sjw,
sjw wrote:And if gravity is shadowing, then why do bodies not continue to spiral into other bodies? Read your papers before, still doesn't solve the underlying problem of stable orbits and even orbits that expand outwards defying the very shadowing that attracted them in the first place.
Matter has around it a net inward field momentum density. Whilst a body is on its own this of no consequence. However, when two bodies come into proximity the net inward momentum density is reduced at their facing sides, because they are both victim to the other body's reduced outward momentum. As such the term "Shadowing", which may have been appropriate for the Fatio model, is not precisely what is going on.
from a previous post sjw wrote:I insist any object in orbit around another object CAN NOT be in free fall. That there is a force acting upon all objects at all times, that free fall is a fantasy. It is impossible for any object to orbit another and be in what we term free fall. It is generating energy in its orbit which it is using to maintain its orbit.
No, it is not generating energy and the state of "orbit" is not special per se. The object is travelling through space, it is travelling through the aethereal field. It has more "velocity" than the object it is orbiting. Without this extra "velocity" gravity WILL cause to SPIRAL toward the other body. The orbiting object does not need to use its engines to maintain orbit, all that is required is that it have sufficient velocity to attain orbit. Once orbit is attained no further input is required. The only difference between an orbiting object and a spiraling inwards object is velocity.
The point I am trying to emphasise here is that An orbiting object is constantly subject to gravitational acceleration, there can be no doubt about that. Present theory of orbital mechanics gives no opposing action of any kind, just that the orbiter falls freely toward the ground and misses the ground. We are to believe that somehow the orbiter is going fast enough to "escape" from the gravitational effect. Willing suspension of disbelief is useful for enjoying fiction, but is of no use for understanding mechanical physics.
The orbiter's velocity through the aethereal field is the only additional factor that maintains its orbit.
We are naturally quite unwilling to accept action at a distance. Near instantaneous action over astronomical distance is next down the list. It is a cop out, it is a way of avoiding further analysis. Quantum mechanics uses a similar ploy with wave-particle duality, aka quantum superposition. Unable to work out the physical process, they went to Copenhagen and the top "physicists" of the day openly declared that nature works by spooky magic - calling it "intrinsic uncertainty" does nothing to hide the fact that "Modern Physics" is the study of spooky magic. The simple motion of spinning particles through the aethereal field has been misinterpreted at magic. Do not fall into the same trap. Near instantaneous action is not a scientific solution. It is the result of "I can't think what else it could be".
The orbiter's velocity through the aethereal field is the only additional factor that maintains its orbit.
If you are unhappy with ACTION AT A DISTANCE, the an aethereal field becomes a logical imperative.
If the field exists it must exist everywhere at all times. For an aethereal particle field to exist everywhere at all times, the motion and very existence of matter must be affected by it at all times.
A boat in water is affected by the water: it bobs up and down and moves with the current, but the boat is the boat and the water is the water and they can be defined separately.
Matter in an aethereal field is defined by its existence in that aethereal field, it cannot be defined separately.
Michael
