Hi Jimbo welcome, in your theory how would you describe gravity? Would it be related to other forces or is an independant of other forces?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo  Let me explain why why my first book contains very little mathematics.
Throughout my life I have been fascinated by science and discovering why things are the way they are. At school and university I was always drifting off during lectures into my own thoughts as I tried to visualise the processes being described. I wanted to know for example by what process light was bent when it entered glass, why it slowed down and then sped up again as it emerged. I just could not accept things unless I could visualise them in my mind.
My heroes of the past are Newton, Faraday and Young. Newton declared that the universe operated like clockwork with effect following cause. I discovered only recently that he though gravity was the condensation of aether into bodies, which is exactly what FET predicts. Faraday believed in forces emanating from wires carrying an electric current, which again is predicted by FET. Young described contact angles of liquids upon solids in just the way I imagined must be occurring in order to explain my experimental data.
Einstein started off brilliantly with his analysis of Brownian motion and the release of electrons by photons. His trouble came when he taught himself mathematics and let the maths dominate his thoughts. Although he argued against the Bohr model of an atom where nothing appeared definite or real, he seemed to have lost touch with reality when he proposed spacetime.
His biggest blunder was when he stated that a mechanical acceleration cannot be distinguished from a gravitational acceleration. In fact they are very different although they are numerically the same. A gravitational acceleration operates simultaneously upon every atom in an object and this is why our bodies cannot sense the acceleration when we are in freefall. A mechanical acceleration, such as in a rising elevator, pushes upon our feet and then sequentially through every atom of our bodies. It is this flow of energy through our bodies that gives us the sensation of acceleration. FET shows in both cases just how these flows of energy are achieved.
When we stand upon the ground the gravitational energy flows into every atom simultaneously but because it cannot be used as kinetic energy to move us downwards, the energy has to flow out of our body and into the ground. It is this flow of energy through our bodies that gives us the sensation of weight.
I therefore decided that I would not use anything but the simplest of maths in my development of FET as it might prejudice my logic. Only when I reached the limits of the theory would I start to perform a mathematical analysis.
Take for example whirlpools. As far as I know, no one has tried to calculate the forces in a continuous substance. I could have spent a long time calculating the forces and their distribution in whirlpools but instead satisfied myself with the analogy of a water whirlpool, where, when items are dropped into it they would circulate around with the flow and speed up as they moved towards the centre.
I later realised that there is a difference between an energy and water whirlpools in that when an object is dropped into water it immediately adopts the same speed as the water. With energy whirlpools it takes time to accelerate to the speed of the energy. At the Earth's surface I calculated the flow rate of gravitational energy to be 11.2km/sec. i.e. equal to its escape velocity. If you jumped out of a plane at 1km and immediately took on the speed of the energy then you would hit the ground in less than 0.1sec. I have shown in book 2 how and why the acceleration is only 9.8m/sec. This rate depends upon the actual energy density of the continuum and this varies from a minimum at the outermost edge of a whirlpool to a maximum at its centre.
Because the Sun draws in continuum energy, it causes the density to decrease slightly the nearer you approach it. Thus, the inverse square rule for Newton's gravity has to be modified slightly to allow for the increased density with distance. This would account for the mysterious slowing down of the 2 Pioneer spacecraft.
I hope this explains the lack of mathematics in book 1 of FET. However, the time is now ripe for a much more detailed analysis. I am still very busy trying to get book 2 ready before the end of this year but if anyone wants to attempt to calculate how stars might behave in a galaxy sized whirlpool you have my blessing and appreciation.
I have been receiving many questions privately as well as from this excellent site and will try to give a weekly update on the most frequently asked aspects of FET.
Jimbo |
Linear Mode
