The Law of the astral inertia

Discussion in 'Alternative Theories' started by Asexperia, Jul 25, 2015.

  1. Asexperia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,725
    THE LAW OF THE ASTRAL INERTIA

    Let's see these statements:

    1- Gravity is not a force in itself.
    2- No depends on particles such as gravitons.
    3- Gravity is the weakest "force" of the four known forces.
    4- Gravity has no charge, so it is impossible to shield it.

    These four statements led me to assume that gravity is a fictitious force that depends on the Law of the astral inertia.

    The postulates of this law are:

    1- Objects on the ground or near the surface of the earth, or any other star, follow the movement of this.

    2- Originally planets follow a straight trajectory, but It's converted into elliptical by the gravity of the star they orbit.

    3- The movement of the stars was originated since the Big Bang.

    Elvis Sibilia
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 25, 2015
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    I don't want to get the thread started off track right at the beginning, so let me ask a few questions. You say #1- Gravity is not a force in itself. Is that a statement that you assert, like an axiom, upon which you are basing the Law of the Astral Inertia?

    You say #2- "No depends on particles such as gravitons". Do you mean gravity does not depend on particles such as gravitons, or does? Should there be a comma after the word "No", i.e. should it say, "No, it depends on particles such as gravitons? Or what?

    In #3 you include gravity as one of the four known forces, and yet in #1 you say it is not a force in itself. Is it a force, or isn't it a force; which way do you mean it?

    And in #4 you say - Gravity has no charge, so it is impossible to shield it. I do understand what you mean, but the lack of a charge doesn't mean that there is no way to shield from it. For example, a magnetic field can suspend an object in space; isn't that a sort of a shield? Just asking.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Daecon Kiwi fruit Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,133
    You just said gravity was fictitious. Make up your mind.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Asexperia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,725
    1- Gravity is a fictitious force. It is not a real force.

    2- Gravity does not depend on particles such as gravitons or any other one.

    3- Equal 1

    4- I understand that there is no material barrier for the gravity.
     
  8. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    Ok, then we start from there.
     
  9. Asexperia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,725
    Yes, you're correct. It must say astral inertia.
     
  10. Daecon Kiwi fruit Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,133
    Then your own "postulate 2" is wrong.
     
  11. Asexperia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,725
    Why? If the sun suddenly cease to exist planets would escape with rectilinear trajectory.
     
  12. Daecon Kiwi fruit Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,133
    You're saying gravity is fictitious and you ALSO mention gravity being a force but also not a force.

    You're contradicting yourself.
     
  13. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,421
    Aren't these two statements contradictory?
     
  14. Asexperia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,725
    I have always been aware of that.
    The fundamental forces are just three. I will review the first post.

    Thanks a lot.
     
  15. Asexperia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,725
    THE LAW OF THE ASTRAL INERTIA (Edited)

    Let's see these statements:

    1- Gravity is not a force.
    2- It does not depends on particles such as gravitons.
    3- Gravity has no charge, so it is impossible to shield it.

    These three statements led me to assume that gravity is a fictitious force that depends on the Law of the astral inertia.

    The postulates of this law are:

    1- Objects on the ground or near the surface of the earth, or any other star, follow the movement of this.

    2- Originally planets follow a straight trajectory, but It's converted into elliptical by the astral inertia of the star they orbit.

    3- The movement of the stars was originated since the Big Bang.
     
  16. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    Sibilia make up a lot of crap.
     
    Dr_Toad likes this.
  17. Asexperia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,725
    You should have a little respect.
     
  18. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    We understand that this is the case, but it is explained as the result of gravity, with the center of gravity in the center of the mass. That way, things on the surface "fall" toward the center mass, and therefore stay near the surface all the way around the sphere. If you abandon that concept, things in the leading side of the Earth's motion would stay on the ground, but wouldn't things on the trailing side fall behind?

     
  19. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    Why do you think you're due any?
     
  20. Daecon Kiwi fruit Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,133
    Yes, but your ideas don't deserve any.
     
  21. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,421
    That led Einstein to his theory of general relativity.

    How do you know? What evidence are you relying on?

    You speak as if gravity is a kind of particle. Is that what you're thinking?

    Follow the movement of what? What is "this"?

    Do you mean that objects on the Earth's surface rotate with the Earth? That has nothing to do with gravity.

    What do you mean by "originally"? When did the Earth, for example, follow a straight trajectory?

    How did the Earth's orbit "convert" to elliptical?

    What is "astral inertia"? How can we measure it?

    That's uncontroversial. Everything was originated since the big bang.
     
  22. Asexperia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,725
    If gravity is a fictitious force, the center of mass and center of gravity too.
     
  23. Asexperia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,725
    Sent by James R:
    How do you know? What evidence are you relying on?


    Gravity does not have charge.

    You speak as if gravity is a kind of particle. Is that what you're thinking?

    No, gravity is not a particle.

    Follow the movement of what? What is "this"?

    The earth.

    What do you mean by "originally"? When did the Earth, for example, follow a straight trajectory?

    It is what would happen if the sun suddenly ceases to exist.

    How did the Earth's orbit "convert" to elliptical?

    Due to the astral inertia of the sun.

    What is "astral inertia"? How can we measure it?

    The astral inertia is determined by the mass.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 27, 2015

Share This Page