Ether, NOT Gravity

Wrong interpretions of the Ether and Gravity properties;

Ether has always been presented as an areoform environment .
Ether has a very strong density.
Ether density is several thousand times higher than air density ,When comparing accoustic speed in the air and the Light speed.
It is not the ether that is areoform ,but the Material World is an areoform TO the ETHER
But as ether is electrically neutral ,,poorly interacts with the Material World .
Example of interaction becomes apparent in gravitation {which should be named }


But it is the ETHER that makes one material body to PRESS to another.
Stars and Planets and all the Universes appeared from the Ether when some part of it ,,due to certain Reasons become less dense .

THE EHER TRIES TO RETURN ITSELF TO IT'S INITIAL STATE BY COMPRESSING OUR WORLD .BUT Intrinsic electric charges within material world substance obstructs this .

With TIME ,having lost the intrinsic charge >>>Our world will be conpressed with the Ether and is going to turn into the Ether .

Having came out of the ether ..so it will go back .

Density of the substance of the material world is STRONGLY different From Density and physical Properties of the ETHER .

Therefore the ETHER cannot reman in a FIXED state around material bodies and under certain circumstances there will be an Ether whirlwind appearing around material bodies.

I have just as many Questions about this as the many answers I have received.



The four fundamental forces of nature[3]
Property/Interaction Gravitation Weak Electromagnetic Strong
(Electroweak) Fundamental Residual
Acts on: Mass - Energy Flavor Electric charge Color charge Atomic nuclei
Particles experiencing: All Quarks, leptons Electrically charged Quarks, Gluons Hadrons
Particles mediating: Graviton
(not yet observed)
W+ W- Z0 γ Gluons Mesons
Strength in the scale of quarks: 10−41 10−4 1 60 Not applicable
to quarks
Strength in the scale of
10−36 10−7 1 Not applicable
to hadrons


And the next DOT:




Pen-Motion-Picture and the story of our "Planet Earth" in the Solar System

The geocentric model was developed thousands of years ago by Greek philosophers and was the accepted model of the Solar System for centuries. Geocentric actually means earth centered. This model is also called the Ptolemaic system in honor of the Greek scientist and philosopher Claudius Ptolemy, although the thory was around years before him. The geocentric model places the Earth at the center of the universe with the Sun, Moon, stars, and planets circling it.
The heliocentric model, which means sun centered, gradually replaced the geocentric model. This new system places the Sun at the center of the Solar System with the Earth and all the other planets orbiting it. This theory revolutionized everything because it reversed centuries of established opinion. Although the idea of a heliocentric model had been around as early as 200 B.C., it did not gain popularity until the 16th century.
One reason why the geocentric model remained in popularity for so many years is because it did explain many observations made by the early Greeks. For example, the geocentric model explained why things fall toward Earth – gravity – as well why Venus seems to stay the same distance from Earth based on its unchanging brightness. As astronomers saw problems with the geocentric theory, they altered it in order to account for these discrepancies. Another reason why this model remained in popularity so long was because it went along with the Roman Catholic Church’s policy.
As technology advanced, more problems surfaced facing the geocentric model. In the 16th century, the astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus built on the work of earlier scientists and published his heliocentric theory in his book On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Bodies. In this book, he made some radical changes, such as asserting that the stars do not orbit the Earth and declaring that the Earth’s rotation is what makes it appear as if the stars orbit our planet.
necessarily correct. Einstein’s Theory of Relativity upset both models. New evidence has also shown that the Solar System’s center of gravity is not the exact center of the Sun. This means that either model is acceptable regardless of the fundamental differences between the theories. Astronomers use both the heliocentric and geocentric models for research depending on which theory makes their calculations easier. It definitely seems as if some things are relative after all.
Universe Today has articles on both the heliocentric model and the geocentric model.
There are a number of other articles you will want to read including geocentric theory and the center of the galaxy.
Astronomy Cast has an episode on the center of the universe.
NASA Earth Observatory: Planetary Motion
So WHY can't modern science RECONCILE the helio- and geocentric model (A FALSE DICHOTOMY!) of our "Solar System"? THAT should strike anyone as ODD. As mentioned: Astronomers use both the heliocentric and geocentric models for research depending on which theory makes their calculations easier. Well, there are NAMES for such practices; SCIENTISM, SOPHISTRY, TAILORING EVIDENCE, take your pick.

And what has GRAVITY, THEE COMMON DENOMINATOR OF THE IRRECONCILABLE MODELS to do with any of that, since it is a FORCE  NOT  to be reckoned with: "Gravity is the weakest of the four fundamental forces of nature. The gravitational force is approximately 10−38 times the strength of the strong force (i.e. gravity is 38 orders of magnitude weaker), 10−36 times the strength of the electromagnetic force, and 10−29 times the strength of the weak force. As a consequence, gravity has a negligible influence on the behavior of sub-atomic particles, and plays no role in determining the internal properties of everyday matter." - Wikipedia

Mind you that one of the greatest genius of all time, Nikola Tesla, did NOT think 'gravity' exists. Let's TRY to understand WHY.


Back to Top