# Gravity is just Inertia (or is it?) -- the 4th Dimension

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by Caleb, Jun 25, 2001.

Not open for further replies.
1. ### CalebRedeemedRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
248
We've all heard the familiar rubber sheet analogy for gravity, right? You condense 3-D space into 2-dimensions, and imagine it as a rubber sheet. Masses placed on it produce "gravity wells" in the up-down direction, corresponding to real gravity in a fourth, "gravitational" dimension. Yada, yada, yada...

There's just one problem with it -- There is nothing to create the dimples. When you place a mass on the rubber sheet, it creates a dimple (analogous to gravity) because the earth's real gravity pulls it down. But if this dimmple represent's gravity, what creates the dimple in real life? There is nothing. Imagine you perform the rubber sheet experiment in space. There is nothing (no real gravity in 3-D space) to produce a dimple, and hence, no gravity in the 2-D rubber universe.

But, now imagine that the entire sheet is being accelerated perpendicular to it's surface (in the extra dimension). Einstein's equivalency principle says that the resulting acceleration will produce a pseudo-force (opposite to the direction of acceleration) that is indistinguishable from gravity. This accelerative force will cause the sheet to dimple, since the masses on the sheet have inertia, and will resist the sheet's acceleration. Now imagine that the entire universe is this sheet, and is accelerating "upwards" in a fourth, "gravitational" dimension (which, by the way, is not time). Since all the mass in the universe has inertia, what is to say it doesn't also have inertia in this fourth dimension. Hence mass will resist the universe's acceleration, and dimple it in the fourth dimension, creating gravity wells. The reason that matter is attracted to a gravity well, then is because it is seeking the lowest point in the gravitational dimension, just like water is attracted towards the lowest spot. Since water, say in a drain, has to move horizontally along the bottom of the sink to reach the lowest point in the vertical direction, similarly, mass has to move in the 3 dimensions of space time (along a hyper-surface) in order to reach the lowest point in the fourth dimension.

Therefore, all gravity is created by inertia because matter resists acceleration, and the universe is accelerating in the fourth dimension.

~Caleb

P.S. - Anyone think they can poke some holes (or rather, dimples) in this theory? I'd love to know if there's something wrong with it.

3. ### Chagur.Seeker.Registered Senior Member

Messages:
2,235
Neat idea re.mass resistance to acceleration, but how about me, or you? Is Earth expanding and creating relative gravity wells?

5. ### PlatoRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
366
models and their drawbacks

Hello Caleb,

If you allow me I would like to pick a nice little hole in that rubber sheet of yours...
This, again, is a classical example of how useful models for explaining some weird mathematical equations tend to be come misused when wanting to get to much out of it.
The rubber sheet model only goes as far as giving a suggestive visual image of how spacetime bends around matter. It gives no explanation of the reason how it does this. As you come to point out in the case of a rubber sheet it is the gravitational pull of the earth that does it, this however would give some indication that looking for something similar in the real case is stretching the rubber sheet to far

It is in fact gravity itself that does the trick in real space, there is a very close relationship between bend spacetime and gravity, in Einsteins Universe they are in essence the same. Two masses that are bound in the same system like the earth and the sun are actually two free masses that are travelling along bend spacetime and ultimatly end up in the same spot as they left, a year ago. (well not exactly the same spot but that is an other effect which is also very neetly explained by General Relativity).
This is truely the equivalent principle : when you are falling you are subject to gravity yet you don't feel it since you are in free motion. The same goes for the earth and the sun.

7. ### CalebRedeemedRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
248
I'm not sure how that pokes a hole in my theory. I understand all of that already. However, you say that:

<i>"It is in fact gravity itself that does the trick in real space, there is a very close relationship between bend spacetime and gravity, in Einsteins Universe they are in essence the same."</i>

Gravity does not actually <i>cause</i> the bending of spacetime. Gravity <i>is</i> the bending of spacetime. Gravity says nothing about what causes the sheet (space) to bend (except that mass and energy do, but how?). But just as in the rubber sheet, an extra force had to cause the sheet to bend, so an external force must cause real space to bend (and hence create gravity).

Currently, there are two ways of measuring matter: it's inertia, and its gravity. Einstein struggled with the problem of trying to prove whether inertial and gravitational mass were, in fact, the same thing. According to this idea, they are.

An interesting thing about this theory, is that if the universe were to stop accelerating in this fourth dimension, G would equal zero. If, in fact, space were to deccelerate, it would cause all matter to instantly have anti-gravity. So the question is, what is causing space to uniformly accelerate in the gravitational dimension? (and just so there's no confusion, I'm talking about acceleration in a fourth dimension, not the acceleration of the universe's expansion in the three spatial dimensions)

~Caleb

8. ### PlatoRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
366
chicken and egg problem

You say that gravity does not cause the bending but is it, that is indeed the case. It is mass/energy that causes it, how it does this is not really a mechanism but rather a mathematical property of a Riemann space.
One must look at special relativity to get a glimps of an answer : how is it that time tends to slow when an observer moves in regard to an other observer ? Fundamentally it is because you demand that for both observers the laws of physics remain the same. This should be because both observers are in inertial frames.
The same goes for observers at different gravitational potential wells (or planets if you prefer), the demand that the laws of physics remain the same can only be satisfied if space and time are different for both observers, connecting these two in a continuum would imply that spacetime is bend between them.

Inertia is something that can be explained in the framework of general relativity which itself is a result of the Mach principle. Inertia would then be the gravitational attraction of a mass by all other mass in the universe.
I think it was Wheeler and Feynman who made the theory, it involves interference of gravitational waves going with and back in time and all that , not really bed time literature.

9. ### JavierRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
56
Stimulating

Hi,guys

Caleb,would be very intuitive- calming a model the way you point,
because is really weird to imagine a set of dimensions (of the same type,check downwards¡¡) bent not in an additional one,but as fans of science as we are,we gotta "press"("inert") any new theory,so here I accelerate:

From a purely logical approach,you use a metaphor or analogy to describe the original only by the similarities that you observe in the second regarding the first,but is dangerous to extend the initially differentiating(in the sense of not produced by the observation-theory of the first)features of the analogy to explain the original;(i.e. you can explain the nature of fuel by saying that is fluid like water,but would be wrong to conclude that because of this you can use it to extinguish fire,even as strange or counter-intuitive a fire-increasing liquid may look)

Regarding this particular model,is not said that gravity curves spacetime in a fourth spatial dimension,but the three known plus time,and this is because the mathematical relation between the lenght of an object measured in rest in relation with it s shrinking accelerated in spacetime,shows the same proportion as the Euclidean two dimensional geometry related to Riemann s three dimensional (as Plato pointed out);so if the object is not accelerating/warping by itself or another moving it,then is under a "topographical"effect that equals its result, being the 2-3 dimensions of the original geometric model,the 3-4 of the relativistic theory(the fourth is time here,which combined with space produces the geometrical -like warping observable in three dimensions(plus time),for if not,the reason Euclides-Riemann would be useless having to jump 2 dimensions(3-5),but the experiments proved that it indeed matches observation):

Now,the rubber sheet model is like relativity in the sense that the masses placed in it curve the surface proportionally to their entity(but not in another spatial dimension,as the rubber sheet does not warp in the time one),and the movement of an object passing through the dimple is quite similar but that s it:

Check out that in an strict analogy the objects would have to be spatially fourth-dimensional,because if not stars and planets could have never had collapsed not having a gravity center to "fall" in(they would be plane in the fourth spatial dimension),and this applies to all the rest,including us...

Regarding the "how"of the warping,is the same to ask how the mass afects space than to how space does with mass;you can either say that mass accelerates and space stands still,or the other way all right:you would always "give" a dinamic force to one and a resistance to the other to explain facts:

But if this new "dark energy" operates as anti-gravity,then would be more easy to say that the acceleration(in either direction)is provided by mass and the resistent is spacetime...

Phycisists are in search of the graviton,a virtual (is not directly detectable,but by it s effects on other objects)particle that may be the vector of mass influence(of course then we can ask why the graviton,if is the case, transmits the force,and so on...)

Well,that was the way I see it,at least...

10. ### CalebRedeemedRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
248
I understand that there is a danger in taking analogies too far. I have to say the same thing when I make theological arguments. Nevertheless, it is useful to look at a model/analogy and try to determine <i>if</i> cetain properties of of the analogy <i>do</i> hold true.

Take the oil example. You cannot conclude that, since oil is a fluid like water, it must also quench flames like water. However, you can look at it and ask a question (make a conjecture) that, since oil behaves like a fluid -- like water -- perhaps it does quench flames. You can then test this conjecture, and find that it is wrong.

I admit that gravity may not be inertia, but because there seems to be a corelation that makes alot of sense, I think its a possiblity worth scientists looking into. In fact, I guess I would really like to know if any scientists have thought of this before, and considered any possible proofs/disproofs/implications.

~Caleb

11. ### PlatoRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
366
Indeed so ! As I was saying in the last part of my previous post, there have indeed been some attempts to link gravity with inertia, check out the following link for more information :
http://www.johnkharms.com/reference.htm

12. ### CalebRedeemedRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
248
Thanks. Interesting site, I'll need to take a closer look, but it seems that he is saying inertia is caused by gravity, while I am proposing it is the other way around. Instead, another page on his site states:

"The text proposes that the machinery for gravitation is positive radiation pressure"

I propose the machinery for gravitation might be inertia. Of course, it still doesn't answer the question as to what inertia is...

~Caleb

13. ### JavierRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
56
Caleb:
Ask a professor of physics,they are easily at hand and will tell you if the matter is well directed...

Plato:

Last edited: Jun 29, 2001
14. ### CalebRedeemedRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
248
I've considered it. I was hoping that by posting here I could find out something. My fear about telling a physics professor is that if it is someone who is not used to thinking new ideas, they may just ignore the whole issue and say that it isn't since no one else has thought of it (did that make sense?)

Nevertheless, I guess I have no choice.

~Caleb

15. ### JavierRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
56

Last edited: Jun 29, 2001
16. ### KaiduorkhonRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
552
'Gravity Is The 4th Dimension' is copyrighted & published since 1959

12/14/02 0425 hrs. PST (USA)

Dear Caleb and all other contributors to this forum:

Until the Astronomy Net was temporarily retired on 6 December 02, for renovation, when you clicked on google and entered 'gravity is the 4th dimension', you went to the Astronomy Net and accessed a post by 'bkparque', who intiated that particular Astronomy Net post about two years ago and referenced enquiries to a series of URL 404's where he had posted info previously and then deleted it without further explanation.

Since then, one bkparque is sprinkled all over the web/net with 'posts by bkparque', espousing gravity as the 4th dimension. This goes back to February 2000. Bkparque avoids telling his readers that such posts are not authored by himself, deliberately leaving the reader with the directly implied impression that bkparque is the author of what he posts.

bkparque was recently - in the past two months - reprimanded and corrected for copyright infringement (including bold and elaborate plagiarism), by Delphiforums.com for multiple copyright intrusions and misrepresentations on a variety of subjects, including claiming the title *'gravity is the 4th dimension' to be authored by himself (*included in his 'forum profile' as his 'personal quote'), along with the title of his forum - EXTRATERRESTRIAL PHYSICS 101 (Copyright 1979 by Kent Benjamin Robertson, AKA Kent Robertson ben Abraham).

Reliable sources say that bkparque's brigand posts in the Astronomy Net Forums are one of the reasons that site is being renovated

The title, 'Gravity Is The 4th Dimension' is copyrighted and published in 5 small press editions since 1959, by Kent Benjamin Robertson, whose book was sold internationally through the 1970-71 WHOLE EARTH CATALOGUE (Published by the Portola Institute), and which goes back to earlier titles, including 'The New Gravity', and 'An Hypothesis On Gravity'.

The work has since emerged under a flurry of authorships, some of whom are informed piecemeal and innocent of plagiarism, and some of whom - like bkparque - are lifting extended exerpts, rhyme, chapter and verse, directly out of K.B. Robertson's original work, the 5th edition of which is free for any and all to read at * http://einstein.periphery.cc/

(The subjected work - 'einstein's unified field' - is 2nd from the bottom of a list of files at *that URL address. It is accompanied by a variety of informations including other published and copyrighted books by the same author, K.B. Robertson. Among these works is Nomads, Civilization & War (NomCivWar), The Butterfly, Owl & Eagle (boe -01 - 07), and 'rofaco' (The Invisible 1984 Machine - The Robertson Family Conspiracy <ROFACO>, a 'faction' story about the Conquest Of Reason In The United States; featuring the good, bad and oogly guys...)

In 1967, Dr. Richard Feynman, Prof Emeritus of Cal Tech (Nobel Prize Laureate), skipped three classes he taught at that time to talk with K.B. Robertson (AKA Kent Robertson ben Abraham), one on one in his (Feynman's) study, about the unprecedented statement 'gravity is the 4th dimension', after which time Dr. R. Feynman candidly conceded, 'I am unable to disqualify it'.

10,000 small press distributed copies are sold out in 41 California bookstores in the past 30 years. It outsold 'JAWS' at the UC Berkeley Campus bookstore in the mid '70s, and was a best seller at CODY'S and MOE'S bookstores on Telegraph Ave. It has been graffiti on the walls of international cities - as well as the Birge - Physics - Building on Berkeley Campus, for decades.

A number of people certainly including myself have learned of and certainly taken interest in a series of emergences of this statement - Gravity is the 4th dimension (Extraterrestrial Physics 101, The New Gravity) - under as many different 'original authorships' in the past several years.

For an evolved discussion on the featured topic at hand in this forum the reader is respectfully advised to refer to the source: http://einstein.periphery.cc/

Let it be said in the meanwhile that to exclude time from considerations of the 4 dimensional space-time continuum and/or gravity is to demonstrate a plebean underestimation of the magnitude - and simplicity - of the topic at hand.

It will be interesting to see the evolution of this thread as it is contributed to by readers of the referred URL (http://einstein.periphery.cc/), as compared to the persons who (ostensibly) haven't read it.

Here's a copy of the beginning portions of what is at point here:

GRAVITY IS THE 4th DIMENSION
(Formerly entitled, The New Gravity and Extraterrestrial Physics 101)

The Reinstatement
Of Einstein's Presently Abandoned
In 20,000 Words: Without Mathematics

(More Powerful than Money, Politics, Sex, Violence and/or War)
(*Previous copyrights 1959, '60, '66, '70, '79 & '85.)
* By Kent Benjamin Robertson,

The Big Bang Theory is wrong.
'Entropic Heat Death' is a myth.
Black Holes are 4 dimensionally contracting singularities.

Caution:
Contents may be hazardous to or cause drowsiness
in conceptually disordered and/or attention-span handicapped persons.

"In 1916, Albert Einstein published his General Relativity, a mathematical theory of gravitation which replaced Newtonian concepts with abstractions so difficult that it took a decade even for most mathematicians to grasp them. The essence of Einstein's theory was that the presence of matter distorts space and makes it curve. The concept of space curvature stemmed from many dimensional, non-straight-line geometry created abstractly through equations. Just as a surface can curve in ordinary 3-Dimensional space, so in non-Euclidean geometry a 3-Dimensional space can itself curve in 4-dimensional space. No one can visualize such a curved space because humanity is not 4-Dimensional..."
- LIFE Science Library, THE UNIVERSE, p. 179

"When events occur in 3-Dimensional Space it is not possible to draw an actual graph of 4-Dimensional space-time, but mathematicians have ways of handling such graphs without actually drawing them."
- Martin Gardner, RELATIVITY FOR THE MILLION, p. 98

"The 4-Dimensional world of relativistic physics is the world where force and matter are unified; where matter can appear as discontinuous particles or asa a continuous field. In these cases, however, we can no longer visualize the unity very well. Physicists can 'experience' the 4-Dimensional space-time world throughout the abstract mathematical formalism of their theories, but their visual imaginations - like everybody else's - is limited to the 3-Dimensional world of the senses. Our language and thought patterns have evolved in this 3-Dimensional world and therefore we find it extremely hard to deal with the 4-Dimensional reality of Relativistic Physics."
- Fritjov Capra, THE TAO OF PHYSICS, P 150

"This concept is very difficult to visualize. It is a consequence of the 4-Dimensional space-time character of the sub-atomic world and neither our intuition nor our language can deal with this image very well."
- Fritjov Capra, THE TAO OF PHYSICS, p. 80

"In the General Theory of Relativity, the framework of the Special Theory is extended to include gravity. The effect of gravity, according to General Relativity, is to make space-time curved. This, again, is extremely hard to imagine. We can easily imagine a 3-Dimensionally curved surface, such as the surface of an egg. The meaning of the word 'curvature' for 2-Dimensional curved surfaces is thus quite clear; but when it comes to 3-Dimensional space - let alone 4-Dimensional space-time - our imagination abandons us. Since we cannot look at 3-Dimensional space 'from outside', we cannot imagine how it could be 'bent' in some direction."
- Fritjov Capra, THE TAO OF PHYSICS, p. 173

"The reader is cautioned against concluding that time is an additional physical dimension in the sense that it can be seen and felt like a material object. No one in our universe can see in 4-Dimensions or more because of the way our universe is constructed."
- James A. Coleman, RELATIVITY FOR THE LAYMAN, p. 69
........................

NOTE: All of the above authorities proclaim that the 4th Dimension is non-mathematically 'incomprehensible', even 'unimaginable'. 'Very difficult', 'Extremely hard', 'We can no longer visualize'. 'Because humanity is not 4-Dimensional'.

Readers are cautioned against concluding that these authorities are right, and encouraged to read the following discourse, and draw their own non-mathematically facilitated conclusions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

"There is nothing new about Newton's Classical Mechanical gravity or Einstein's 4th dimension of time, except preeminent non-mathematical proof that they are one and the same. The New Gravity Is The 4th Dimension."
- K.B. Robertson, Ibid.

"It's still the same old universe, but gravity is the 4th dimension of that same old universe. I'm grateful for the indelible change in my perception of it. It may be impossible to overstate the importance of this book. The one, two three and X Y Z of comprehensive infinity."
- Mark Stephan Halfon, Ph.D., Philosophy, Brooklyn, New York. 1977

"An ambitious new treatise on the otherwise seasoned subjects of Space & Time. We are not qualified to evaluate it, but are pleased to see it in this ('comic book') format."
- THE WHOLE EARTH CATALOGUE, Portola Institute, 1970 - 71

"An unprecedented and awesomely credible non-mathematical theory which matter-of-factly proves that gravity is the 4th dimension of time, then forthwith discovers the previously unrecognized - therefore unidentified - 5th & 6th dimensions of electricity and magnetism."
- Dr. John Shaw, Chemistry Prof. 1971, University Of California @ Berkeley

"Gravity Is The 4th Dimension' - A documentary scientific 'Future Shock'. Overwhelming. Major conceptual breakthrough. It must be disqualified or formally acknowledged at the foundations of modern theoretical physics; there is no middle ground. So advanced it's simple." - Mark Vukovic, Electronics Tech, U.S.N. USS Shasta (AE-33), San Francisco, CA.

"This book has clearly made a formerly mystified theoretical physics truly comprehensible to anyone with high school reading skills and 'street people' in general. Beyond its overt revolutionary scientific import, the social implications are also profound. Bound to surprise and constructively influence an enormous number of people for a very long time. Ignoring or denying it won't make it go away. Now I know what E=MC squared means."
- Don Donahue, original printer and publisher of ZAP Comix, San Francisco

"Gravity really is the 4th dimension, and levity and mirth use to be the 5th and 6th dimensions, until K.B. Robertson proved them to be electricity & magnetism, respectively." - Herb Caen, The San Francisco CHRONICLE

"Not without levity, the sharp shooting author expertly documents his academic and historical subject; then - suddenly - the reader is experientially surrounded by it. There is no intellectual escape from the 4-D space-time continuum anymore, in or out of an ignorant or uninterested yawn. The very act of reading these words is directly and physically sustained by it. Observing various responses of others, in the early stages of recognizing it, is a recreation in itself. The documentary is scientifically irreproachable, the informal narrative is a social liberation. The fascist elements don't like it already." - Sallie Taylor Melinda Bryan, 1979

"Academic L.S.D. in a Stockholm punchbowl, and everybody's invited. Ready or not there is no way out of this but through it. A scientific Odyssey. The most remarkable fact about 'The New Gravity' is that it was not discovered and written fifty or more years ago."
- Gregory Nageotte, Ph.D. Philosophy, Santa Barbara, CA. 1979

"I am unable to disqualify it."
- Dr. Richard Feynman, 1966, Professor Emeritus, Cal Tech
Nobel Prize, Quantum Electrodynamics

"It reads a hell of a lot more easily and comprehensively than anything else of the subject of Einstein's Relativity. Reads at least as easily as the brass tacks section of any good sci. fi. mag., and it is not science fiction."
- Travis T. Hipp, KSAN radio, San Francisco, 1970

"The old saw, 'There is no gravity, the earth sucks', is no longer tractable. The New Gravity (Is The 4th Dimension) is the old gravity, in a pushy new paradigm of Einstein's 4 dimensional space-time continuum. Guaranteed to illuminate even the most diffident mind. It will chancelessly see you and raise you indefinitely. The New Gravity will never let you down."
- Arthur Kretchmer, 1979, Article Editor, PLAYBOY Magazine
...............................................

CONTENTS
Introduction
pp. 1 - 2
Newton's Gravitational Alternative
pp. 2 - 4
Einstein's General Principle Of Relativity
pp. 5 - 8
A REVIEW OF THE PHYSICAL DIMENSIONS, 1 - 4
pp. 9 - 10
The Four Dimensional Ultimatum.
pp. 10 - 12
Abandoned Proof That Matter Is An Expanding 4-D Field
pp. 12 - 15
4-D Mass-Field Doppler Effect
pp. 16 - 18
The Discovery And Identification Of The 5th & 6th Dimensions
pp. 22 - 23
The Unification Of Electromagnetism & Gravity
pp. 22 - 25
Einstein's ' Incomprehensible' 4-D Geodesics: Comprehended
p. 27
The Unification Of Inertial & Gravitational Mass Values
pp. 28 - 29
E= MC2 Without Mathematics
pp. 29 - 31
The Sound Of 4-Dimensional Gravity
p. 31
A Popular And Serious Misunderstanding About Space & Time
pp. 31- 32
Non-Absolute Relativistic 4-D Space-Time And Time Dilation
p. 32
Why: The Big Bang Theory Is Wrong
pp. 33 - 40
The Black Hole Singularity Controversy: Deciphered Without Mathematics
pp. 34 - 35
Another Familiar Yet Unrecognized And Frequently Denied
Accelerating Expansion In Nature
p. 40
Epilogue
pp.40-41
Afterward
...........................................

