Antigravity Research

BINARY MOTION AND THE PRECESSION OF THE EQUINOX

"If the Earth were coming up about 50 arc seconds short of the equinoctial point that it was at in the prior year, then lunar equations would show the Earth goes around the Sun 50 arc seconds short of 360 degrees in an equinoctial year. But they do not show this. They show that the Earth goes around the Sun 360 degrees in an equinoctial year. Yet anyone can see that the Earth in relation to inertial space appears to move around the Sun 360 degrees only in a sidereal year. Indeed, fixed star to fixed star has almost become the litmus test for what is or isn’t a 360 degree movement. But like Ptolemy’s Sun, that appears to orbit round the Earth, motions in space can be deceiving.

Lunar equations based on tropical data clearly show the Earth goes around the Sun 360 degrees in an equinoctial year. Interestingly, if one plugs in only sidereal data they also show the Earth moves 360 degrees relative to the fixed stars in a sidereal year, yet this orbit path of the Earth around the Sun takes 20 minutes longer and is 22,000 miles wider in circumference. Now obviously, the Earth does not have two different orbit paths around the Sun each year. So which is right? Mathematically, they are both correct; the Earth does move 360 degrees around the Sun in a solar year and does move 360 degrees relative to the fixed stars in a longer sidereal year. The startling conclusion is, while the Earth is moving 360 degrees counterclockwise around the Sun in a solar year, the entire solar system (containing the Earth Sun reference frame) is moving clockwise relative to inertial space. The mathematical equations support no other conclusion.

It is the missing motion of the solar system curving through space that modern scientists have failed to calculate in their lunisolar precession theory. But the Moon does not lie. Its movement is exact and acts like a witness to the Earth’s motion. The only way the Sun can appear to move around the Earth, and be confirmed by lunar data, is because the Earth is spinning on its axis. Likewise, the only way the Earth’s axis can appear to precess or wobble relative to inertial space, and not wobble relative to the Sun as confirmed by lunar equations, is if the solar system (the reference frame that contains the Sun and Earth) is curving through space. Furthermore, the only way the solar system can be curving through space at a rate of 50 arc seconds per year, is if it were gravitationally affected by another very large mass: a companion star."

www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/bri/rese...nce/lunarcycle.shtml

Here is a graph depicting the solar system angular momentum to mass ratio in balance with a Binary Center of Gravity:



Caption Reads: "The Sun came right into line.

All these years, the Sun has had the proper angular momentum but it is not in it’s spin, it is in it’s movement through space.

The chart assumes the Sun is in a binary orbit with an object 8% of Sun's mass at distance of 1000 AU."

Sheer line around solar system formed by reverse motion planetoids around sister sun sweeping region clean. Check out the animation at bottom of this page:

www.binaryresearchinstitute.org/bri/rese...ence/sheeredge.shtml

John

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COMETS, EPH, AND POSSIBLE RED DWARF SISTER SUN

Could a small red dwarf in a binary orbit with our sun possibly be the culprit in causing EPH destruction of fifth planet and formation of the asteroid belt?

Here is a look at the smallest double red dwarf system found so far:

"NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope has spotted a dusty disc of planet-building material around an extraordinarily low-mass brown dwarf, or "failed star." The brown dwarf, called OTS 44, is only 15 times the mass of Jupiter. Previously, the smallest brown dwarf known to host a planet-forming disc was 25 to 30 times more massive than Jupiter.

The finding will ultimately help astronomers better understand how and where planets - including rocky ones resembling our own - form."

www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2005-022




CLOSE BY DOUBLE ORBIT BROWN DWARF:

"Astronomers have found a lightweight star in a configuration never before seen relatively close to our solar system. The star is a cool and dim brown dwarf orbiting another similar brown dwarf. Both objects are like failed stars, with not enough mass to generate the thermonuclear fusion that powers the Sun.

Both brown dwarfs, together, orbit a regular star. Triple star systems are fairly common, but this is the first known to involve a double brown dwarf.

