Femto camera experiment says space is the medium for light

[Grumblenuts]

 

[trevorjohnson83]

Gravity.

Okey doke

 

[Grumblenuts]

THe whole wavicle thing seems to be predicated simply on the fact we came to waves first and to particles.
Had we found the nature of wavicle first, then particles would be described as an extrema as would waves.

In fact a wavicle would be the defining concept with wave and particle at the extrema

The chronological order of "came to" doesn't help explain anything. We called it "wet" because it was like water, but then it froze so we called it "ice." Then we added flavorings while stirring and called it "ice water" and "Slushy."

 

[Grumblenuts]

History[edit]​

Around the year 1900 it was understood that light was a wave, and electrons as well as atoms were particles. There were a few pieces of experimental evidence that hinted at something deeper. Over the next quarter of a century there was a major change in scientific thinking with acceptance of quantization of light as well as wave behavior of electrons, all of which led to the concept of wave-particle duality.

But wait, it continues.. contradicting the above all over the place..

But wait again, what if "It's obviously both, but mostly neither"? Where's the "something deeper"? How about fields? Electricity? What, no energy-matter duality? Wasn't that the real point of E=mc^2? What's the actual purpose of Quantum Mechanics? {Hint: to distract from the obvious necessity for an Aether (rather than an atom and spacetime based) fundament}

 

[Grumblenuts]

A chemistry professor's recent attempt to make cookies resembling water molecules

 

[Grumblenuts]

Just discovered a fellow Nut. I've become contagious:

 

[trevorjohnson83]

The heat in the core of a nuclei or planet doesn't radiate maybe because the pressurized material re absorbs heat differently then if the heat were from a burning ember, and as such the heat in the core is absorbed from outside possibly, the one way direction of heat is all pointed towards the core and gravity is like a magnetic field shaped so that down is S and up is north at every point in it. The same field would be around an object's atom's in that gravity field where every outward direction of the object would be north and inward south, pulling the two object's together?

 

[trevorjohnson83]

Hmmm... if the core of a planet or nuclei is absorbent of heat, and has filled an area the size of its gravity field with heat, then the object in the earth's gravity field falls toward the center not because of magnetic attraction, but because it is full of heat and taking on more heat from the earth's gravity field converts to momentum as gravity increases? Because the earth is also resistant of giving away its heat?

 

[Grumblenuts]

The heat in the core of a nuclei or planet doesn't radiate

Of course it does. Radiation, along with convection and conduction.

 

[trevorjohnson83]

Of course it does. Radiation, along with convection and conduction.

the heat is readily capable of that. but the pressure in the core attracts the heat rather then emits it.

 

[trevorjohnson83]

If the trough side of a magneitic field is south and the crest north, and in a gravity field where the energy is pointed in towards the pressurized core, then both out and in would line up between the earth's gravity field and an object falling into it? The two absorbent core's of earth and the object pulls them together. The heat of the object's core once inside the earth's gravity field is attractive to the earth's core, but its not radiating its being absorbed by the pressure in either core so if it does radiate out, it eventually reabsorbs the heat.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Uncle.

 

[trevorjohnson83]

alright this one then....
Pressure in the core absorbs heat and the heat appears stationary. The direction of equilibrium for the heat that is stationary is towards the core. Because the north direction into the core doesn't loop back around to create the south direction like in a magnet, the trough of the heatwave surrounds the earth and pulls in on the crest of the objects gravity field.

In the magnetic gravity example logic would be that if both the planet and the object were surrounded by a trough S pointing in that the two gravity fields when overlapping would oppose each other. However crest trough alignment would happen between a falling object's topside and the side of the planet facing the object, as well as the opposite, the pull of the object on the planet.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Aunt.

 

[trevorjohnson83]

So as I follow it when you compress a substance it heats up, but loses it heat to the environment until you take the pressure off at which time it absorbs heat again until its at equilibrium? but the tremendous amount of weight bearing down on the core causing the pressure is a different environment Every point in the core is pressurized from above, so where does the heat from pressure escape to? above where its cooler? that's where the pressure originates from.

 

[Grumblenuts]

So as I follow it when you compress a substance it heats up, but loses it heat to the environment until you take the pressure off at which time it absorbs heat again until its at equilibrium? but the tremendous amount of weight bearing down on the core causing the pressure is a different environment Every point in the core is pressurized from above, so where does the heat from pressure escape to? above where its cooler? that's where the pressure originates from.

Let's start again with the basics. What we call gravity results from the spatial component of the Aether pushing into ("pressuring") matter from every direction, thus acting as an anti-field or large scale compressor. If you can't accept that as at least a working premise or valid theory to build from then I'm afraid we have nothing further to discuss here.

Aside: We can simply call the spatial component of the Aether "the magnetic." The other, non-spatial or counterspatial component, we can simply call "the dielectric." Both exist and contribute to actual "electricity" in equal measure. Electricity = dielectric-magnetism = the Aether = everything.

Back to the business at hand: Yes, very generally speaking,

when you compress a substance it heats up

However, depends upon what exactly "it" is and what its environment is. Liquids and solids generally don't compress much compared to gases and plasma.

where does the heat from pressure escape to?

Pressure or no, hot tends to go to cold. If its environment is colder it goes that way. If not, it doesn't go anywhere. It may just build up, expand, and/or explode.

 

[Grumblenuts]

I was just reading about the pressure at Earth's core for a different topic, but it applied better to this one.

The deeper inside the Earth, the higher the pressure and temperature (Fig. 1). The Earth's center has an ultrahigh pressure of 364 GPa and an ultrahigh temperature of 5,500 °C.

At STP (Earth's surface) iron melts at 1,583°C (2800°F). But see.. even at 5,500°C the iron at Earth's core remains solid. It does not melt. Because gravity "pressures" the entire weight of the Earth in upon the core. "Anti-field."

 

[trevorjohnson83]

here we see the arrows of the direction of gravity are pointed in towards the core. What I'm basically saying is A of the smaller sphere lines up with the direction of gravity and assuming the trough crest theory of the static gravity field, then side A of the smaller sphere would be pulled on by side A of the larger sphere, and side B of the larger sphere would pull on smaller side B with less force.

 

[trevorjohnson83]

A chemistry professor's recent attempt to make cookies resembling water molecules

This makes me hungry, not just for food but for science, not just science but science that when you read it, the book smells like johnny muffins or smthn.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Beats smelling like ass, don't it?

here we see the arrows of the direction of gravity are pointed in towards the core.

Nowhere near enough arrows to show such a pattern, let alone depict the effect that causes us to mistake gravity for a (mutually) attractive (or positive) force field. Mutual attraction is the net result not the cause. Mass attracts only the spatial component of the Aether. Le Sage (<--link) clearly began with some poor, very common assumptions (as has every detractor since) but was among the first to grok the basic idea. It's simple stupid. Unfortunately people aren't. They deliberately overcomplicate everything.

assuming the trough crest theory of the static gravity field, then side A of the smaller sphere would be pulled on by side A of the larger sphere, and side B of the larger sphere would pull on smaller side B with less force.

I've seen a different "trough crest theory" (<--link), at times even related to "gravity waves." This is why making shit up on the fly simply because it may sound good at the moment makes no sense. We don't live in a vacuum. History exists. Others have often thought about the exact same things long and hard. Makes sense to check (some) first.