Antigravity Research

More
17 years 11 months ago #18530 by cosmicsurfer
Replied by cosmicsurfer on topic Reply from John Rickey
Hi Stoat & shando,

You can adjust your computer screen text size internally. Also, when I post I try to use small pictures inorder to keep text within standard format...I know I don't like having to scroll either! But, on my computer there is no scrolling on these posts so try to adjust your text size that might help.

On figuring percentages you divide the larger number which is speed of the graviton at 10 billion x c by the speed of light 299 792 458 meters / s. TVF figures for CG speed I believe are 20 billion x c and I think I read that number may be low and could approach infinity. So, actually the 3000 % is a low figure and I was only trying to show how collapse of this flux field would possibly create light spectrum matter and gravity fields.

The declining strength of a gravity field from any given mass is the square of the distance because of the linear spreading out of the lines of force in space. I disagree with Relativity Theory on timespace having curvature because of the elimination of "Fields of energy having time space curvature" and giving space a geometry which is nonsense - space is flat and infinite! Interesting that there is a current sheet around our solar system, is there a current sheet around the visible universe?

Meson drives? Sounds interesting.

John

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 years 11 months ago #18512 by Stoat
Replied by Stoat on topic Reply from Robert Turner
Tom Van Flandern's figure for the speed of gravity, is not 20 billion metres per second but 20 billion times c. Divide by c, and you just cross out the c from the top and bottom of your fraction. No need for a percentage at all.

Robert Carroll's pi meson drive works on the principle of a resonance induced disruption of the neutron. I'll post up the basic details when I've sussed them. He actually has a patent on this but I couldn't find it through a web search. Where he's rather coy is in the area of how to induce k capture. That an electron can sometimes just crash into the nucleus is known but not understood. If Carroll knew how to do it, to order, there's good reason for his patent to be removed from the public domain. Not that it's intrinsically dangerous but just o be on the safe side, there are some nasty people about after all.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 years 11 months ago #18541 by Larry Burford
(grade school math)

To figure a percentage you take the ratio of two numbers (divide one by the other) and multiply by 100.

=== Example:

Express the number 40 as a percentage of the number 80. (in this example we are just using numbers, so units are not necessary)

100 * (40 / 80 )
100 * ( 0.5 )

50 [percent]

=== Example:

Express the number 310 as a percentage of the number 100. (in this example we are just using numbers, so units are not necessary)

100 * (310 / 100 )
100 * ( 3.1 )

310 [percent]

=== Example:

Express the speed 20 billion * c as a percentage of the speed of light. (in this example the numbers used represent speeds, so units <b>are necessary</b>. Why? Because speed is a real world quantity, and this transforms the calculation from a simple math exercise into a physics problem.)

100 * ( (20 billion * c[meters/sec] ) / c [meters/sec] )
100 * ( 20 billion )

2000 billion [percent]

LB

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 years 11 months ago #19221 by cosmicsurfer
Replied by cosmicsurfer on topic Reply from John Rickey
Hi Larry,

Okay let's walk through this together to see if I can get a real number here:

(20 billion x the speed of light = 5.99584916 × 10^18 m / s)/
( 299 792 458 m / s )

Equals: 20 billion

(100 * 20 billion) = 2000 billion percent - just like you said

My example though was based on 10 billion * c, and I missed a step in my after midnight posts...because the two speeds of light times and divided by cancel each other out and I was rounding up on C to 300,000 m/s.

So 1000 Billion percent was the correct answer.

Stoat, 20 billion x c is what I posted. You have peaked my interest in Robert Carrol's Pi Meson drive...I think I will do some research on the subject. Let me know what you find out.

Check out "Mindfreak" on A&E Channel on Wednesday nights 10 pm. Chris Angel does some incredible levitation and dematerialization stunts that if real shows that "fields" can be manipulated, and that matter certainly is not solid.

I hope every one has a great holiday & happy new year!!!

John

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 years 11 months ago #18579 by cosmicsurfer
Replied by cosmicsurfer on topic Reply from John Rickey
COULD THE "GREAT ATTRACTOR" ACTUALLY BE THE ROTATIONAL DIRECTION OF MOTION OF GREATER UNIVERSE [1.4 MILLION MPH]?

"Astronomers have long known that the Milky Way is moving toward the constellation Centaurus at a speed of 1.4 million mph, but the reason for the movement remained a topic of debate. Over 20 years ago, it was suggested that the motion was due to the gravitational pull of a nearby large concentration of matter dubbed the Great Attractor. The Great Attractor is what is known as a supercluster, that is, a group of clusters of galaxies, and was estimated to contain matter equal to more than over 10 million billion times the mass of the sun.

Until now, efforts to find the Great Attractor were hampered by its location in the "zone of avoidance," an area behind the plane of the Milky Way where gas and dust within our galaxy block much of the visible light from objects outside it. The new survey, Clusters in the Zone of Avoidance (CIZA), is the first to search for the X-ray signatures of galaxy clusters behind the Milky Way and investigate the nature of the Great Attractor. Due to the difficulty of observing through the Milky Way, this region was the final portion of the sky in which the cluster population had yet to be mapped.

"X-rays can penetrate even regions that are extremely obscured by gas and dust, and galaxy clusters are sources of X-rays. This is what prompted us to attempt to map the distribution of galaxy clusters behind the plane of the Milky Way using X-ray observations," explains Ebeling, who initiated the survey in 1998.