Brown dwarfs are hard to find because they emit almost no light. They are typically at least 30 times as massive as Jupiter and, because of their heft and heat radiation, are not considered planets. Some astronomers refer to them as substellar.

The system of three objects is just 11.8 light-years away. The main star, called Epsilon Indi, is similar to our Sun and resides in the skies above Earth's Southern Hemisphere. In January, astronomers found a brown dwarf around the star and named it Epsilon Indi B. It is the closest known brown dwarf. And now it has been renamed Epsilon Indi Ba to make classification room for its companion.

The newfound brown dwarf, even cooler and dimmer than Epsilon Indi Ba, is called Epsilon Indi Bb, and it orbits the other brown dwarf. In reality, because the masses of the two objects are not greatly different, they go around each other."



www.space.com/scienceastronomy/brown_dwarfs_030919.html

FURTHEST KB OBJECT:

"Eris, the largest dwarf planet known, was discovered in an ongoing survey at Palomar Observatory's Samuel Oschin telescope by astronomers Mike Brown (Caltech), Chad Trujillo (Gemini Observatory), and David Rabinowitz (Yale University). We officially suggested the name on 6 September 2006, and it was accepted and announced on 13 September 2006. In Greek mythology, Eris is the goddess of warfare and strife. She stirs up jealousy and envy to cause fighting and anger among men. At the wedding of Peleus and Thetis, the parents of the Greek hero Achilles, all the gods with the exception of Eris were invited, and, enraged at her exclusion, she spitefully caused a quarrel among the goddesses that led to the Trojan war. In the astronomical world, Eris stirred up a great deal of trouble among the international astronomical community when the question of its proper designation led to a raucous meeting of the IAU in Prague. At the end of the conference, IAU members voted to demote Pluto and Eris to dwarf-planet status, leaving the solar system with only eight planets.

Where is it?

The dwarf planet is the most distant object ever seen in orbit around the sun, even more distant than Sedna, the planetoid discovered almost 2 years ago. It is almost 10 billion miles from the sun and more than 3 times more distant than the next closest planet, Pluto and takes more than twice as long to orbit the sun as Pluto."

Here is the orbit:



Binary star formation is the primary causitive factors in creating spreading of mass and creation of planets. Fission of planetary mass results from accretion rotation bulging from the constant collapse of higher scale interactions is a secondary role, since the Universe operates on a multi-scale basis between two directions of motion always attempting to collapse back to zero.

Therefore, it would make sense that no doubt our solar system was formed from a Binary splitting of mass with two opposing orbital prograde and retrograde planetoid groups all orbiting around a common center of gravity. However, something could go wrong something from either outside of our solar system or inside,i.e, a KBO impact, could change the normal direct opposition orbit of the double star system to an extreme elliptical orbit with one of the partners taking the long path therefore creating situations that could be disastrous for the inner ring of planets around the primary sun. This extreme orbit of the Brown Dwarf could be the culprit for the EPH destruction of the Fifth Planet.

John

GRAVITATIONAL FIELD COLLAPSE, GALACTIC MOTION, AND THE DESTRUCTION OF FIFTH PLANET

After reading the TVF revised EPH theory regarding destruction events in solar system I thought that the logical conclusions were excellent. Enjoyed that read, had some more thoughts though regarding possible scenario for dislodging Binary status of a possible sister sun thus causing system gravity field collapse by third party.

Binary motion around a gravitational center could possibly become out of balance by collision with another gravitational system. A vertical bucking motion causing solar system on 220 million year rotation around galactic center to move up and down in Orion's Arm could result in collisions. Our two star system may not only rotate around a common gravitational center moving up and down through the galactic plane and around a common gravitational center in our local constellations, but also may move up and down in and out of the huge Orion Arm. The up and down motion of our Solar System’s forward motion from bucking against the flow of the Galactic Wind/Currents could cause a collision between another system. As the two systems begin to pass by each other, the greater mass of the approaching system that might rotate in an opposite direction could force the Red Dwarf to be dislodged and out of balance from its circular dual orbit around a common center.

