The Universal Vortical Singularity

[jag]

I agree with you Grahm that gravity is a pull event.

jag

Sorry....I meant gravity is NOT a pull event.

jag

[G_burnett]

Sorry....I meant gravity is NOT a pull event.

jag

yes I know, the postulation is a lean toward description of what I am doing independent of in or out perception so I do not worry about such slips as the rest of the comment indicated the error. I was a bit worried in rereading my post you referenced that i had missed a comma lol but it hints without the comma that independence of effect or independence of gravity to some of the things I describe and the use of gravity as an effect period. A tool to describe effect of substance in motion without quanta of gravity the same way one might use time or not. It is there but just part of the picture and the picture is big.

As stated but maybe not clear without the comma I am on the platform of gravity being a feature of the all based on quanta of density of substance. In doing this ponder of events, I believe I can describe the events to pictorial geometric independent of its qualification or name given to describe beyond the word, gravity = a force exerted upon other substance based on quanta of density in any view of dimensional substance being.


I have this habit of consideration of which I ponder from a base of despite and not in spite.

I do not know if this makes much sense unless it is practiced day to day. IMHO kind regards graham.

[dipayankar]

Graham, how do we factor in gravity here? How can we explain gravity in vortex terms?

Hi Dip again, hi Vincent, hi all,

Revisiting my rule one of vortex creation where two substance streams reel to two vortex, the event with two varied mass creates two cones with the narrower points the event horizon. ... picture the vortex of a dust devil event on the greater mass of the surface of the planetary desert, we do not see the bottom vortex but just the dust kicked up and dissipation when the event point zero raises on the plane ... the variances of density in substance is the key words to point of view to the event. ... with no reverse spin of the bottom vortical forces effecting in the helix the vortex maintains itself, ... tornadoes, water spouts ... for a longer time to other frictional event effect of cessation/dissipation.

When there is the bottom vortex we have near immediate cessation ... in all relativity of density a factor and other. IMHO kind regards, Graham.

[G_burnett]

Graham, how do we factor in gravity here? How can we explain gravity in vortex terms?

Hi Dip
This is the third time today I started to post a reply and the first got into describing vortex in gravity terms and I decided not to post it.

The second was a few hours later and I was going to post a picture and when I moved from here I lost the post.

So here I go again. Lets see how I can mess it up this time.

Gravity in vortex terms can be looked at in the small or the large. It has to fit for both.

Vortex creation to my personal rule one of interaction creates two vortex cones from a singular event horizon or point zero. We can percieve sometimes only one vortex. The reason for this so postulated is that "the interaction for vortex creation involve two varied densities of substance in varied quanta transient form."

I will not get into the varied transient form here but will post the ponder to density. Thus said density is a factor both in the small and the big that density is a common factor to dimensional quantification.

Are we in our persona density of clumped matter a unit of matter that is too dense to rise in the sky or not dense enough to meld in the earth ... if we were in the water of a lake we would sink more then not and in the ocean float more then not. .. thus said the argument must be that density is a factor of gravity. Our density is in direct relationship to our state of being.

the earth and its density is in a relative exist due to its density of clumped matter.

in the small we see the forces of electromagnetic in nature act as a bonding factor and a repel factor but going further in the quark composite is bonded with a form of extend to the varied quark attractive and repelled not lessened by density in the quark motion in direction away from each other by varied cause of event.

But lets not go off the subject of explaining gravity in vortex terms in the small.

Will the neutron free from an atomic bond no bond event fall toward the core of a larger mass? No it does not.

Will an atom do this? ... sometimes and the reason is density of the medium it is in.

Will a molecule of atoms do this? sometimes and the reason is of the density it is in.

So the density not only has meaning as a medium but as a state of density and ... "a state of what motion the medium is in."

Am I getting this right Vincent?

