elysium density and speed

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Rudolf</i>
<br />If 'elysium' is a medium I assume it consists of particles of some kind. These particles themselfs are as transparent to 'gravitons' as ordinary matter. Is this a correct assumption?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Yes, the unit particle is named "elysons".

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">One thing I wonder then about is if these 'elysium' are also affected by gravity like ordinary matter, i.e. particles attract each other? This could explain why elysium is more dense close to larger masses like planets, stars and other big objects.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Correct.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Might there be some places in the universe where no or little elysium is present? This will then mean that photons (EM waves) cannot (or not easily) travel through these areas.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Possible in principle, but unlikely in practice. If there were no elysium anywhere, then background light could not pass through either. It would look like a hole in space. That is about as likely as a hole in our atmosphere. -|Tom|-

With an explanation as simple as this why is it so hard for physicists and astronomers to accept this? Or do they want a something complex so no one can understand them []

Would it be possible for you to put together something like a layman's guide to 'relativity' and 'gravity'? I know you have explained it more thoroughly in your books but it requires some more knowledge on the subject (IMO). Perhaps as an article on this web site as a starters guide and also for all those new visitors that have not read your books yet. Just an idea.

What possible ways are there to detect the 'elysium' directly, if any? Previous experiments either failed to proof anything or were inconclusive - as far as I can tell.

Rudolf

What is the charge of the elysium? I am beginning to like the MM. Also, unrelated to this particular topic, is there truely a such thing as an instantanious process or do all actions or processes imply de facto divisibility?

My quess would be because 'elysium' is in a different 'scale' it might not have the property we call 'charge'. Perhaps something similar like a polarity (assuming they have some kind of spin) but the bottom line is (I think) we don't know enough about it to say.

Rudolf

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Rudolf</i>
<br />With an explanation as simple as this why is it so hard for physicists and astronomers to accept this? Or do they want a something complex so no one can understand them []<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Aside from investments in other theories in the forms of lectures, papers, books, proposals, grants, teaching, experiments, and the like, it is intrinsic to the way humans learn that they build new knowledge on old. So when one tries to unlearn something learned long ago, many later bits of stored knowledge and many decisions made on the basis of them must likewise to undone and remade. For people not in the regular habit of doing this, it can be a difficult process. The person coming on two theories for the first time is free to make a choice based purely on relative merits. The person invested in one of those theories when learning of the second pays a higher price to make a change, and therefore requires a higher incentive.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Would it be possible for you to put together something like a layman's guide to 'relativity' and 'gravity'?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">We have prepared a computer CD with a collection of papers (technical and non-technical), PowerPoint presentations, and a few animations, that will try to meet this need. It is due for release in about two months.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">What possible ways are there to detect the 'elysium' directly, if any? Previous experiments either failed to proof anything or were inconclusive - as far as I can tell.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Here is one of our EME Notes that go out to subscribers representing a possible detection of the elysium unit, or at least a method for such a detection in the future:

Gravitation. First detection of gravitational quantum. Physics News Update, Amer.Inst. Phys.Bull. #573, 2002/01/16; Nature 415, ix & 267-268 & 297-299 (2002). Quantum gravitational states have been observed for the first time. An experiment with ultra-cold neutrons shows that their vertical motion in Earth's gravitational field comes in discrete sizes. The researchers report seeing a minimum (quantum) energy of 1.4 pico-electron volts (1.4x10-12 eV). This corresponds to a vertical velocity of 1.7 cm/sec for the neutrons in Earth’s gravity field. [tvf: Using the conservation of momentum law, mv = MV, we can apply this to the experiment and adopt v = rms speed of elyson = sqrt(5)/3 c, as needed to make the wave speed in elysium = c. So v = 4x10^10 cm/s. M = mass of neutron = 1.7x10^-24 g. V = minimum rms speed of neutron = 1.7 cm/s from the experiment. So we can solve for the elyson mass, m = 7x10^-35 g.] !!

-|Tom|-

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by rousejohnny</i>
<br />What is the charge of the elysium? I am beginning to like the MM.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Elysium does not <i>have</i> charge, it <i>is</i> charge. Gravitons pack a super-dense elysium field around quantum particles. Whenever two like particles approach one another, their dense elysium fields are virtually impenetrable and force the particles to repel one another before they can collide.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">is there truely a such thing as an instantanious process or do all actions or processes imply de facto divisibility?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">The latter. All of space, time, and scale must be infinitely divisible to deal with Zeno's paradoxes. -|Tom|-