The collision of fields could cause instantaneous transfer of momentum as now all three systems are suddenly out of balance with their gravitational centers. Causing the opposite spinning gravitational fields of our binary system to temporarily collapse between the Red Dwarf star system and our Sun’s opposite spinning systems gravity fields. This collision between two centers of gravity could cause the Red Dwarf system to loose its orbital momentum, and result in the Red Dwarf system being hurled by the "shearing effect" of other opposite spinning system’s greater massive gravitational field directly towards the inner ring of planets that orbited our Sun.

Thus, we could now have a possible scenario that could result in periodic planetary destruction, comet and asteroid impacts, and a Red Dwarf that is no longer in a normal orbital relationship with our sun but has become the great destroyer.

Side Note: Did the ancients know about this Red Dwarf, could this be the Sumerian Nibiru that destroyed the fifth planet Tiamat? If so could the Winged Disk of the ancients actually be Nibiru and could the symbol of a star above a cresent Moon be the first appearance of the Red Dwarf? Exactly, what did the ancients know and are there many ancient "symbolic representations" that might give evidence that this destroyer appears and crosses our planetary plane every 3,600 years? Could Nibiru be visible for over 300 years by the naked eye?

John

SHAPE OF MOTION IN UNIVERSE

Problems with understanding dipolar motion of mass with in fields of electromagnetic energy in greater universe contend with inability of examiner to separate from local relativity. In this case the examiner cannot step back far enough out of local relativity to see clearly how shape of motion of all mass originates and operates. CMB as suggested by Joe Keller, I agree certainly could be the result of these local relativity resonances clashing within boundary zones between gravitational centers. My own interpretation further suggests that multiple octaves of light densities exist in ever higher and lower frequencies as a substrate within a multiple scale universe. That all mass forms resonant boundary zones that either absorbs or emits electromagnetic energy within a range of frequencies. Thus, CMB would be the back ground radiation as seen with in our local reference/relativity from this ongoing process [collapsing higher spectrum FTL fields of electromagnetic energy into this spectrum] and would not be the leftover resonance from a BIG BANG!

The local shell of resonance forms local relativities and this lensing effect of the gravitational shell controls the speed of light within any given reference frame. So that literally both GR and SR are not an adequate explanation of how UNIVERSE is maintaining the continuous cycling of electromagnetic energy.

HAWKINGS:

“There are something like ten million million million million million million million million million million million million million million (1 with eighty zeroes after it) particles in the region of the universe that we can observe. Where did they all come from? The answer is that, in quantum theory, particles can be created out of energy in the form of particle/antiparticle parts. But that just raises the question of where the energy came from. The answer is that the total energy of the universe is exactly zero. The matter in the universe is made out of positive energy. However, the matter is all attracting itself by gravity. Two pieces of matter that are close to each other have less energy than the same two pieces a long way apart, because you have to expend energy to separate them against the gravitational force that is pulling them together. Thus in a sense, the gravitational field has negative energy. In the case of a universe that is approximately uniform in space, one can show that this negative gravitational energy exactly cancels the positive energy represented by the matter. So the total energy of the universe is zero. …now twice zero is also zero. Thus the universe can double the amount of positive matter energy and also double the negative gravitational energy without violation of the conservation of energy. …"It is said that there's no such thing as a free lunch. But the universe is the ultimate free lunch." [Stephen D. Hawking, A Brief History of Time.].
www.cheniere.org/correspondence/082106.htm

The measurement of TIME based calculations of mass in motion are not consistent through out UNIVERSE because of the inconsistency of the speed of light. Time itself is engineered from the local relativity and can be slowed down and speeded up in comparison to other gravitational centers and to where the observations are made as per given location within any given scale. The asymmetric positive mass of a Proton in comparison to the Electron is key in understanding this dynamic structure as it is balancing the inflow of energetics with in our forward time scale. We can glimpse the regenerative process that forms light densities in UNIVERSE during collider experiments, when gluonic fields of light are pulled apart from the two opposite components of forward time matter and reverse time antimatter.


John

VARIABILITY OF TIME BASED MOTION IN A MULTI-SCALE UNIVERSE

QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT:

John Cramer, a physicist at the University of Washington has suggested that reverse time has to exist as a determinate in FTL signaling creating Quantum Entanglement effects in photons. I would certainly agree that a reverse time motion to our forward time motion is key to maintaining balance in Universe. Because of these unseen higher spectrum FTL fields collapsing into our "space scale" there is an exchange in momentum causing atomic motion and twisting of a balanced two way forward and reverse TIME motion within all matter. Certainly TIME now takes on a whole new meaning once we see that these FTL forces that are at work all around us could enable "retrocausality" in photon entanglement.

Here is the original John Cramer Article:

"Going for a blast into the real past

If the experiment works, a signal could be received before it's sent

By TOM PAULSON
P-I REPORTER

If his experiment with splitting photons actually works, says University of Washington physicist John Cramer, the next step will be to test for quantum "retrocausality."

That's science talk for saying he hopes to find evidence of a photon going backward in time.


Scott Eklund / P-I
The reflection of UW physicist John Cramer can be seen as he prepares an experiment with lasers. Cramer is planning to test a new idea related to how light behaves in the quantum realm.
"It doesn't seem like it should work, but on the other hand, I can't see what would prevent it from working," Cramer said. "If it does work, you could receive the signal 50 microseconds before you send it."

Uh, huh ... what? Wait a minute. What is that supposed to mean?

Roughly put, Cramer is talking about the subatomic equivalent of arriving at the train station before you've left home, of winning the lottery before you've bought the ticket, of graduating from high school before you've been born -- or something like that.

"It probably won't work," he said again carefully, peering through his large glasses as if to determine his audience's mental capacity for digesting the information. Cramer, an accomplished experimental physicist who also writes science fiction, knows this sounds more like a made-for-TV script on the Sci Fi Channel than serious scientific research.

"But even if it doesn't work, we should be able to learn something new about quantum mechanics by trying it," he said. What he and UW colleague Warren Nagourney plan to try soon is an experiment aimed at resolving some niggling contradictions in one of the most fundamental branches of physics known as quantum mechanics, or quantum theory.


Scott Eklund / P-I
Physicists John Cramer, left, and Warren Nagourney work in the lab. Nagourney says he has "a faint understanding" of Cramer's idea.
"To be honest, I only have a faint understanding of what John's talking about," Nagourney said, smiling. Though claiming to be "just a technician" on this project, Cramer's technician partner previously assisted with the research of Hans Dehmelt, the UW scientist who won the 1989 Nobel Prize in physics.

Quantum theory describes the behavior of matter and energy at the atomic and subatomic levels, a level of reality where most of the more familiar Newtonian laws of physics (why planets spin, airplanes fly and baseballs curve) no longer apply.

The problem with quantum theory, put simply, is that it's really weird. Findings at the quantum level don't fit well with either Newton's or Einstein's view of reality at the macro level, and attempts to explain quantum behavior often appear inherently contradictory.

"There's a whole zoo of quantum paradoxes out there," Cramer said. "That's part of the reason Einstein hated quantum mechanics."

One of the paradoxes of interest to Cramer is known as "entanglement." It's also known as the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox, named for the three scientists who described its apparent absurdity as an argument against quantum theory.

Basically, the idea is that interacting, or entangled, subatomic particles such as two photons -- the fundamental units of light -- can affect each other no matter how far apart in time or space.

"If you do a measurement on one, it has an immediate effect on the other even if they are separated by light years across the universe," Cramer said. If one of the entangled photon's trajectory tilts up, the other one, no matter how distant, will tilt down to compensate.