I would dare to say thus because as molecules and atoms are with ion charge of polarity they are substance that can be effected then by magnetic field ... electromagnetic current forces of ion transfer event where magnetic wave field flux are created ... and effect other positive and negative charged substance with neutral bonded material by quark composite, the neutron in the atom ... carried along for the effect...and this is not the full picture just the road I am on and I am on the dark side of the road. ... feel free to add to the picture please,

but thus said there is is spin of substance either in the less dense or the greater dense ... and by the event of interaction vortex is created, two vortex, forces relative to view by the density of the two substances.

the dust devil for the example and the earth ... one vortex you see effect of but the other, the earth with the greater density has little effect shown.

... goes back to my rule one.

Its late and sage wants me to go to bed, put the dog out, turn on some 60s music, let the dog back in, go back to bed, sleep, get up, take a pill, and pass out so he can use my subconscious better to go near Pegasus and see the three new planets they have a real visual on now thanks to some other Canadians here ,three I guess that it took to clean the damn lens finally lol.

kind regards, G.

[G_burnett]

Here is a good link for reading on varied subjects

http://www.adsabs.harvard.edu/

citation needed
``This research has made use of NASA's Astrophysics Data System."

[G_burnett]

for those of you who might want some new wall paper?

• the Mercury image was taken by Mariner 10,
• the Venus image by Magellan,
• the Earth image by Galileo,
• the Mars image by Viking, and
• the Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune images by Voyager.
• Pluto is not shown as no spacecraft has yet visited it.

The inner planets (Mercury, Venus, Earth, Moon, and Mars) are roughly to scale to each other; the outer planets (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune) are roughly to scale to each other. PIA 00545 is the same montage with Neptune shown larger in the foreground. Actual diameters are given below:

• Sun 1,390,000 km
• Mercury 4,879 km
• Venus 12,104 km
• Earth 12,756 km
• Moon 3,475 km
• Mars 6,794 km
• Jupiter 142.984 km
• Saturn 120,536 km
• Uranus 51,118 km
• Neptune 49,528 km
• Pluto 2,390 km

For more information on the Planets, a good place to start is the Planets section of the NASA Solar System Exploration Home Page athttp://sse.jpl.nasa.gov/features/planets/planetsfeat.html.

Image Credit: NASA/JPL

[G_burnett]

hi again all and dip ...

I want to talk on gravity over here dip.

the reason for that is the other thread has a standard model of gravity ... or lets us say they have given gravity a dimension to measure it.

I would rather measure the shape of matter or substance clumped to potential area of effect from push in forces ... and I use the s on the end of force intentionally ... if the aether is not a vacuum and i believe it is not .. and it is a pressure of a type (set ...) upon all substance then when does it weaken in event may be the query to ponder. Examples are known.

Tell me dip if you or any are following me here and lets stay out of fission (not fusion) event please for personal reasons if we can? ... before I get into vortex link.

kind regards graham.

[dipayankar]

What I am not clear here is that if aether is a pressure, then there is a force behind it, what would be that force?

hi again all and dip ...

I want to talk on gravity over here dip.

the reason for that is the other thread has a standard model of gravity ... or lets us say they have given gravity a dimension to measure it.

I would rather measure the shape of matter or substance clumped to potential area of effect from push in forces ... and I use the s on the end of force intentionally ... if the aether is not a vacuum and i believe it is not .. and it is a pressure of a type (set ...) upon all substance then when does it weaken in event may be the query to ponder. Examples are known.

Tell me dip if you or any are following me here and lets stay out of fission (not fusion) event please for personal reasons if we can? ... before I get into vortex link.

kind regards graham.

[G_burnett]

What I am not clear here is that if aether is a pressure, then there is a force behind it, what would be that force?

Hi Dip, ok I would try here ... motion of the universe effect based on varied density but do not forget the mass behind it? It sounds to simple and it is in the simple ...

that is not complete a description I would like to give nor the end of ponder to me... remember it is more then just a medium ... it is a clumping of many events this great ... pulse ... g

[G_burnett]

Hi all
http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...venus-eye.html
Vincent .. you have to see these shots of venus.

enjoy all. kind regards G.