Dialogue21.com Family of Forums  

Go Back   Dialogue21.com Family of Forums > Science > Physics > Theoretical Physics' Theories > Pulsoid Theory > Definitions, Index, and General Information
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Definitions, Index, and General Information Precisely defined words and nelogisms indicated within Pulsoid Theory with unusual formatting.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-31-2008, 03:42 PM
Epsilon=One's Avatar
Epsilon=One Epsilon=One is offline
Avant-garde Sr. Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 208
Default Attraction-at-a-distance: voodoo science

Attraction-at-a-distance: voodoo science

Attraction-at-a-distance: voodoo science; an illusion.

Gravitational attraction as described by Newton is a force that he actually thought was transcendental.

And, despite the curved spacetime continuum of general relativity (GR), Einstein knew that gravitational attraction was inexplicable.

Gravitational attraction-at-a-distance, as a fundamental force, is ludicrous on its face; as, it describes at least six forces (reach, grab, and pull for each of at least 2 bodies).

Actually, what is commonly referred to as gravitational attraction are several phenomena that act directly on the object; as all forces must!

The forces that control the action of cosmic bodies is primarily a function of the quantizing of space (“dark” matter); while, the forces that are observed between matter are a function of the common locus of the pulsation of their most fundamental, subatomic quanta (Pulsoids).

See: Relative, Hierarchic Compression (RHC) and Confluent Congruence (CC).



©Copyright 2005-2009 by Brunardot. All rights reserved.
Terms: Dialogue21.com, Brunardot, and Pulsoid Theory must be cited.
Sorry! This Thread has not been completed.
Please Bookmark and return to this site often.

If there is an immediate need for information,
please e-mail directly at the below "Click" link.

Please note that any private correspondence
may be edited and anonymously posted unless
requested otherwise.

Every effort will be made to expedite a reply
with the requested information.
Please ask questions.
With questions it’s possible to know if
comments are logical and convincing;
or whether clarification is required.


If images don’t display, "click" the Refresh Icon.
__________________
..."Click" to E-mail Me Directly
......Or, use a Forum Private Message

....."Seek simplicity; and
....... . . Natural integers."

..........Challenge to Academe
...The Purpose of Pulsoid Theory
..........
...........Forum Designer

Last edited by Epsilon=One : 01-31-2009 at 10:10 PM. Reason: Clarify
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-20-2011, 05:47 AM
Midgar21 Midgar21 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 20
Default Re: Attraction-at-a-distance: voodoo science

I'm sorry, but if you could educate me a little: didn't Einstein conceive gravity as a force that existed because of the curvature of space (when space was visualized as a physical, 3-dimensional material)? I don't know. What is the difference between Einstein's conception of gravity, the popular/modern/accepted conception of gravity, and the conception of gravity as described by Pulsoid Theory?

The idea of having 6 simultaneous interactions (reach, grab, pull, x 2) does indeed seem ludicrous. But can you explain how dark matter relates to gravity? Does gravity, in your opinion, have anything to do with mass?

I liked your phrase "a function of the quantizing of space..." Perhaps you could explain/expound?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-31-2011, 12:06 AM
Epsilon=One's Avatar
Epsilon=One Epsilon=One is offline
Avant-garde Sr. Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 208
Default Einstein’s undefined “space” and undefined “time.”

Quote:
Originally Posted by Midgar21 View Post
…didn't Einstein conceive gravity as a force that existed because of the curvature of space (when space was visualized as a physical, 3-dimensional material)?
In a sense, yes.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Midgar21 View Post
What is the difference between Einstein's conception of gravity, the popular/modern/accepted conception of gravity, and the conception of gravity as described by Pulsoid Theory?
Einstein considered gravity as a singular, primary force that is the resultant of a metaphysical concept that he referred to as “spacetime,” which apparently is a label for some form of ether that is without a relationship to Einstein’s undefined “space” and undefined “time.”


Pulsoid Theory defines the phenomena that manifests with the properties ascribed to the metaphysical “gravity” as several, complex, non-primary forces.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Midgar21 View Post
The idea of having 6 simultaneous interactions (reach, grab, pull, x 2) does indeed seem ludicrous.
It’s not the six forces that are ludicrous; it’s the theoretical, standard model concept of gravity that is ludicrous.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Midgar21 View Post
…can you explain how dark matter relates to gravity?
Well, this would depend upon some detailed definitions. It, of course, is impossible to predicate anything upon a metaphysical concept.


However, I think I understand the gist of your query. So . . . a type/form of “gravity” is a phenomenon of fermion characteristic, phenomena displacement analogous to compression (direct action upon an object). And, dark matter is analogous to compressed Pulsoids. I made an attempt at a confusing comparison; thus, a confusing reply.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Midgar21 View Post
Does gravity, in your opinion, have anything to do with mass?
The term “gravity” generally connotes a metaphysical, voodoo attraction-at-a-distance.


Mass connotes “something” that behaves in accordance with the Pauli Exclusion Principal that exhibits compression.

You will have to determine if they “have anything to do with” one another.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Midgar21 View Post
I liked your phrase "a function of the quantizing of space..." Perhaps you could explain/expound?
Quantized space is subject to the Pauli Exclusion Principal; thus, is compressible. Compression can push fermions closer to one another at a variable (accelerating) rate; and, of course there is an opposite, accelerating reaction. Be aware that unlike the other metaphysical, standard model forces that “gravity” exhibits acceleration that is quite difficult (with its reciprocal force) to explain with standard model theory. I know of no serious consideration or theory so proposed other than PT.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.