Einstein ridiculed the idea as "spooky action at a distance." Quantum mechanics must be wrong, the father of relativity contended, because that behavior requires some kind of "signal" passing between the two particles at a speed faster than light.

This is where going backward in time comes in. If the entanglement happens (and the experimental evidence, at this point, says it does), Cramer contends it implies retrocausality. Instead of cause and effect, the effect comes before the cause. The simplest, least paradoxical explanation for that, he says, is that some kind of signal or communication occurs between the two photons in reverse time.

It's all incredibly counterintuitive, Cramer acknowledged.

But standard theoretical attempts to deal with entanglement have become a bit tortured, he said. As evidence supporting quantum theory has grown, theorists have tried to reconcile the paradox of entanglement by basically explaining away the possibility of the two particles somehow communicating.

"The general conclusion has been that there isn't really any signaling between the two locations," he said. But Cramer said there is reason to question the common wisdom.

Cramer's approach to explaining entanglement is based on the proposition that particles at the quantum level can interact using signals that go both forward and backward in time. It has not been the most widely accepted idea.

But new findings, especially a recent "entangled photon" experiment at the University of Innsbruck, Austria, testing conservation of momentum in photons, has provided Cramer with what he believes is reason for challenging what had been an untestable, standard assumption of quantum mechanics.

The UW physicists plan to modify the Austrians' experiment to see if they can demonstrate communication between two entangled photons. At the quantum level, photons exist as both particles and waves. Which form they take is determined by how they are measured.

"We're going to shoot an ultraviolet laser into a (special type of) crystal, and out will come two lower-energy photons that are entangled," Cramer said.

For the first phase of the experiment, to be started early next year , they will look for evidence of signaling between the entangled photons. Finding that would, by itself, represent a stunning achievement. Ultimately, the UW scientists hope to test for retrocausality -- evidence of a signal sent between photons backward in time.

In that final phase, one of the entangled photons will be sent through a slit screen to a detector that will register it as either a particle or a wave -- because, again, the photon can be either. The other photon will be sent toward two 10-kilometer (6.2-mile) spools of fiber optic cables before emerging to hit a movable detector, he said.

Adjusting the position of the detector that captures the second photon (the one sent through the cables) determines whether it is detected as a particle or a wave.

The trip through the optical cables also will delay the second photon relative to the first one by 50 microseconds, Cramer said.

Here's where it gets weird.

Because these two photons are entangled, the act of detecting the second as either a wave or a particle should simultaneously force the other photon to also change into either a wave or a particle. But that would have to happen to the first photon before it hits its detector -- which it will hit 50 microseconds before the second photon is detected.

That is what quantum mechanics predicts should happen. And if it does, signaling would have gone backward in time relative to the first photon.

"There's no obvious explanation why this won't work," Cramer said. But he didn't consider testing this experimentally, he said, until he proposed it in June at a meeting sponsored by the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

"I thought it would get shot down, but people got excited by it," Cramer said. "People tell me it can't work, but nobody seems to be able to explain why it won't."

If the UW experiment succeeds at demonstrating faster-than-light communication and reverse causation, the implications are enormous. Besides altering our concept of time, the signaling finding alone would almost certainly revolutionize communication technologies.

"A NASA engineer on Earth could put on goggles and steer a Mars rover in real time," said Cramer, offering one example."

seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/292378_timeguy15.html

ANISOTROPIC UNIVERSE INDICATES MOTION AROUND AN AXIS:

It is obvious that all atomic forces are balanced in spin around an axis in nature. Yet why then do we not see this same generalized principle when we look into deep space? Or, because of our preconcieved notions are we unable to see the truth? BIG BANG scenarios leave only a continuous expansion of space with zero explanation for centers of motion, and a mysterious dark matter is explanation for causing UNIVERSE space to expand towards an oblivion. This explanation is so linear in thinking that every other quantum notion then becomes distorted by this non-balanced mental imagery. Fortunately, there are a few of us that see a big picture that is balanced between a two way reciprocity between the forces.

