Proof of instant gravity.

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

Perhaps try the old philosophy method
of clearing your mind of pre-conceived beliefs
before carefully reading this article.

Instant Gravity Proof

 

[Polymath257]

I'd suggest actually learning what general relativity says. The description in this articles does NOT give an accurate portrayal of what GR says. Yes, gravity travels at the speed of light, but in the expansion there is a 'correction term' that negates your whole viewpoint.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

I'd suggest actually learning what general relativity says. The description in this articles does NOT give an accurate portrayal of what GR says. Yes, gravity travels at the speed of light, but in the expansion there is a 'correction term' that negates your whole viewpoint.

The geometry is not at all anything to do with expansion because in the little lime it takes for the pair to separate
the expansion is virtually nil.

 

[Jake1001]

Have your tried getting this stuff published ? Peer review shows genius vs. nonsense.

Perhaps try the old philosophy method
of clearing your mind of pre-conceived beliefs
before carefully reading this article.

Instant Gravity Proof

 

[Polymath257]

The geometry is not at all anything to do with expansion because in the little lime it takes for the pair to separate
the expansion is virtually nil.

Not the expansion I was talking about. In the mathematics, there is a term that describes, essentially, the Newtonian attraction. Then there is a term that describes the time delay. Then there is a term that 'corrects' for that time delay. This all comes out of the math for general relativity.

 

[Jake1001]

Can you show us the form of these terms..thus de-bunking ainsleys hypothesis. Can you provide an order of magnitude estimation?

Not the expansion I was talking about. In the mathematics, there is a term that describes, essentially, the Newtonian attraction. Then there is a term that describes the time delay. Then there is a term that 'corrects' for that time delay. This all comes out of the math for general relativity.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

Have your tried getting this stuff published ? Peer review shows genius vs. nonsense.

I live in a remote corner of Africa.
I don't know any individuals involved in institutional academia.
Its my experience (out here) that formal recognition has less to do
with the logic of the theory than it has to do with palm-greasing and croneyism.

In order for me to put the effort in to seeking publication I would need to be invited.
If you know of any people who appreciate this work, please let me know.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

Not the expansion I was talking about. In the mathematics, there is a term that describes, essentially, the Newtonian attraction. Then there is a term that describes the time delay. Then there is a term that 'corrects' for that time delay. This all comes out of the math for general relativity.

You have not actually explained what you mean.
If the gravity is delayed because it travels the distance between the binary stars,
then one star would be pulling to the point that the gravity originated from (the other star).
This causes the out-spiral that would mean that all binary pairs fall apart
after a few million years at most - if gravity traveled at the velocity of light.

If there is any 'correction' for this delay, then this would mean that the information
as to where the opposite star is, must jump across the gap instantly.
Once more, to do this, it would violate General Relativity.

 

[Polymath257]

You have not actually explained what you mean.
If the gravity is delayed because it travels the distance between the binary stars,
then one star would be pulling to the point that the gravity originated from (the other star).
This causes the out-spiral that would mean that all binary pairs fall apart
after a few million years at most - if gravity traveled at the velocity of light.

If there is any 'correction' for this delay, then this would mean that the information
as to where the opposite star is, must jump across the gap instantly.
Once more, to do this, it would violate General Relativity.

Nope. Clearly you have not actually studied the equations of general relativity.

In the binary star situation, there are gravitational waves produced as well as the overall curvature. The curvature produces a 'force' directed towards where the other star was, but the wave aspect is also 'pushed to the side' which produces a correction term that nearly cancels the difference in the pure curvature term.

There is still a *gradual* spiral that happens because of the energy loss due to the gravitational waves. And that effect has been observed.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

If it weren't for the internet, so many revolutionary geniuses would never have been known.

 

[Jake1001]

Your remote location is no excuse for your lack of rigor. You do not need to know anyone, just search the web and find a journal to submit your article to. If it gets accepted let us know. If it gets rejected figure out why. No one will invite you. It is how peer review works.

You seem like a bright fellow, with about a high school level education. If you are serious about science you will need to learn a lot more.

I live in a remote corner of Africa.
I don't know any individuals involved in institutional academia.
Its my experience (out here) that formal recognition has less to do
with the logic of the theory than it has to do with palm-greasing and croneyism.

In order for me to put the effort in to seeking publication I would need to be invited.
If you know of any people who appreciate this work, please let me know.

 

[crowfeather]

Peer review shows genius vs. nonsense.

Peer review? What is that? When a bunch of people who didn't discover something peer at it and decide it's nonsense?

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

Nope. Clearly you have not actually studied the equations of general relativity.

In the binary star situation, there are gravitational waves produced as well as the overall curvature. The curvature produces a 'force' directed towards where the other star was, but the wave aspect is also 'pushed to the side' which produces a correction term that nearly cancels the difference in the pure curvature term.

There is still a *gradual* spiral that happens because of the energy loss due to the gravitational waves. And that effect has been observed.

that was ad hoc sophistry.

If the force pulls to where the other star was, the pair will spiral outwards.
That is just logical.

Could you please reference where you claim this logic has been noted before me?

How and what 'pushes to the side'?
If the information as to which side to push towards 'corrects' - then that information would
have to travel across the space between the stars instantly so that it would be 'corrected' in the right direction.
If not, then what stops it from 'correcting' in the other direction? Or up or down for that matter?
What is the terminology and source quote for this correction for what I have termed BOGVOS?

As for the energy loss *gradual* spiral, Hawking (Brief History of time) shows it to be:

Which equates to a rate of 1mm for a period of time 500 times longer than the age of the universe.
And you claim that this rate has been 'observed'?
Really?
The LIGO claims are entirely at odds with Hawking's account as they claim that
the in-spiral rate will be 3000km per second.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

Your remote location is no excuse for your lack of rigor. You do not need to know anyone, just search the web and find a journal to submit your article to. If it gets accepted let us know. If it gets rejected figure out why. No one will invite you. It is how peer review works.

You seem like a bright fellow, with about a high school level education. If you are serious about science you will need to learn a lot more.

Peer-pressure-review clearly does not work, or else BOGVOS
(or something similar) would have been noted before now.
My logic is absolutely correct, and if the (alleged) scientific community is
too conceited to admit that it has been out-thought by a single African honors philosophy student,
then God alone will be their judge; and the western world is in for a tragic future.

My remote location was noted purely to show that distance prevents direct person-to-person communication.
The full article has been analysed with the rigor required to program the evolutionary software which backs up
these findings. If you had been rigorous yourself, you would have noted that, and read the full article here:

Computational analysis of LIGO gravitational-wave experiment GW150914

There is no evidence that you have done that, and there is plenty of evidence of the rigor you ask for in my article.

If searching the web is all that is required for publication then note this:

Which shows that I am the only person in the world that has ever
successfully calculated three (or more) interactive gravitational fields.
(The many-body-problem)

Moreover this is in evolutionary software, ranked 1st and 3rd in the world.
So my ranking on the web is far higher than any of your abominable godless
'academic' institutions. God will judge how you have disrespected
His messenger - and He will do so in his own time.

Repent of your errors, beg forgiveness for your sins, and offer restitution.
Only that can save your soul.

 

[Jake1001]

Even Einstein and Hawking were able to get their work published....and it was so radically different...that few reviewers full understood it.

Of course, Ainsley's discoveries far exceed Einstein and Hawking

Peer review? What is that? When a bunch of people who didn't discover something peer at it and decide it's nonsense?

 

[Jake1001]

I repent to you..computer simulator of the universe...

Moreover this is in evolutionary software, ranked 1st and 3rd in the world.
So my ranking on the web is far higher than any of your abominable godless
'academic' institutions. God will judge how you have disrespected
His messenger - and He will do so in his own time.

Repent of your errors, beg forgiveness for your sins, and offer restitution.
Only that can save your soul.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

I repent to you..computer simulator of the universe...

You are saved! Bless you!
Now carry the message to those godless institutions that:
gravity is instant!

If you do not, then be very very careful next time you decide to
go anywhere near a whale.