Gravity Behaving Badly - Part 2

About | Information | History | Online | Facts | Discovery

1. if you are overcoming gravity with a electromagnetic force IT IS NOT ANTIGRAVITY
2. Recent research at nasa has actually looked at folding space and they are experimenting on a smaller scale to determine if the technology actually would work. If they could overcome the energy requirements and the technology works the technology could in theory get them to Proxima Centauri with only about a 6 month flight time thats about the same time it take to currently get to mars.
3. the wave-particle duality they are and can be both, or they can be one or the other it is real physics 
4. Why exactly does a constant force of Gravity acting with a delay of 8 mins actually mean that the earth and all the planets are going to go spinning away from the sun. Gravity acts essentially then same.. this is because the wave of mass that was there at the forming of our planet pulling us toward the sun had a certain strength the wave passes but as it passes the new wave arrives and this continues and has forever since the formation of our universe. 
5. The Aether you talk about is not the same Aether of the old days people reject this concept mostly I believe because you use old words that makes them think of things that were disproven and it reminds them of this. 
6. no science in this video.
7. @soupdragon42 The mainstream doesn't want to deal with the Aether because of it's connections to the Alchemical World View. The Aether is viewed to be a part of the Supernatural among astronomers, and they want to take any reference to the Supernatural out of Science. 4 thousandths and 15 thousandths isn't a null result, so they ignore it.
8. @soupdragon42 they love the beauty of their math models, even though nature doesn't like them. I bet you if the models were anthropomorphed, they'd dump their wives and husbands and marry them. :) That's an exaggeration of course, but it somewhat explains their fanatical attachment to them.
9. you make good points but plz don't say that the hutchison effect is real it ruins the whole video, relativity dosen't shrink a train it just makes it appear to shrink, there's room in the theory of an electromagneticly driven universe for relativity and quantum mechanics, there are other holes you can easily pick in the gravitationally driven universe than relativity and quantum mechanics, like the behavior and composition of the center of our galaxy or pulsars
10. The Michelson-Morley experiment showed a deflection .004 and .015 which is not a null result.
11. As I see it the universe is Electrical and gravity is nothing than the Electrical Pressure created on matter which is also electrical on another frequncy. Gravity might then be the Push theory instead of Pull theory. Just a thought ;)
12. Sorry, I said Rest Mass is Mc2. I should have said Rest Energy is Mc2, since Relativisitc Kinetic Energy = Total Energy - Rest Energy.
13. Hi Definitionofis, Yes you are right that E = mc2 was derived from an expression for Relativistic Kinetic Energy (RKE). E is Total Energy, and m is relativistic mass, equal to RM, where the Relativity factor R = (1-v2/c2)^-1/2 and M is the Rest Mass. RKE = (1/2)Mv2 = Mc2(R-1). Total E = RMc2 from Einstein, and Rest Mass is Mc2. But V = Rv according to my calculations, where v is apparent velocity and V is Proper Velocity. R should be applied only to v or c, never to M, in my view. I think.
14. e=mc2 was originally about kinetic energy, not atomic energy. So although your answer seems correct, I'm having trouble making e=mc2 fit it. Perhap the energy requirement is also only observational ?
15. @MrBarnabas09 "How close to the speed of light could matter travel before acquiring infinite mass?" From an observer "at rest" it appears that an object traveling close to light-speed is becoming more massive, but this is not real. From the traveler's perspective, the observer is traveling and the traveler is "at rest." So the observer appears to be gaining mass and having trouble reaching light speed. But these are all observational effects. No one gains mass. No time dilation either.
16. "These accelerators wouldn't even work if they weren't engineered according to relativistic principles. " Perfect example of Relativity being used to help explain what we still dont understand of particle physics, bext this guy is going to tell us qauntum mechanics is flawed becuase it has gaps, even though we couldnt be using computers without it
17. This video reminds me of a question that has been on my mind for years. That is: How close to the speed of light could matter travel before acquiring infinite mass?
18. I didn't finish watching your video, but i just want to say this: there is firm evidence that clocks run slower in space than on earth. atomic clocks on satellites have to be updated by nanoseconds daily. that's a fact that's, I would say that's been predicted by general relativity but from what i did see of your video, you don't believe in it. I respect that, but I think that some things out on the web are false and some aren't.
19. This video went right over your head.
20. most mathmatical approach fails to explain the net behaviuor of grav because we fail to log in in our equasions other factors that may interupt the natural behaviuor of what we are trying to explain. a natural orbit of a celestial body is circular by nature of gravity only. maths can reflect reality if all factors concerning that reality are mathmatically loged in the equasion. if were to only express grav between 2 object mathmaticaly we will have the circular orbit behaviuor