Here is further proof that an axis does exist in greater UNIVERSE:

"IS THE UNIVERSE BIREFRINGENT? That is, does the universe behave like a crystal in which light moving in one direction acts differently from light going in another direction? Radio waves from distant galaxies must pass through the vast reaches of an intergalactic medium filled with stray magnetic fields and a tenuous plasma of ions and electrons. Through a well-known phenomenon called the Faraday effect, these ions and fields in the cosmic prairie subtly rotate the polarization of the radio waves (the orientation of their electric fields) on their way toward Earth. This is a very slight effect but it has been measured in the case of light coming from many galaxies; the effect is proportional to the magnetic field strengths and ion densities, as well as the square of the light's wavelength. (Typically about 5- 8% of the light from a galaxy is plane polarized, most of this in the form of synchrotron radiation.) Now two researchers, Borge Nodland at the University of Rochester (bnod@lle.rochester.edu; 716-275-5772) and John Ralston at the University of Kansas (ralston@kuphsx.phsx.ukans.edu; 913-864-4020), have studied polarization rotation data for 160 galaxies and have perceived that in addition to the Faraday effect, there seems to be an extra mysterious angular dependency at work. Indeed, the rotation varies consistently with the angle across the sky, as if the universe had an axis. That is, the amount of polarization rotation depends on the distance to a galaxy as well as on the cosine of the angle between the incoming radio waves and an axis that apparently lies in the direction of the constellation Sextans. This anomaly would seem to challenge some important physics concepts, such as the notion that there is no preferred direction in space and the notion that space itself is isotropic (the same in all directions) or homogeneous (the same in all places). One possible explanation might be the existence of "domain walls" between different realms of the cosmos, as prescribed in certain particle physics theories. The soundness of their study depends, among other things, on the quality and amount of polarization observations, and Nodland and Ralston therefore look forward to acquiring additional data. (To appear in Physical Review Letters, 21 April 1997; see figures at Physics News Graphics. Reminder---science journalists can obtain a copy of PRL articles by contacting AIP Public Information at physnews@aip.org)"

www.aip.org/enews/physnews/1997/physnews.317.htm

CHARGE SEPARATION IN AN ELECTRIC UNIVERSE

In the forward time portion of our dipole, the interexchange of FTL collapsing fields causes mass to maintain integrity and motion with in centers of gravity. All energy is constantly pouring into this scale from a higher EM source just as TESLA suggested.

Here is a picture of the organized filament structures as found in our Universe:



Source:

www.the-electric-universe.info/Scripts/filament.html#4

Our UNIVERSE, which our visible scale is only one of many scales that operates at various frequencies within many octaves of light densities each operating with in there own given speeds of motion. Time is then relative to each scale, we will eventually understand that FTL travel is possible and many otherwise paradoxes will be solved once we can evolve our thinking.

John

Here are my definitions of voids and RSR's:

VOIDS - Zero Time Events where nothing can exist. Matter cannot exist in a void because there are zero field support mechanisms available to regenerate signal and to enforce RSR's; (RSR's-Rigid Spacial Relationships)and mass would evaporate into aether. The exception would be a gravitational mass so dense that in itself the fields around the object would be inpenetrable and self regenerative with zero bleed off of signal. Ironically, VOIDS may only exist at centers of Black Holes, or maybe between islands of super scale structures and at centers of large scale opposing forward and reverse time field rotations in an infinite universe.


RSR's - All mass is maintained in form due to electromagnetic field integrity that forms many Rigid Spacial Relationships. This field integrity is a multi-scale wide interaction even down to the sub atomic level. All atomic RSR's are maintained by this greater multi-scale field interaction and any disruption in this force field interaction will cause the mass to loose equilibrium, explode, implode, or disappear entirely into the aether.

John