(Digressing to reality: Is gravity really the 4th dimension, or has the author only cleverly built his theory around reality so that no one can tell the difference? < http://einstein.periphery.cc/ > )

Thanking sciforums.com for making this communication possible,
I am very sincerely yours, Kent Benjamin Robertson
(AKA Kaiduorkhon, Aka The White Mongol, kraziequus@yahoo.com)

Last edited: Dec 24, 2002
17. ### bkparqueRegistered Member

Messages:
1
Einsteins Gravity....the 4th spatial Dimension and the 4d computer go einswrwin

http://geocities.com/bkparque/einstein.html
Albert Einstein & Leopold infeld Evolution of Physics ¿ 1938.& 2002 bkparque 'all bets are off' , 'Ein swr win'

'Einsteins Standing Wave Ratio Wins Windows Fractal Operating System Squared'
[the Rise of the Mechanical View

The great mystery story ... The first clew ... Vectors

The riddle of motion ... One clew remains . . . Is heat a substance? ... The roller-coaster . . . The rate of exchange . . . The philosophical background ... The kinetic theory of matter.

THE GREAT MYSTERY STORY
....
....
....
{([The Rise of the Mechanical View 7])}

-are not always to be trusted, for they sometimes lead to the wrong clews.

Einsteins gravity

18. ### KaiduorkhonRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
552

'wheres the di-pole', and north and south east and west etc. Center of balance ,pivot or divot ,turn or burn refer:micky mouse watch , reefer the weight of everything. Ballet Four Space 'Telluric 4 a Sextant' 'Compass and square baby'undefinedundefined etc.-.-bkparque

[a side note: While riding down the street on my bicycle, i like to attach to trucks, cars, semi-trucks, busses ect. Attaching to a semi-truck going 40 miles per hour and attaching to a car going the same speed of 40 miles per hour attached are two completly different physics experiences.-bkparque]

Then Mr. Gardner continues correctly....""of moving three dimensional space in a direction at right angles to all three of its dimensions. this generates a Euclidean space of four dimensions. there is no need to stop at four. we can go on to spaces of five, six, seven, or more dimensions. all these spaces are euclidean. they are extensions of euclidean geometry in the same way that euclidean solid geometry is an extension of euclidean plane geometry.-mr martin gardner"""
------------------------------------------------------------

- Excerpt from Brian Kirk Parquette's cut & paste, oscillating, hit & miss mardi gras of celebrating the work of others as his own. The above entry is but one of an abundance of road apples accumulating on the cyberspatial, equine hustling, bovine rustling hiway.

Occasionally, Bkparque actually narrates or otherwise ad libs his own ancillary sectional densities, ballistic coefficients and ; even then, not without a precipitating sprinkle or heavy showers of stylish expressions boosted from the work of others - particularly K. B. Robertson - such as 'word salad', 'pivot or divot', 'turn or burn', 'spirals', 'nautilus shell' ('nautilus pompelius linnae') Mendelyev's harvest of elements from a spiral shaped expression of the periodic table of elements, quadrated by two straight lines intersecting the center of such a logarithmically accelerating spiral...
The definition for geometric dimensions by Martin Gardner was selected by Parquette via his learning of it from the world renowned if inexplicably 'obscure' work of K.B. Robertson's GRAVITY IS THE 4th DIMENSION: The Reinstatement of Einstein's Presently Abandoned Unified Field Theory, w'out Mathematics: The Big Bang Theory is Wrong.

What resonates in Parquette's writings is resource material he copies and pastes, characteristically without referencing the derivational source material; implying neither an education nor a memory that is his.

His incredulity dilating powers range from solemnly delivered purloinments of the work of others to more transparently prevaricated statements such as his 'side notes' describing 'two completely different physics experiences (aquired while) attaching himself on his bicycle to trucks, cars and busses moving at 40 mph.'
Whereas, since Mr. Parquette lists four vehicles - 'bicycle, car, truck and bus' - that equals four (not two) different experiences, furthermore alleging a speed of 40 mph; adding up to five well done whoppers; compounding his inability to convey even a credible fiction. ('In the BKP way. 'Everyone knows' is 'a witness to this'...)
Parquette's duplicity and intrigue may be exceeded only by his impotence- haunted dauntless vulgarity & obsession for public obscenity ('He's all over the net' shadowing KBR). - Note the chronologies of KBR's trail blazing entries and Bkparque's subsequently lurking, dust eating responses; compulsive indulgence in crotch attacking, gender bending: belies an hysterically overcompensatory invasive (Re: Re: Rape mentality) - finding not only the input of his facially cramped maw, but also the proportionately puckered other end of his en toto, gestaldt considered - food to fecal - transformer (refer E.lectronics T.echnician 101). Which, in his currently alternating case appears to be ambivalent. (Re: Re: bkparque bkparque bkparque).

More to come as the applauded subject refines his affectatiously denied 3-D ability to stack it higher, beneath a blossoming daisy that he may only covet with impotently envious Limburger eyes that smell, nose that piquantly hears, and hemispheric cerebrally mechanized mouth that is frequently Missing In Action.
(Only humanly being, all that he can b-b.)
((The best is yet to arrive, before it disembarks.))
(((Woof?)))
Anything only humanly worth being, is worth being endlessly overtaken for.

(Mr. Carpette is IN SEARCH OF an internet white out for his revealingly abundant '[deleted]' spoor. Any suggestions?)

- Equus
Vini. Vici. Entiendo.
Kent Benjamin Robertson

_____________________________________

19. ### KaiduorkhonRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
552
12/14/02 0425 hrs. PST (USA)

Dear Caleb and all other contributors to this forum:

Before late '99, as can be confirmed by GOOGLE and other chronological archives, there were no (zero) discussions on 'gravity is the 4th dimension', or gravity, electricity & magnetism are the 4th, 5th & 6th dimensions. Or The Reinstatement of Einstein's Unified Field w'out Math: The Big Bang Theory is Wrong. All that has changed, since.
In late '99, one Brian Kirk Parquette enthusiastically introduced himself to me and several of my friends and acquaintances, asked to buy a copy of the 54 page, 5th edition of my hard copy published - consistently sold out - book, GRAVITY IS THE 4th DIMENSION (Electricity the 5th, Magnetism the 6th). After reading and praising it abundantly, Parquette asked me if it was posted on the net. I said I didn't know how to use the internet and used computers only for word processing and printing out copy material from which I produced small press editioins of my book. Havng done so with a typewriter and off set press since 1970, and before then, published and sold out repeatedly in small press essay form, since 1959. Parquette asked me if it was okay for him to post it on the internet. Of course I was grateful for this opportunity and was happy to give him a disc containing several of my works, including the issued physics book.

Until the Astronomy Net was temporarily retired on 6 December 02, for renovation, when you clicked on google and entered 'gravity is the 4th dimension', you went to the Astronomy Net and accessed a post by 'bkparque', who intiated that particular Astronomy Net post about two years ago and referenced enquiries to a series of URL 404's where he had posted info previously and then deleted it without further explanation.

Since then, one bkparque is sprinkled all over the web/net with 'posts by bkparque', espousing gravity as the 4th dimension. This goes back to Dec., '99 and February 2000 (and ever since...). Bkparque avoids telling his readers that such posts are authored by himself, deliberately leaving the reader with the directly implied impression that bkparque is the author of what he posts. In a an internet letter addressed, and rudely worded to Dr. Eliot McGucken, Parquette proclaims himself to be the 'Author' of several extended, verbatim excerpts from my book (Enter 'Dr. Eliot McGucken Do let me know when it stops' 'Brian Kirk Parquette', in GOOGLE.)

bkparque was recently - in the past two months - reprimanded and corrected for copyright infringement (including bold and elaborate plagiarism), by Delphiforums.com for multiple copyright intrusions and misrepresentations on a variety of subjects, including claiming the title *'gravity is the 4th dimension' to be authored by himself (*included in his 'forum profile' as his 'personal quote'), along with the title of his forum - EXTRATERRESTRIAL PHYSICS 101 (Copyright 1979 by Kent Benjamin Robertson, AKA Kent Robertson ben Abraham).

Reliable sources say that bkparque's brigand posts in the Astronomy Net Forums are one of the reasons that site is being renovated

The title, 'Gravity Is The 4th Dimension' is copyrighted and published in 5 small press editions since 1959, by Kent Benjamin Robertson, whose book was sold internationally through the 1970-71 WHOLE EARTH CATALOGUE (Published by the Portola Institute), and which goes back to earlier titles, including 'The New Gravity', and 'An Hypothesis On Gravity'.

The work has since emerged under a flurry of authorships, some of whom are informed piecemeal and innocent of plagiarism, and some of whom - like bkparque - are lifting extended exerpts, rhyme, chapter and verse, directly out of K.B. Robertson's original work, the 5th edition of which is free for any and all to read at * http://einstein.periphery.cc/

(The subjected work is accompanied by a variety of informations including other published and copyrighted books by the same author, K.B. Robertson. Among these works is Nomads, Civilization & War (NomCivWar), The Butterfly, Owl & Eagle (boe -01 - 07), and *'rofaco' (The Invisible 1984 Machine - The *Robertson Family Conspiracy , a 'faction' story about the Conquest Of Reason In The United States; featuring the good, bad and oogly guys...)

In 1967, Dr. Richard Feynman, Prof Emeritus of Cal Tech (Nobel Prize Laureate), skipped three classes he taught at that time to talk with K.B. Robertson (AKA Kent Robertson ben Abraham), one on one in his (Feynman's) study, about the unprecedented statement 'gravity is the 4th dimension', after which time Dr. R. Feynman candidly conceded, 'I am unable to disqualify it'.

10,000 small press distributed copies are sold out in 41 California bookstores in the past 30 years. It outsold 'JAWS' at the UC Berkeley Campus bookstore in the mid '70s, and was a best seller at CODY'S and MOE'S bookstores on Telegraph Ave. It has been graffiti on the walls of international cities - as well as the Birge - Physics - Building on Berkeley Campus, for decades.

A number of people certainly including myself have learned of and certainly taken interest in a series of emergences of this statement - Gravity is the 4th dimension (Extraterrestrial Physics 101, The New Gravity) - under as many different 'original authorships' in the past several years.

For an evolved discussion on the featured topic at hand in this forum the reader is respectfully advised to refer to the source: http://einstein.periphery.cc/

Let it be said in the meanwhile that to exclude time from considerations of the 4 dimensional space-time continuum and/or gravity is to demonstrate a plebean underestimation of the magnitude - and simplicity - of the topic at hand.

It will be interesting to see the evolution of this thread as it is contributed to by readers of the referred URL (http://einstein.periphery.cc/), as compared to the persons who (ostensibly) haven't read it.

Here's a copy of the beginning portions of what is at point here:

GRAVITY IS THE 4th DIMENSION
(Formerly entitled, The New Gravity and Extraterrestrial Physics 101)

The Reinstatement
Of Einstein's Presently Abandoned
In 20,000 Words: Without Mathematics

(More Powerful than Money, Politics, Sex, Violence and/or War)
(*Previous copyrights 1959, '60, '66, '70, '79 & '85.)
* By Kent Benjamin Robertson,

The Big Bang Theory is wrong.
'Entropic Heat Death' is a myth.
Black Holes are 4 dimensionally contracting singularities.

Caution:
Contents may be hazardous to or cause drowsiness
in conceptually disordered and/or attention-span handicapped persons.

"In 1916, Albert Einstein published his General Relativity, a mathematical theory of gravitation which replaced Newtonian concepts with abstractions so difficult that it took a decade even for most mathematicians to grasp them. The essence of Einstein's theory was that the presence of matter distorts space and makes it curve. The concept of space curvature stemmed from many dimensional, non-straight-line geometry created abstractly through equations. Just as a surface can curve in ordinary 3-Dimensional space, so in non-Euclidean geometry a 3-Dimensional space can itself curve in 4-dimensional space. No one can visualize such a curved space because humanity is not 4-Dimensional..."
- LIFE Science Library, THE UNIVERSE, p. 179

"When events occur in 3-Dimensional Space it is not possible to draw an actual graph of 4-Dimensional space-time, but mathematicians have ways of handling such graphs without actually drawing them."
- Martin Gardner, RELATIVITY FOR THE MILLION, p. 98

"The 4-Dimensional world of relativistic physics is the world where force and matter are unified; where matter can appear as discontinuous particles or asa a continuous field. In these cases, however, we can no longer visualize the unity very well. Physicists can 'experience' the 4-Dimensional space-time world throughout the abstract mathematical formalism of their theories, but their visual imaginations - like everybody else's - is limited to the 3-Dimensional world of the senses. Our language and thought patterns have evolved in this 3-Dimensional world and therefore we find it extremely hard to deal with the 4-Dimensional reality of Relativistic Physics."
- Fritjov Capra, THE TAO OF PHYSICS, P 150

"This concept is very difficult to visualize. It is a consequence of the 4-Dimensional space-time character of the sub-atomic world and neither our intuition nor our language can deal with this image very well."
- Fritjov Capra, THE TAO OF PHYSICS, p. 80

"In the General Theory of Relativity, the framework of the Special Theory is extended to include gravity. The effect of gravity, according to General Relativity, is to make space-time curved. This, again, is extremely hard to imagine. We can easily imagine a 3-Dimensionally curved surface, such as the surface of an egg. The meaning of the word 'curvature' for 2-Dimensional curved surfaces is thus quite clear; but when it comes to 3-Dimensional space - let alone 4-Dimensional space-time - our imagination abandons us. Since we cannot look at 3-Dimensional space 'from outside', we cannot imagine how it could be 'bent' in some direction."
- Fritjov Capra, THE TAO OF PHYSICS, p. 173

"The reader is cautioned against concluding that time is an additional physical dimension in the sense that it can be seen and felt like a material object. No one in our universe can see in 4-Dimensions or more because of the way our universe is constructed."
- James A. Coleman, RELATIVITY FOR THE LAYMAN, p. 69
........................

NOTE: All of the above authorities proclaim that the 4th Dimension is non-mathematically 'incomprehensible', even 'unimaginable'. 'Very difficult', 'Extremely hard', 'We can no longer visualize'. 'Because humanity is not 4-Dimensional'.

Readers are cautioned against concluding that these authorities are right, and encouraged to read the following discourse, and draw their own non-mathematically facilitated conclusions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

"There is nothing new about Newton's Classical Mechanical gravity or Einstein's 4th dimension of time, except preeminent non-mathematical proof that they are one and the same. The New Gravity Is The 4th Dimension."
- K.B. Robertson, Ibid.

"It's still the same old universe, but gravity is the 4th dimension of that same old universe. I'm grateful for the indelible change in my perception of it. It may be impossible to overstate the importance of this book. The one, two three and X Y Z of comprehensive infinity."
- Mark Stephan Halfon, Ph.D., Philosophy, Brooklyn, New York. 1977

"An ambitious new treatise on the otherwise seasoned subjects of Space & Time. We are not qualified to evaluate it, but are pleased to see it in this ('comic book') format."
- THE WHOLE EARTH CATALOGUE, Portola Institute, 1970 - 71

"An unprecedented and awesomely credible non-mathematical theory which matter-of-factly proves that gravity is the 4th dimension of time, then forthwith discovers the previously unrecognized - therefore unidentified - 5th & 6th dimensions of electricity and magnetism."
- Dr. John Shaw, Chemistry Prof. 1971, University Of California @ Berkeley

"Gravity Is The 4th Dimension' - A documentary scientific 'Future Shock'. Overwhelming. Major conceptual breakthrough. It must be disqualified or formally acknowledged at the foundations of modern theoretical physics; there is no middle ground. So advanced it's simple." - Mark Vukovic, Electronics Tech, U.S.N. USS Shasta (AE-33), San Francisco, CA.

"This book has clearly made a formerly mystified theoretical physics truly comprehensible to anyone with high school reading skills and 'street people' in general. Beyond its overt revolutionary scientific import, the social implications are also profound. Bound to surprise and constructively influence an enormous number of people for a very long time. Ignoring or denying it won't make it go away. Now I know what E=MC squared means."
- Don Donahue, original printer and publisher of ZAP Comix, San Francisco

"Gravity really is the 4th dimension, and levity and mirth use to be the 5th and 6th dimensions, until K.B. Robertson proved them to be electricity & magnetism, respectively." - Herb Caen, The San Francisco CHRONICLE

"Not without levity, the sharp shooting author expertly documents his academic and historical subject; then - suddenly - the reader is experientially surrounded by it. There is no intellectual escape from the 4-D space-time continuum anymore, in or out of an ignorant or uninterested yawn. The very act of reading these words is directly and physically sustained by it. Observing various responses of others, in the early stages of recognizing it, is a recreation in itself. The documentary is scientifically irreproachable, the informal narrative is a social liberation. The fascist elements don't like it already." - Sallie Taylor Melinda Bryan, 1979

"Academic L.S.D. in a Stockholm punchbowl, and everybody's invited. Ready or not there is no way out of this but through it. A scientific Odyssey. The most remarkable fact about 'The New Gravity' is that it was not discovered and written fifty or more years ago."
- Gregory Nageotte, Ph.D. Philosophy, Santa Barbara, CA. 1979

"I am unable to disqualify it."
- Dr. Richard Feynman, 1966, Professor Emeritus, Cal Tech
Nobel Prize, Quantum Electrodynamics

"It reads a hell of a lot more easily and comprehensively than anything else of the subject of Einstein's Relativity. Reads at least as easily as the brass tacks section of any good sci. fi. mag., and it is not science fiction."
- Travis T. Hipp, KSAN radio, San Francisco, 1970

"The old saw, 'There is no gravity, the earth sucks', is no longer tractable. The New Gravity (Is The 4th Dimension) is the old gravity, in a pushy new paradigm of Einstein's 4 dimensional space-time continuum. Guaranteed to illuminate even the most diffident mind. It will chancelessly see you and raise you indefinitely. The New Gravity will never let you down."
- Arthur Kretchmer, 1979, Article Editor, PLAYBOY Magazine
...............................................

CONTENTS
Introduction
pp. 1 - 2
Newton's Gravitational Alternative
pp. 2 - 4
Einstein's General Principle Of Relativity
pp. 5 - 8
A REVIEW OF THE PHYSICAL DIMENSIONS, 1 - 4
pp. 9 - 10
The Four Dimensional Ultimatum.
pp. 10 - 12
Abandoned Proof That Matter Is An Expanding 4-D Field
pp. 12 - 15
4-D Mass-Field Doppler Effect
pp. 16 - 18
The Discovery And Identification Of The 5th & 6th Dimensions
pp. 22 - 23
The Unification Of Electromagnetism & Gravity
pp. 22 - 25
Einstein's ' Incomprehensible' 4-D Geodesics: Comprehended
p. 27
The Unification Of Inertial & Gravitational Mass Values
pp. 28 - 29
E= MC2 Without Mathematics
pp. 29 - 31
The Sound Of 4-Dimensional Gravity
p. 31
A Popular And Serious Misunderstanding About Space & Time
pp. 31- 32
Non-Absolute Relativistic 4-D Space-Time And Time Dilation
p. 32
Why: The Big Bang Theory Is Wrong
pp. 33 - 40
The Black Hole Singularity Controversy: Deciphered Without Mathematics
pp. 34 - 35
Another Familiar Yet Unrecognized And Frequently Denied
Accelerating Expansion In Nature
p. 40

Epilogue
pp.40-41

Afterward

Kent Benjamin Robertson (KBR)
...........................................

After reading this work, Parquette's brazen plagiarization of it is a palette of a copy and paste artist, mixing a variety his own statements with unavoidably identifiable quotes and paraphrasations of K.B. Robertson's work in physics.
Parquette even goes on in several internet posts to copy and paste verbatim excerpts of KBR's NOMADS, CIVILIZATION & WAR (Enter 'Dr. Wheeler', and 'Smoky the dragon' in google.)
Since several friends and acquaintances who use the internet and who've read KBR's work (in many cases, as long ago as 35 years), discovered Parquette's claim to the work he enthusiastically volunteered to post, that word reached KBR a few years later, with all of the time between 12/'99 when Parquette first begqn posting KBR's work, until 9/02, when KBR began to use the internet - with some encouragement and help from his friends...

Seeing that indeed, Parquette had 'evolved' from the privilege of being the first to post it on the net, to implying and directly identifying himself as the 'Author' of it. After being found out this way, Mr. Parquette proclaimed that his bbs - and forum - subjections of my work, were requested by me, and that he 'kicked KBR out', alleging that he - Parquette - was 'threatened', and complaining that he wasn't paid for the work he did for KBR. Often asking the latter: "I don't know who's working harder on this, you or me..." (Parquette had requested copy & paste posting it a few years earlier. KBR began research, development, printing and publication of it, since 1959.)

Ever since, as any active net surfer is aware, Parquette and several of his acolytes have launched a vulgar, profanity proliferating, name calling hate campaign against KBR. The former following KBR's posts 'all over the net', as can be observed by anyone entering 'Kent Benjamin Robertson' and/or 'Brian Kirk Parquette - Bkparque, and/or 'Gravity, Electricity & Magnetism are the 4th, 5th & 6th dimensions': The Reinstatement of Einstein's Presently Abandoned (Steady State) Unified Field, w'out Mathematics: The Big Bang Theory is Wrong.
These were not subjected on the net - as can be established through chronologically archived sequence - until (12/'99 - 2/2000) Parquette began posting - then attempted to plagiarize (steal, take credit for, impersonate KBR) - the issued material.
(Parquette also painted portions of the interior Sistine Chapel cupola, and co-authored much of Shakespeare's works, along with those of Homer's Iliad and Odyssey... (squared). They refused to pay him for it, and 'threatened' him, so he 'threw them out' of his bbs posts and DelphiForums 'Extraterrestrial Physics 101 forum. Going on to smear them all, 'all over the net'.

All of the pantheistic gods, and no small number of internet itinerants, mendicants and nomads of every stripe and plumage, wish him - and his grease paint roaring, smelly crowd: 'Buona Fortuna'.

..........................................

(Digressing to reality: Is gravity really the 4th dimension, or has the author only cleverly built his theory around reality so that no one can tell the difference? < http://einstein.periphery.cc/ > )

Thank you for reading this missive

Thanking sciforums.com for making this communication possible,
I am very sincerely yours, Kent Benjamin Robertson
(AKA Kaiduorkhon, Aka The White Mongol, kraziequus@yahoo.com)

Vini, Vici. Entiendo.

Last edited by Kaiduorkhon : 12-24-02 at 03:10 PM.
(10/14/04 22:36 hrs EST Thursday.)

20. ### blobranaRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
2,214
[reply to original post by Caleb]

hUM,
Neat idea.
Well i for one think that it would be difficult to find an experiment to disprove it.
But i feel uncomfortable with the idea of infinite acceleration(in extra dimension);
where is the energy comming from?
The expansion of space ?
if so then the value of gravity will change if the expansion slows or speeds up (in the past or future)
As for the Wheeler and Feynman theory, that was really an exploration/expansion of Maxwell electromagnetic theory and would be difficult (IMHO) to apply to a gravity field (as that would that require a negitive higgs boson ?) , but i suppose that the electromagnetic field may have some interaction with a gravity field.
[er, it may be possible, if you stood in an a magnetic field, to be less heavy(??!) ]

Last edited: Oct 15, 2004
21. ### KaiduorkhonRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
552
blobrana
Registered User (480 posts) Today, 07:11 PM
[reply to original post by Caleb]

(Blbrana wrote

hUM,
Neat idea.
Well i for one think that it would be difficult to find an experiment to disprove it.
But i feel uncomfortable with the idea of infinite acceleration(in extra dimension);
where is the energy comming from?
The expansion of space ?
if so then the value of gravity will change if the expansion slows or speeds up (in the past or future)
As for the Wheeler and Feynman theory, that was really an exploration/expansion of Maxwell electromagnetic theory and would be difficult (IMHO) to apply to a gravity field (as that would that require a negitive higgs boson ?) , but i suppose that the electromagnetic field may have some interaction with a gravity field.
[er, it may be possible, if you stood in an a magnetic field, to be less heavy(??!) ]

Last edited by blobrana : Today at 07:23 PM.

**************************************

Blobrana (of the neatly thumping cardio valentine icon?):

Truly good to hear from you.

This is in my 45 years of experience as the proud - and deeply humiliated - author of the issued work, the most regularly questioned...
...................................

"But i feel uncomfortable with the idea of infinite acceleration(in extra dimension);
where is the energy comming from?
The expansion of space ?
if so then the value of gravity will change if the expansion slows or speeds up (in the past or future)
.........................................

The expansion does indeed 'speed up', as you say. That's what acceleration means - not mere expansion, but ever increasing expansion (ripples on a quiet pool of water do just that, the later, larger ripples moving ever faster than the earlier, smaller ripples. Those who dispute that, and there is an entire school of such fish, are all wet).

There is no contradiction of the law of Conservation of Mass-Energy here.

It's the same amount of energy distributing itself over an increasing area of space: squared. All densities in a given coordinate system remain uniformly the same density.
On the other hand, yesterday's square mile is not todays. Nor is yesterday's 60mph that of today.
Tomorrow's square mile will be larger and more tenuous than todays. Yesterdays square mile was smaller and denser than today's.

The same amount of energy - at any given moment - more or less dense, large or tenuous, only when compared with itself - in the (eternal present, between the past or the future (Graph a slice of pizza, or a V shaped slice of cake or pie <We're serious here, now>: The widest portion of the V shaped slice represents the infinite future of the arrow of time. The intersection of the lines, where space seems to run out (in 3-dimensions) is the infinite past. The Big Bang Gang says that 'we run out of space', at that intersection. Whereas, they've left out Einstein's 4-D space time continuum (which is shizophrenically said to be 'acknowledged').

Yes. The Big Bang Gang ('We can't all be wrong!' Re: Science by majority rule - to hell with the facts, like E's 4th Dimension, for example) calls the intersection of that V shaped wedge, the place where all of the observed spatially expanding universe - when back tracked - converges and 'runs out of space', in a cosmic egg or 'ylem'.

The sum total of all universal mass in one space consequently generating pressures and temperatures resulting in a massive explosion, the results of which we see in the presently observed (Hubble's 'red shift' Universe, originally discovered through spectroscopic analysis by H. Sylpher, in 1927, refined into Hubble's Law - the further the faster - a few years later...)

Corroborates with 'Hubble's Law', as applied to the spatially expanding universe. It also explains why there is no common center from which the allegedly 'Big Bang Beginning', began. (No matter what part of the universe the spatially expanding universe is observed and measured from, the receding celestial systems, stars, galaxies, et al, are in direct line of sight. The center is everywhere'. )

Incidentally, regarding that V shaped wedge of infinite smallness on the intersecting - ingoing - end, and infinite largeness on the widest - outgoing - 'end': the Eternal Now, is a line sliced exactly between the intersecting small end, and the ever enlarging outgoing end. That is, past, microcosmic space-time is looked down at from 'where we always are' (in the middle of infinite smallness and infinite largeness), future macrocosmic space is looked up and forward to, always by 'us'; always at the center of the extremes of smallness and largeness: squared (Re: ReL Re: Re; 'Forever').

The Big Bang, in the scenario of E's Unifield (Steady State Theory), never happened. Repeat: Smallness in 4-dimensions is as endless as largeness. There is no convergence of the observed expanding universe - when back tracked - into an ending 3-D space, but rather an endless 4-D microcosmic space.

This correlates a repelling force acting out of all material systems (Refer Einstein's presently abandoned, now reinstated 'Cosmological Constant' - a repelling force, having all the characteristics of impelling gravity, but moving parallel to and in the opposite direction (among other things, preventing a universe full of impelling bodies from collapsing on itself - a problem Newton himself pointed out, to which he had no answer; though, in the first three pages of the PRINCIPIA, Newton specifies that the unidentified force of gravity (F) may be an impelling or a repelling force, in those words, and that in either case, whether the apple falls from A to B, or whether the coordinate system earth moves up to overtake and strike A, the figure, 32' per" per" is correct.

All densities and measurments remaining relatively 'the same', at any given moment. Moreover: yesterdays 60 mph was slower than today's. Tommorow's square mile will be corroborately larger than todays along with the value of 60 mph: all the while - past, present and future, sixty mph is 'the same'. As is a given 'square mile', a given density.

Furthermoreover: Yesterday's speed of light is slower than todays, and tomorrows speed of light (Celeritas Constant) is (relatively) faster than today's. ('The velocity of light is constant relative to the coordinate system from - where and when - which it originated. - Einstein. Special Theory, 1906).
The fact that the velocity of light is constant, is causally explained for the very reason that it is constantly increasing.
Microcosmic space = correspondngly microcosmic time. Macrocosmic space = correspondingly macrocosmic time.

"The value of (non absolute) time is determined by the value of (non absolute) space it occurs in". - K. B. Robertson, 1960

Strong ('microcosmic nuclear binding') forces are simply gravitational forces acting in a smaller (earlier) coordinate system. Weak (macrocosmic) forces, are simply gravitational forces acting in a larger (later) coordinate system. That is, microcosmic, small, strong forces, and macrocosmic, large, weak forces, are the same force, acting in two different conditions of small and large - earlier and more dense, larger and less dense - space-time...

(Re: Unified Field theory, finding electromagnetism and gravity as two different manifestations having the same causal identity...)

Enter the reinstatement of the Steady State Theory, Einstein's Unified Field. More proof that the Big Bang theory is wrong (in four dimensions, when you 'back track' the expanding universe, you don't 'intersect' and 'run out of space'. Instead, everything simply gets smaller and more dense: squared. That is, microcosmic infinity is as endless as macrocosmic infinity.

Repeat: If black holes exist - they are a contracting 4-D space time continuum, or, they are 3-D entities (singularities) in a 4-D acxcelerqting universe.
Enter the causal explanation for the hitherto 'inexplicable' 'time dilation', enter 'Mass field doppler effect' to explain the contraction of matter in the direction of its motion in proportion to its velocity.
(Einstein's successful application of Lorentz transformations, which were originally and exclusively construed to be applied to expanding fields, successfully applied to 'static, non expanding particles' - successfully proving that so called static particles are in fact an expanding field.

With regard to Maxwell: all of 20th century physics is founded on his electromagnetic 'theory'. Let me know if you or anyone you know has any problems with that, or Max Planck's photons, and how they are said to prove a discontinuous universe and disqualifiy a continuous one.

Gravity is an impelling 'field' (causing aquatic, atmospheric and terrestrial tides) at long distances, and a mechanical-inertial (heavy mass generating) force of acceleration upon or near large gravitational coordinate systems.
Newton allows for it.
Einstein requires it.

Your sincerity is clear enough, Blobrana; on the other hand, correct me if I'm wrong: have you not just recently encountered this entire scenario as an alternative to the Cuisinart spin Doctoring political circus that is presently passing as physics: Glueons, Tachyeons, Strangeness, Super Strings, Foam, Charm, Quarks, Sparks and Larks...?

The Big Bang Gang looms supreme in the foreground, even with no common center from which the only recently and unexpectedly discovered (spatially) expanding universe, recedes...
Whereas, the facts of the magnanimously misunderstood matter is that Einstein's 'intractable' Unified Field', along with the alleged 'failure' of the 'Steady State Theory', do not and never have needed or depended on the - Law of Conservation Of MassEnergy contradicting - 'spontaneous creation of energy', via the mysterious formation of Hydrogen atoms, to maintain the uniformity of the observed, apparently prevailing density of space (occurrence of celestial systems per given unit of space over an indefinite period of time). No indeed. Einstein's Unified Field was falsely abandoned. Yes. Einstein did call it the 'greatest blunder of my life'. Indeed it was. Because: he should never have allowed himself to be persuaded to abandon it...
(Having predicted it in 1919, seven years before it was discovered. Refer: EINSTEIN: His Life & Times, by Ronald W. Clark. THE MEN WHO MADE A NEW PHYSICS, by Barbara Lovett Cline, THE SLEEPWALKERS, by Arthur Koestler, and MUSIC OF THE SPHERES, by Guy Murchie.)

Indeed, as this record has observed before, the 'new idea' is actually the recognition and assemblage of old ideas, that have never been recognized and connected before, often being rejected as not tenable (as my work documents repeated incidents of, often by eminent scientists), before any real thought was put into new discoveries (it is in fact a biological imperative to resist or reject anything new... <fashion trends and other such domestic social phenomenological hype, not included>)

Request you read all of the physics issue at http://einstein.periphery.cc/ I think you agree that would give us both an accelerated dialogue, rather than your understandable questions of the present obliging me to re-write a book that's already been written; which you've been kind enough to attend to, but ostensibly not to effectively absorb. It's a remarkably quick, unprecedented and unexpectedly comprehensive read - full of documented surprises the Big Bang Gang turns it's trembling back to....
Places their presently foregrounded - unfounded - multiply non-sequiturial, oxymoronic 'theory' in the background, looking like, as I've observed before: a cluster of dud pop bottle rockets propped up on a broken bottle of SQUIRT.

('Proving' that 'two wrongs don't make a right, but, three or more, do...')

After you read all of the book (after you read all of the book, not simply skim over it and oblige me to tell you what you would have had explained to you and understood, if you read it, instead of merely saying you read it...) then I invite you, with all respect, to constructively criticize, disqualify, or perhaps reinforce it with factors I have yet to augment it with.

Blobrana of the palpitating crimson heart:

I am confident that whether you agree with the work or not, it will enhance and expedite your knowledge and non-mathematical comprehension of the evolution of physics, from Aristothenes, to Bruno, Copernicus, Brahe, *Galileo (*originator of the concept of space-time, a lot of people have lost bets on that, and keep on losing them), Kepler, *Newton (*originator of the concept of a continuum of space and time; pondered the possibility of non-absolute space and a corresponding non-absolute time; suggested that gravity might be both an impelling and a repelling force. A lot of people have likewise lost - and won - money on this frequently unknown fact), Faraday, Hertz, Reimann, Oerstead, Lorentz, Maxwell, Curie, de Broglie, Schroedinger, Bohr, Einstein, Planck, Russel, Bondi, Gold & Hoyle, Gamow, Gardner, Barbara Lovett Cline (and a heck uvva lot of others: refer 'giant shoulders', and 'lookout mountain'; etc.).

I very much look forward to your questions, criticisms, contradictions, disqualifications or improvements, or those of anyone else: after you, or anyone else has (in fact) simply read (and seriously pondered) the 54 page condensation 6th sold out - small press - edition, of the 5th (sold out, small press) 627 page edition.

I am sincerely and respectfully,
Kent Benjamin Robertson (KaiduOrkhon, The White Mongol, Magic Horse).

Vini. Vici. Entiendo.

Messages:
429
23. ### KaiduorkhonRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
552

Starthan Xyzth & RawThinkTank & Caleb:

Reviewing a few considerations familiar to most dilletantes in this field...
(Respectfully chancing the role of choiring to the preacher, or conversely... While at the same time offering a review of the presumably known facts, which seem to be inadvertantly or selectively omitted from this - perhaps cursory - discussion...)

"Objects in vertical descent or horizontally defining a parabola above the earth's surface are not actually falling or moving parabolically, but rather, **'space-time' causes the object to appear to be descending, and the apparently curved parabola to actually be al geodesic straight line.'
This is an established standard 'explanation' (- however vague), by venerable and delusory authorities on the (often anarchistically besieged) subject of relativity, describing gravitational effects on vertically precipitating or horizontally projected test objects.

(**Space-time: Yet to be comprehensively recognized or identified, with the exception of the unprecedented non-mathematicall translations of this record's - KBR's title:
Gravity, Electricity & Magnetism are the 4th, 5th & 6th Dimensions: The Reinstatement of Einstein's Presently Abandoned Unified Field Theory: The Big Bang Theory is Wrong.

The 'dimple' (in space) Caleb (and others) correctly allude to, as it is spoken of and issued in many popular discussions on relativity (as a 'rubber sheet', more or less depressed in a funnel shape, the depth of which is determined by the mass value of whatever 'object' is placed on the consequently yielding surface of the stretchy surfaced 'rubber sheet'), fulfills the spatial structure of Riemannian Geometry: was adopted by Einstein, long after Riemann's pre-relativistic innovation of it.

Einstein especially implemented Riemannian structured space, before, during and after the (equatorial) expedition of 1919, where - as most vigilant students know - a full solar eclipse allowed the confirmation of Einstein's prediction that light rays are 'bent' by massive gravitating sources (in this case, the sun; while it was eclipsed by the moon, allowing accurate measurements of distant light sources in deep space). The preciseness of the results of this experiment have been questioned, but remain, undisqualified.

Whereas: 'the curvature of space time', is established by KBR (Truly Yours) as the accelerating expansion of all material frames of reference and coordinate systems, generating the 'illusion' of 'curved light': likewise accounts for Einstein's predictions - and the confirmational results - of the solar eclipse expedition of 1919.

Moreover, until further notice, the accelerating expansion of neutrons, protons, electrons and (consequently) all systemic entitities constituted of them (electromagnetic charges of electricity, having no distinct boundaries or surfaces; therefore not being 'particles', as they are dogmatically referred to), is (so far?) the only comprehensive explanation of the effects of 'space-time': generating 'horizontally projected geodesic lines that only appear to be curved', and 'vertically descending objects that only appear to be falling.'

(By the Reader's leave, this same post is repeated in the thread <click-on URL> referred to in the previous post.)

Thank you for reading this missive.
Sincerely, Kent Benjamin Robertson

Vini. Vici. Entiendo.