Kocevski and collaborators report finding far fewer massive cluster systems near the Great Attractor than would be expected given the region's proposed mass. "One of our goals was to uncover the true mass of the Great Attractor. What we found is that it is not that great after all," says Kocevski. Instead, the CIZA team identified a significant concentration of galaxies behind the Great Attractor, near the Shapley Supercluster, which lies 500 million light-years away or four times the distance to the Great Attractor region. The Shapley Supercluster, first identified in 1930 by Harlow Shapley, is the most massive association of galaxies out of the 220 identified superclusters in the observable Universe. It contains the equivalent of nearly 10,000 Milky Ways, or four times the amount of mass currently observed in the Great Attractor region.

With the galaxy cluster population mapped over the entire sky for the first time, Kocevski analyzed how all the clusters surrounding the Milky Way would affect it and found that only 44% of our galaxy's motion through space is due to the gravitational pull of galaxies in the nearby Great Attractor region. The remaining portion is the result of a large-scale flow in which much of the local Universe, including perhaps the Great Attractor itself, is being pulled toward the Shapley Supercluster.

The results confirm previous work, which suggested the Milky Way's motion was influenced by structures more distant than the Great Attractor, but this study is the first to reach this conclusion after having fully mapped the Great Attractor and regions behind it.

The finding resolves one of the long-standing problems associated with the Great Attractor. The presence of a massive overdensity relatively close to the Milky Way suggested that extreme mass concentrations such as the Great Attractor were fairly common in the Universe. This implied that the Universe contained much more matter than was measured by other means such as supernova Ia observations. The finding of a less massive Great Attractor and the large distance to the Shapley supercluster implies that extremely massive overdensities are rare in the Universe, which brings the suggested density of the Universe in line with the density established by independent means."

www.hawaii.edu/cgi-bin/uhnews?20060111091754



"A search is reported for X-ray emission associated with the object, dubbed the 'great attractor', which has been postulated as the cause of the coherent deviations from the Hubble flow which are observed in nearby parts of the universe. The hypothesis that a substantial fraction of the dynamical mass of the great attractor exists in the form of rich clusters of galaxies is ruled out."

www.journals.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/resolve?id=doi:10.1086/168046

A diviation in the proposed expansion of universe towards the attractor certainly could be an indication of rotational directions of forward motion of universe; rather then deviation of expansion caused by dark matter or gravitational attraction. The x-ray map certainly looks like a focal point towards an infinity. Here is the map:



The visible universe appears to contain an even distribution of mass in smooth flat flowing structures forming "Fingers of God", large chains of "Super Clusters", and all in motion. Where does the energy come from to create mass, gravitational forces, and motion? A big bang or a dual motion steady state universe? My guess is a steady state universe especially if we find that there is in fact a direction of motion of visible universe.

John

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 years 11 months ago #18630 by cosmicsurfer
Replied by cosmicsurfer on topic Reply from John Rickey
DYNAMICS OF A UNIVERSE WITH GLOBAL ROTATION:

Authors: Godlowski, Wlodzimierz; Szydlowski, Marek

We analyze dynamics of the FRW models with global rotation in terms of dynamical system methods. We reduce dynamics of these models to the FRW models with some fictitious fluid which scales like radiation matter. This fluid mimics dynamically effects of global rotation. The significance of the global rotation of the Universe for the resolution of the acceleration and horizon problems in cosmology is investigated. It is found that dynamics of the Universe can be reduced to the two-dimensional Hamiltonian dynamical system. Then the construction of the Hamiltonian allows for full classification of evolution paths. On the phase portraits we find the domains of cosmic acceleration for the globally rotating universe as well as the trajectories for which the horizon problem is solved. We show that the FRW models with global rotation are structurally stable. This proves that the universe acceleration is due to the global rotation. It is also shown how global rotation gives a natural explanation of the empirical relation between angular momentum for clusters and superclusters of galaxies. The relation J ¡­ M2 is obtained as a consequence of self similarity invariance of the dynamics of the FRW model with global rotation. In derivation of this relation we use the Lie group of symmetry analysis of differential equation.
Comment: Revtex4, 22 pages, 5 figures
Full-text available from: Cached PDF
Linked PDF (experimental)
Gen.Rel.Grav. 37 (2005) 907-936
arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0409073

Export record as: BibTeX

www.citebase.org/abstract?id=oai:arXiv.org:astro-ph/0409073

I read somewhere the CMB rotation calculations were .5 arc in 20 billion years [which is not much]. Not sure if this information is correct. But again we might only be looking at a very small portion of our Universe that includes chains of Galaxies in gigantic walls and rotating Star Clusters all caught up in the flow of one huge Super Large Arm in motion around [forward motion should appear faster then lateral motion which is true, even though everything appears to be expanding away from us] our Universe that appears to be expanding in all directions away from our point of reference. But, the expansion without rotation is not real and is only a distorted view of the back edge and leading edge of this arm in extreme motion forming one huge ¡°S Curve¡± of deformed light stretched by the extreme collapse of a universe wide flux field creating faster then light graviton bombardment streaming into all Mass. If this is the case, our Universe may be spreading out as we move away from a center and is far older and speeds of motion may be far greater then we can presently comprehend.

John

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.430 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum