Jump to content


Senior Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

Community Reputation


About Theredbarron

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Location
  • Interests
    Creating solutions to problems
  • Favorite Area of Science
  • Biography
  • Occupation

Recent Profile Visitors

1481 profile views
  1. Shut down by hypervalent_iodine. Some people are allergic and most people dont care. No one is following this anyways. How many points am I allowed?

    1. hypervalent_iodine


      As swansont mentioned, all we ask is that you follow the rules. If this isn't an appealing prospect to you, you are welcome to leave. 

  2. Its not a discussion if you dont listen. Its more like oppression is what I get from this site. Just like when people pretend that air is not matter and only see it as air. 

    1. Show previous comments  5 more
    2. Theredbarron


      you should hear yourself. "hand-wavy nonsense" you sound like some one who cant explain what they are seeing. 

    3. Theredbarron


      I brought an observation asking for tests and all you did was shut it down. How does the scientific method work again? So how can I give you data if I dont know what data you need? I'm beginning to think there is no tests that you have. Accelerometer test would only work if I had relatable data. Like someone holding an accelerometer outside earths atmosphere and what are the result in relation to earth only then compare the effects to mine. That doesn't really show anything. Otherwise I have to put one on the wheel and it will create acceleration no matter what. Drive a car at a constant speed and turn it at a constant degree and you will get a constant acceleration in a direction.  The g forces. If you think I didnt account for this you are very wrong.  So why do I keep getting told what it is without any data to show or explain exactly why matter moves to it and not away? Why does it continue to pull on the paper after the airflow is stopped? You dont even know what the wheel looks like? If your just going to answer the questions without testing it then I guess that how science is done now because thats what this science website has done. I found something if you like it or not. Its not new. Its been around for a long time. We have already been using it just not in this way. And its been cast out due to not knowing what to do with it. Thats what I'm testing.

    4. hypervalent_iodine


      Statuses are not the place to bring up closed topics. I am locking this, please do not bring it up again. 

  3. Its not just speed its also the imperfections of the surface of what is rotating and the size of what is rotating and whats surrounding it. Thats just planets. To replicate electricity we use artificial magnets and spin them. So I created something that is designed to generate drafts only because all of the planets are rotating and have a certain amount of imperfections. Even hurricanes have a low pressure zone in the middle thats rotating. it would be very hard to calculate each planets imperfections and how it would create a draft effect. So Einstein used comparison to calculate. I have even placed this in a different setup and still came up with the same overall result. that is all matter surrounding is still moving to the center of rotation. It will have a capacity. The gases density surround its rotation will effect is overall capacity or effect because I dont know its only comparison at this point. I only found something that ties a lot together and I thought the science community should be the first to know for more the one reason. Even if its against the grain I have a responsibility to investigate! The simplest way I can say how the effects most easily created is by draft. What is really happening is much more detailed then just a draft. This is where it get confusing. Inside a draft in comparison to whats outside is a lower density. The true details of density is how many electrons, protons and neutrons are occupying a given space at a given time in all matter. So If I gave you a source of 12v dc and it had to charge a battery that was at 6v dc it would have a 6v differential. All of that is above 0. So if all matter is made of electrical properties then the higher value would push into the lower one. What I'm saying is that all matter is subject to this and it does have magnetic like properties or effects on matter in this way. It appears as vacuum and pressure but thats the result of the effects for this attraction. Gas is matter to. Its very light so its the first to go. I haven't even got to the core yet.
  4. Einstein solved all the math with comparison logic of the planets and a whole lot more. But I am purposing that the functions of how to create said force is not proven yet. Saying he proved the functions of it to me is like saying knowing the horsepower of an engine is the same as knowing how the horsepower is created by said engine. The only thing I found from all of what is out there is that its simply matter occupying space and nothing to do with motion. But when you look at all things demonstrating gravity why are they all in motion? Einstein did not leave this for us to just stop there at the numbers. You would be nieve to think only one man can think that way then believe in evolution and not think that we can all understand with time.
  5. I have no idea how to be direct about this. You can spout numbers and things from education and all you want. It was to easy to prove a certain thing to myself that I find it very hard to understand how this is not part in the action of creating gravity. I know it sounds stupid to all of you but I decided to use common denominator logic in a physical sense and this is what I came up with. The results repeat themselves every time. Change one thing then the results change. Very basic as I hope I have said before. This is not a game to me even if it sound like it. There is a common thing between everything and its very hard to explain with words especially since I clearly suck at it. Drafting is a very rudimentary term but I dont know any other words to use. Its not just simply drafting either so it confusing because its much more detailed in its action then just that. Thats why I have been saying density so much and electrical properties so much. So I thought this would be the easiest route for some reason because its so easy to replicate without too expensive of materials. A visual would be easier then me trying to explain all that and convince you in doing so. Does that at least make sense why I would come here? This would in fact be the best route logically for anything like this even if I am so convinced. Is that enough because I'm not one of those gimmicks?
  6. That was actually good stuff that I just got the chance to read. I am more then happy to change from the tube to a chamber. I know it was crap for the first setup. how much would you spend? Im not using math for this. Einstein already solved that part. I'm showing functionality. Just because you can say what the horsepower is does not explain how to make it. I am merely trying to find an outside source to compare for proving or disproving. Shutting me down doesn't disprove anything. So can I proceed? Im sorry I didnt prove it immediately after other responses or are you controlling information? Can I continue because it doesn't effect your life at all? Because it is effecting mine
  7. Actually what I want to do is take the real test. The irrefutable one. What I'm having trouble with is which one it is? I know its air that you see but there's no way I'm going to sit here and try to convince with words on how thats relevant because I have tried. I get that I'm slumming it down here but if thats what it takes to find this answer then so be it. So I thought another experiment. As you can see there is a lot of biasness to anyone that comes on here like I have. Not that its all undeserving just dont let it blind you too much. I'm not trying to be confrontational. I said I wanted to know and this is how I'm going to answer it. If I can prove it to you here then I can prove it anywhere otherwise its a bust right? Visually that is. I did not say any numbers where wrong. I'm only proving functionality. How can I do this? My theory without getting to deep is that gravity is created by density differentials by use of drafting from surface imperfections of a rotating mass. I have created a wheel to replicate this effect and it does. I thought placing a bubble level perpendicular to the rotating axis with a camera watching it on a bigger wheel could do it. The idea is that if the air in the bubble level goes to the top then the rotation is effecting the matter through the material which would prove what my wheel is doing. That or making a trike thats accelerated off of a version of this.
  8. Ok so the wave would be more or less the effects of a change in gravity? What does it mean by accelerating a mass exactly?
  9. Venus atmosphere is about 200 times shorter then ours and the speed is also over 200 times slower then our planets. The exit velocity of that size of mass moving would almost have to stand still for the planet to rip apart. Venus is not standing still. Plus it already has a bubble of gasses around it that would have to be ripped from the planet first before the surface is effected. An its spinning the opposite direction which is an opposing force against the rest of its surrounding which may be a factor. Its not simply just sitting there
  10. Watch the video on this site and tell me thats not what I have been posting about here on this site. This is exactly what I have been trying to point out gravity. Notice the rotation. Thats weird how thats what I have been saying about gravity! Just because I cant make sense of it doesn't mean I'm wrong. The waves are density differential. The lower density allows higher density to move to and same goes as higher density pushes into lower. The surrounding matter including gases change gravities effects because of density. The faster its moving the stronger the attraction. Slower rotating planets have much less gas surrounding them. It even says on the site "The strongest gravitational waves are produced by catastrophic events such as colliding black holes, the collapse of stellar cores (supernovae), coalescing neutron stars or white dwarf stars, the slightly wobbly rotation of neutron stars that are not perfect spheres, and possibly even the remnants of gravitational radiation created by the birth of the Universe." Not Perfect spheres. The imperfection of the surface of a rotating mass effects the total gravity that can be generated by said mass. All Im saying is that gravity has everything to do with motion. The first paragraph speaks about massive accelerating objects creating said waves. If I placed this wheel in a tube with both ends open. It will hold a piece of paper on each end. I have already done this. Air is matter. The use of air in that situation is how the gravity is being created. The surrounding of the wheel has air around it so its going to effect it first. Then the paper is pulled in by the Moving Air. We are standing in the draft path of what is rotating. Not all planets are like earth so it just so happens that we have a lot of gas surrounding our planet. Mars is about half the size and the surface speed is about half of earth and the gravity is about half of earth. The atmosphere is mad of co2 for the most part which is less dense then our atmosphere which temperatures come into play there. Gases can move objects and draft them as well. A venturi is gases drafting. The surface is what attract and holds the gases of a planet. The density of the gases along with the surface imperfections and speed and size determines how much the planets can hold. Even the planets effect the gases around it much like the wheel that I made if you have been paying attention. If our planet stopped rotating or slowed down escape velocity goes down. At a certain speed the surface loses its attraction which reduces what it can hold. If it gets to low it will rip our planet apart. So gravity relies on the planet rotating not just occupying a space. https://www.ligo.caltech.edu/page/what-are-gw
  11. Ok so what I was meaning by bringing the future here is because we cant be there and here. What I was meaning is by prediction we can determine certain things and make certain things happen earlier then predicted. For example food rationing. Changing how much something is happening to change when something is going to happen. You ration so you can have food for longer time. Evolutionary patterns of relative events of all types is what would be used to compare what is to happen. Changing the existence rather then the time itself. I dont know if that makes any sense. I guess it would be more of a perception of time since we can really go there yet, why not make it come here?
  12. Can you be in the future and the present at the same time?
  13. I am definitely thinking about time travel. I was thinking that instead of going to the time, bringing it here without the aging. I actually thought that maybe there is more then 4 dimensions its just which one is relative? Whats the link? I am picking up what your saying. I just try to ask all the question rather then judge the question with an assumption from my point of view.
  14. Date time stamp of a location in space with xyz coordinates. So just one instance.
  15. So the numbers used is more like a snapshot of space time?
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.