Comments

• 

  Roaring Lovely November 30, 2021 at 5:01am

  

  The picture below depicts 'galaxy filaments'.
  
  It is not immediately apparent that the mainstream theories has a problem in explaining galaxy filaments. So let me elaborate it abit. The mainstream's gravity is fundamentally, what I may call it 'mono-poler'. This means that there is no repulsive force associated with gravity. Wallace's Theory, on the other hand is fundamentally 'di-poler'. The gravity's monopoler property emerges when large number of particles gravitates.
  
  Now, in an entirely mono-poler force, we espect stars and galaxies to lump together into sphericaly symmetrical lumps, rather than form filaments. This is because each star pulls the other stars equally in all directions.
  
  In fact such is how they explain why planets are spherical. If planets where cylindrical, it would be an headache to explain how they form using only gravity. A cylinder implies that either the plannet was consistently pulling matter only from the 'top' (so that the matter piles along one ditection into a long structure) or the planet pulled more strongly from the sides than it from 'top' and 'bottom' (so that it gets squeezed only along one direction-think of how you might kneed to form a spaghetti). In whichever way, this would show that gravity is not pulling evenly in all directions, as the theory insists.
  
  But now since large scale structures don't form spheres, we must reconsider theories of gravity. We must make them capable of antisymmetric pulling in larger scale but symmetrical in smaller scales. Wallace's Theory does this excellently!
  https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-682110fd60c79dbdaeb4a966cff17...

  

  https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-682110fd60c79dbdaeb4a966cff175be-c
• 

  Drekx Omega November 29, 2021 at 9:03pm

  

  Yes indeed...this looks closer to the science used by offworlders...Mainstream theories are behind Wallace Thornhill....
• 

  Roaring Lovely November 29, 2021 at 8:51pm

  

  I have thought a lot about Wallace thornhill's (the founder of 'Electric Univers Theory) theory of gravity. I found that it can explain the formations of galaxy filaments better than the mainstream theories. The Wallace's theory easily explains how G can be a variable and makes control of it a bit conceivable. In wallace's theory, gravity is caused by charges that can freely re-oroent themselves. So it is ultimately an electrostatic force. Being electrostatic, we use permeability,(ε) rather than G. Unlike G, of course ε, which is related to speed of light, c, is a variable. ε inside a glass is, for instance bigger than in vacuum.
  
  c^2=1/εμ , according to Maxwell's theory. So in a realm where Wallace's gravity is smaller, light travels faster, for instance.
• 

  Drekx Omega November 29, 2021 at 8:30pm

  

  Yes, gravity is a powerful displacement vector, for propulsion systems...It can be independent of mass...These ships behave like mini-planets and stars...Electro-gravitic, one could suggest...
  Even close to a powerful gravitational field, such as the sun's, a ship can remain "afloat," rather than subject to overwhelming pull forces...causing disintegration...Moreover, massive heat and solar winds, irradiating ships, can be shielded from, within protective electro-gravitic envelopes...Along with other force fields generated...
  Another process which enables closer solar work, is vectoring inter-dimensionally...The higher the planes, (the faster LIGHT,) the easier to avoid space debris bumps, flare bursts, magnetic pulse, gravity distortions and hull scorching, from suns...The shields can almost be dropped completely, on the 4th aether....A far more gentle voyage in space, there.
• 

  Roaring Lovely November 29, 2021 at 8:13pm

  Variable G might even explain galaxy rotation without any need for the so called 'dark matter'! The G is simply larger in a large collection of stars, making gravity stronger without adding any more matter.
• 

  Drekx Omega November 29, 2021 at 8:09pm

  

  Exactly right Movella....Frankly, a ship's weight is not particularly pertinent in the context of a planetary gravity, as it creates it's own...The figure provided would only be applicable in the context of systems deactivation....when landed on the surface.
  
  Normally such Scout Ships, as you know, are either vectoring between a Mothership and planetary system...Or being cradled within the hangar bay of a Mothership...When cradled, they are within a general bay field that lightens them, to a mere quarter Ton each...
  
  The gravity in a Mothership, is roughly equal to Earth's, at the equator...(Gravity is variable, across a planet and heaviest at the poles.) This applies on the bridge, engineering and recreation areas....Floating about weightlessly, is allowed for certain specialist tasks, in certain areas, for certain types of work.. This is not the norm,.
  
  From experience, it has become normal practice to maintain a gravity field in the hanger bay, which allows the robot carriers of loads, some traction...Lest they bounce about like ping pong balls, uselessly....lol
  And loads lose items, as they float about in the bay...Thus this policy applies as a rule, for all on the ship's manifest, including service robots..
• 

  Roaring Lovely November 29, 2021 at 8:06pm

  

  "However, weight is normally based on the acceleration due to gravity, being a constant..g.....Downward Force= Mass times g.....But within the field, gravity is modified and controlled..."
  
  It can work if we regard 'G' (appearing in both Newt's law and GR )as a variable, as many pple have suspected. In this case, we may say 'G has different value inside the field'.
  
  mg=MmG/r^2
  
  But inertial mass is also relevant.
• 

  Movella November 29, 2021 at 7:55pm

  Wow! Mikala's ship at 600 tons is indeed quite heavy, however the gravity isn't determined by the planet. Instead the ship generates it's own gravitational field and is entirely independent of planetary gravity..
• 

  judithfaye66 November 29, 2021 at 7:33pm

  Pet Rock, I love your insights.
• 

  Drekx Omega November 29, 2021 at 7:07pm

  About a 600 tons. So very heavy and a 100' diameter..
  
  However, weight is normally based on the acceleration due to gravity, being a constant..g.....Downward Force= Mass times g.....But within the field, gravity is modified and controlled...