gravity waves found

[Adie123]

My own personal opinion on gravity, is that gravity is not one state but a combination of elements.

Gravity that holds matter to a planet is a combination of magnetic forces + atmosphere pressure + centrifugal forces.

Gravity outside of atmosphere is magnetic forces + centifugal forces.

If something large is spinning, it sucks other objects towards it and eventually into the direction of the main mass/bodies spin direction. A bit like a whirlpool or galaxy formations spin effect(s) on other matter.

The less spin of a mass will result in less gravity geforce. The more spin of a mass will result in greater gravity geforces.

-------

SO with this in mind, i dont think it would be possible to find the definative answer for anti-gravity. What would need to be found is an effecient way to counteract the forces. Which would result in an artificial anti-gravity effect propulsion.

I'd like to hear peoples opinion on my/this theory.

Adie.

[witsend]

If plasmas were inclined to antigravitational effects then it would be impossible to contain plasmas within our own gravity fields. I trust that this much is clear. But I do see that any 'justification' - any positioning of the plasma paths - would be a response to the earth's or any surrounding magnetic field. And it would find that path that best neutralised it's own ionic imbalances. That plasmas do respond to magnetic fields is known. I am not sure if it's proven to respond to electric fields. But since electric fields have magnetic fields associated with them - then presumably such would also allow an interaction of sorts.

However, it is interesting to see - as sucahyo has shown, that flames themselves respond to electric and/or magnetic fields and this rather proves that flames themselves hold either electric or magnetic properties or possibly both. I've seen this proved - all over the place. But I've not seen it so simply and graphically made evident. My own thinking here is that flame is the actual 'aetheric' or magnetic particle that has manifested within our own timeframe. A kind of elementary plasma. And like all such magnetic dipoles - it looks for it's most balanced position - that path of least resistance. And because they are fundamental neutral particles they are well able to 'share' a path - where, conversely, electrons cannot. Hence the flame can 'grow' and become bigger and share the same space with other such 'flames'. Again. That's just my own thinking. It speaks rather well to the conservation of energy principles in that their energies would neither be created nor destroyed. They are either evident - when we see them - or they are hidden inside mass - when we don't see them. A kind of 'peek a boo' - that relies on applied physical events to make it manifest. And the good news is that if such dipoles existed and if this is our source of aetheric energy - then there's lots of them. Which means we just need to find ways to use them better. Flame can be somewhat destructive.

EDIT. BTW - if, indeed, there is such a magnetic particle - then it would need to be a dipole which would render it neutral. And as a dipole it would indeed respond to magnetic fields. But that's another example of a deduction based on inductive reasoning. LOL. It seems that these are tools of logic that I simply can't avoid using. I wonder if anyone can?

[Harvey]

Don't associate atmosphere existence with electrical charge then.


Fire is plasma. Some say it is the next matter transition after gas. Negative ion blows fire and thus considered as reacted the same at much lower scale to gas, liquid and solid.

Plasma is lighter than gas just like gas is lighter than liquid. Plasma fly up, just like light gas fly up and heavy solid going down. Maybe gravity reacted with mass. heavy matter attracted to negative mass at earth center, light matter repelled.

Thing that repel fire have similar characteristic as gravity. Things that attract fire have similar characteristic as anti gravity. My previous conclusion about gravity derived from single candle light experiment. If you put a ring of corona maker underneath the candle flame, the flame shrink. If you point the negative wire to the fire, it blows them just like wind being generated. But it is only illusionary wind since no real wind happen other wise the fire won't change direction very quickly.

I theorized that ion wind repelling acceleration is faster on plasma than on ambient air. If any real wind happen then it would react slower than the fire.

If david lambright has ion wind property. It should either repell fire or attract fire.

You have an interesting point there regarding plasma 'flying up'.

Did you see this video? YouTube - Plasma Puzzle

That is true that the plasma stream runs from gravity like a bean sprout growing away from it. I wonder NASA - Threshold Acceleration for Gravisensing (Gravi)

YouTube - Microgravity Combustion

Floating Flame Balls - NASA Science

[sucahyo]

So, the same in space where very strong electric fields are present many miles from charged matter producing the field. Detecting that field is not so difficult a task. You may find this interesting:

Thank you. Interesting .

A combination of many physical device. As I thought they use magnet meter (magnetic field model) to detect static. I wonder if it result the same measurement if they send one of electric field sensing device to the stars. I wonder if it can transmit the data though, or if the man in charge do not forget to leave note to his successor....

[Harvey]

How do we measure electrical charge in space? Can we really measure static electricity in space?

How space electrical detector work? If we use magnetic detector to measure electricity, isn't we already use assumption by then? If we use spectrometer to measure electricity, isn't we already use assumption too?

What happens when you put your arm in front of your TV screen when it is charged up? If it is a CRT, then you will detect the electric field very easily because each of hairs on your arm will stand up and straighten out to align with that field. Or if you yourself become charged, what happens to your hair?

This



So, the same in space where very strong electric fields are present many miles from charged matter producing the field. Detecting that field is not so difficult a task. You may find this interesting:
http://web.media.mit.edu/~jrs/efs.html

Here is a document regarding the FAST:
The FAST Satellite Electric Field and Magnetic Field Instrument

And here is one on the VEFI used on the C/NOFS Satellite:

http://vefi.gsfc.nasa.gov/vefi/Resources/VEFI_DescriptionREV.pdf

Electric field strength diminishes by the inverse square rule so the strength reduces rapidly at great distances from the source.

[witsend]

Sorry, I though you are suggesting that as a fact. A fact based on experiment or theory. And human has limit to replicated or think about what happen in real life. And we may have achieve wrong knowledge because of this limit.

