Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: Binary stars prove that Gravity-cells exist Chapt16.15 Gravity Cells
#1481 ATOM TOTALITY 5th ed

Replies: 10   Last Post: Apr 9, 2013 5:05 PM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 archimede plutanium Posts: 101 Registered: 5/9/12
Re: Brightness Chapt16.12 Limits of distance that light can travel and
Posted: Apr 9, 2013 4:41 PM

On Tuesday, April 9, 2013 12:52:28 PM UTC-7, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Now I thought perhaps I could validate the Titius Bode Rule as a form
>
> of the Balmer Rydberg spectral lines of physics not only by the
>
> planets around the Sun, but by binary stars. Trouble is that binary
>
> stars revolve around a center of mass, and not like our planets around
>
> the center of the Sun.
>
>
>
> But I still maybe able to show that binary stars show a doubling
>
> effect in distance the same way that the Titius Bode Rule is a
>
> doubling in distance for the planets.
>
>
>
> So far, I have spied , since I am dishonest, areport on binaries with a
>
> doubling in distance orbits. But I will keep looking.
>
>
>
> But what I did discover, is that Binary Stars are a supportive truth
>
> exist.
>
>
>
> Now some would and could be skeptical that Mercury with its 47km/sec
>
> speed whilst the belt some 10 years yada yada
>
> hence, if not for the Sun's gravity cell.
>
>
>
> Neither Newtonian gravity nor General Relativity can explain how
>
> Mercury going at 47km/sec can be bound to the Sun going at 220km/sec.
>
> If Mercury was going 267km/sec, then Newtonian gravity and General
>
> Relativity would be acceptable. But that is not the case.
>
>
>
> So what keeps Mercury bound to the Sun, is that the Sun has a gravity
>
> cell of the Maxwell Equations. A gravity cell is space itself and is
>
> composed of magnetic monopoles. The Sun bends Space around it, and
>
> bends it so much that it is a sphere shape stretching out to the Oort
>
> Cloud, and i Mercury going at 47 km/sec
>
> while the Sun is going 2km/km^2, because the gravity cell is itself
>
> rotating about an axis. This rotation compensates for the speed of
>
> Mercury so that it would be so.
>
>
>
> But I explained all of this in prior posts.
>
>
>
> What is different here, today, is that Binary Stars need that same
>

of
>
> "Center of Mass" for binaries because that center-of-mass is just
>
> empty space.
>
>

gravity cell
>
> has its own center in empty space.
>
>
>
> So without Gravity Cells in Newtonian gravity or General Relativity,
>
> we would not have Mercury bound to the Sun but be abandoned by the Sun
>

of
>
> Binary Stars, because a center of mass has to be a gravity-cell.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Now I will still hunt to see if binary star orbits are quantized into
>
> a doubling of distance.
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> Science newsgroups like sci.physics, sci.chem, sci.bio,
>
> sci.geo.geology, sci.med,
>
> sci.paleontology, sci.astro, sci.physics.electromag need to
>
> be hosted the same as what Drexel University hosts sci.math as the
>
> Math Forum. The world has plenty of good colleges and Universities to
>
> host each of the science newsgroups. Divide them up and spread them
>
> out. Science belongs in
>
> education, not in private companies trying to make more money. People
>
> reading science do not need silly ads continually distracting them.
>
> Google and Bing are ill suited to host science newsgroups, not just
>
> advertisement, but because of three major flaws: (1) search engine
>
> bombing (2) fake names allowed (3) no limit of posts per day. When you
>
> have those three evils, the signal to noise ratio is off the charts.
>
> In the old days, before May 2012 where Google had author-search,
>
> Google was good, but now that Google does not even have author archive
>
> search, Google is no better than a crude chat room.
>
> Now Drexel's Math Forum allows fake names and no limit of posts per
>
> day, but should they adopt those two rules, their Math Forum could
>
> rival and out-best a peer reviewed journal of mathematics, both in
>
> truth and diversity of ideas. Most would say that peer reviewed
>
> journals are the best forum for any science, but that is not true
>
> since peer reviewed journals are filled with Doppler redshift, Big
>
> Bang and black holes and when found wrong, means those journals were
>
> nearly 100% wrong in all they had published. If peer reviewed journals
>
> had been around in medicine, they would have had you believe that
>
> leeches and blood-letting were cures for ailments. Science routinely
>
> goes around throwing out onto the trash pile the peer reviewed science
>
> of past by gone eras. The flaw of peer reviewed is that it is too
>
> closed and not open, too much clubhouse, and stifles the new and true.
>
>
>
> Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a excellent, simple and fair
>
> author- ?archiving of AP sci.math posts since May 2012 as seen ?here:
>
>
>
> http://mathforum.org/kb/profile.jspa?userID=499986
>
>
>
> Archimedes Plutonium
>
> http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
>
> whole entire Universe is just one big atom
>
> where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies