying that the experts reckon that each generation is, on average, a quarter inch (5-6mm) taller than the preceding one.
In Victorian Britain the average 'toff' was 3 or 5 inches taller than the average working-class slum dweller. (I can't remember whether it is 3 or 5 - it's one of them).
Also in recent times the Japanese have started to get taller due to the introduction of western foods, i.e. meat, mostly beef.
Saturnine's comment is correct. If it were an external influence, e.g. gravity, then it would also affect the flora and fauna, tides and who knows what else.

None of the above need apply to ancient or pre-historic times though it is not ruled out either.
And, just for the record, I have not seen any evidence anywhere that the Earth was ever anything other than part of the current solar system (and that includes the writings of the Saturn theorists and Velikovsky etc).

It's okay having your head in the clouds but the trick is to keep your feet on the ground at the same time.

Oh yes, over here in reference to the days of yore, we say 'when men were men and sheep were nervous'.

[bdw000]

I am no expert. And I certainly think the mystery of gravity is wide open.

But I think there are some generally accepted exceptions to the "people were smaller back then" idea.

2000 years ago the Romans averaged about 5'3" (if I remember correctly), but their famous opponents, the Celts, often reached 5'9" or 5'10" (for males). That was one reason why the Romans were, in the early days of their confrontation, intimidated by the Celts. In response to beef-eating above, didn't the Celts eat a lot of beef? But I also seem to remember some vague references of Roman soldiers, in general, getting a lot of meat in their diet.

And if gravity is affecting our size, it seems unlikely that people in France would be that much taller than Italians.

Again, I am no expert.