Indeed. My thoughts exactly.

[sucahyo]

Sucahyo? Again not sure of the question. There is no known static electricity in the vacuum of space. Are we talking about the same thing?

Sorry, I though you are suggesting that as a fact. A fact based on experiment or theory. And human has limit to replicated or think about what happen in real life. And we may have achieve wrong knowledge because of this limit.

[witsend]

At what level of static electricity this experiment done? 10 digits of volts? 20? 1000? What if the experiment result will actually positive at 10000 digits of volts?

Sucahyo? Again not sure of the question. There is no known static electricity in the vacuum of space. Are we talking about the same thing?

[witsend]

How do we measure electrical charge in space? Can we really measure static electricity in space?

How space electrical detector work? If we use magnetic detector to measure electricity, isn't we already use assumption by then? If we use spectrometer to measure electricity, isn't we already use assumption too?

Not sure of your question here sucahyo. I'm talking about the vacuum of space. This is filled with matter that has electromagnetic properties - by definition. But there's no known electric fields within space itself - nor for that matter magnetic fields. It's widely assumed to be a vacuum. And classicists propose that the vacuum is filled with 'gravitons'. EU theory proposes that there's a longitudinal path where the electric fields always propogate. But that path has never been 'found' - only proposed. In effect the proposal is that electric fields 'radiate' outwards and in lines and through space - very much as light does. If that 'thing' that irradiates outwards is based on some loose concept of 'charge' - then I can still buy in. But if it's being proposed that 'electrons' irradiate outwards - then they're doing something that we know electrons, usually, don't do. They simply don't 'share a path'. It would be a new heretofore unknown property of electricity that they're proposing.

[sucahyo]

The flame experiment show electricity repel. But who knows.

I am very interested in your 'flame' experiment. I think it's very elegant and I agree with you that it's significant.

We just need high voltage DC and a candle . Although I use the one that also has AC lol.

[sucahyo]

But electricity is not known to bend light - it is not known to attract massive objects in space - and, if it attracted all materials regardless of its magnetic properties - then there'd be an evident pull of all matter towards any generator of electricity. None such is evident.

At what level of static electricity this experiment done? 10 digits of volts? 20? 1000? What if the experiment result will actually positive at 10000 digits of volts?

[witsend]

Plasma is lighter than gas just like gas is lighter than liquid. Plasma fly up, just like light gas fly up and heavy solid going down. Maybe gravity reacted with mass. heavy matter attracted to negative mass at earth center, light matter repelled.

It's not that plasma 'flies up'. It simply is lighter than the other elements and therefore less 'pull' by gravity. But if it literally 'flew up and away' from a gravitational field there would be no means of holding it within a gravitational field. It would dissipate into space. All states, solid liquid, gaseaous and plasmas - are attracted to a gravitational field.

I am very interested in your 'flame' experiment. I think it's very elegant and I agree with you that it's significant.

[sucahyo]

Actually sucahyo - there are no 'known' electric fields in space. It is always associated with matter.

How do we measure electrical charge in space? Can we really measure static electricity in space?

How space electrical detector work? If we use magnetic detector to measure electricity, isn't we already use assumption by then? If we use spectrometer to measure electricity, isn't we already use assumption too?

[witsend]

I say gravity is an effect of electricity, kind of strong ion wind but not caused by the magnetism that produced by current. In my opinion, gravity goes perpendicular with voltage, a product of huge voltage, not current.

Since the earth center is negative, gravity goes straight down to earth. There is less gravity in space because there is less electric polarity in space.

Actually sucahyo - there are no 'known' electric fields in space. It is always associated with matter. And to say that it is an 'effect' of electricity would first need an explanation of electricity. In effect you are simply calling gravity - 'electricity'. We do know a little more about electricity than gravity - precisely because we use it so much more widely. But electricity is not known to bend light - it is not known to attract massive objects in space - and, if it attracted all materials regardless of its magnetic properties - then there'd be an evident pull of all matter towards any generator of electricity. None such is evident. But I do know something about the Electric Universe theory. That proposes that electricity is the primary force. I discount that thesis by these arguments. But I really do like that thinking especially as it proposes the changing shapes of Venus and other celestial bodies. Fascinating stuff. And some valid arguments against both classical and quantum theories. But none that our classical and quantum theorists don't themselves acknowledge.

[sucahyo]

If Gravity was related to some electrical effect like the ionosphere and surface being different charges, then wouldn't we expect all gravitational bodies like the asteroid belt, Moon and Comets to not have gravity since they have no atmosphere?

Don't associate atmosphere existence with electrical charge then.


Fire is plasma. Some say it is the next matter transition after gas. Negative ion blows fire and thus considered as reacted the same at much lower scale to gas, liquid and solid.

Plasma is lighter than gas just like gas is lighter than liquid. Plasma fly up, just like light gas fly up and heavy solid going down. Maybe gravity reacted with mass. heavy matter attracted to negative mass at earth center, light matter repelled.

Thing that repel fire have similar characteristic as gravity. Things that attract fire have similar characteristic as anti gravity. My previous conclusion about gravity derived from single candle light experiment. If you put a ring of corona maker underneath the candle flame, the flame shrink. If you point the negative wire to the fire, it blows them just like wind being generated. But it is only illusionary wind since no real wind happen other wise the fire won't change direction very quickly.

I theorized that ion wind repelling acceleration is faster on plasma than on ambient air. If any real wind happen then it would react slower than the fire.

If david lambright has ion wind property. It should either repell fire or attract fire.