Main Menu

Those who do not read are no better off than those who cannot.
Chinese Proverb

There are four chief obstacles to grasping truth,
which hinder every man, however learned,
and scarcely allow any one to win a clear title to learning,
submission to faulty and unworthy authority,
influence of custom,
popular prejudice,
and concealment of our own ignorance
accompanied by ostentatious display of our knowledge.

Roger Bacon (Franciscan Theologian)

A lot of questions are presented by people who like to be annoying. There is no point in answering most of them. However, there are legitimate questions that are posed and even some that should be answered from those who have ulterior motives.

This section has been added to show a few of the deliberately annoying questions or accusations, and all of the legitimate questions when they occur.

Question (actually a public accusation):

"You say that time is measured with motion. This is a misunderstanding of the second law of thermodynamics."


The reader has only to go to the section of this site regarding time and read it to see that time is measured by motion. The revolution of the earth about the sun is our measure of the year, the rotation of the earth relative to the sun is our measure of a day, the movement of the second hand on our clock is the measure of seconds and minutes, etc.

The second law of thermodynamics states, essentially: "The entropy of the universe tends to increase (energy becomes less available).

What has the second law of thermodynamics to do with time being measured by motion? Someone said that there are no silly questions, but whoever said this did not know about individuals who are only remnants of their former selves. Perhaps we should feel sorry for people whose only recourse to fame is to use buzz words to influence the opinions of others. However, those who took too much dope, alcohol, or are still taking too much of either probably deserve what they get. They should not be bothering the rest of us with their symptoms.


"You say that matter is proportional to weight. This is a confusion of mass and weight. Go back to school."


Yes, mass is proportional to weight. This does not mean that it is equal to weight. In English measure (but not in the metric system) this can be seen easily because the English used a different term for mass than they did for weight. In English measure, mass is given in "slugs" and weight is given in "pounds". The equation is mass times gravity equals weight. Or the product of slugs and gravity (acceleration of about 32.2 feet per second per second) equals pounds. If the mass is tripled, the weight is also tripled. If the mass is quadrupled, the weight is also quadrupled. This is why mass is proportional to weight.

In the metric system, the word for both mass and weight is either subdivisions of, multiples of, or straight "grams", which tends to create confusion.

The same individual made the above accusation and the one before it. My comments about him apply here as well. However, he did provide a service in that other people may not have realized that mass is measured in slugs.


"You say that Newton said `The quantity of motion arises from velocity and the quantity of matter with that velocity'. This is a gross misunderstanding of Newton. Go back to high school".


This is an exact quote from Newton's original "definitions". The rest of the quote has to do with momentum which is the product of mass and velocity.

It appears to me the the person making the accusation has real problems with reading and with understanding.


"You say that Newton said `The absolute quantity of a centripetal force is the measure of the centrifugal force which it opposes. For centripetal force is equal to centrifugal force for the body in question'. No such thing as centrifugal force. Go back to college".


This is a paraphrasing from Newton's definitions. What Newton stated is "The absolute quantity of centripetal force is the measure of the same, proportional to the efficacy of the cause which propagates from the center". He went on to say, as paraphrased in modern language, "centrifugal force and centripetal force oppose one another and are equal when relating to the same body or bodies".

Centrifugal force is a name given to what happens when an object is constantly pulled toward a center such as is a stone in a sling or the earth about the sun. It is a "force" caused by inertia to oppose an acceleration toward a point. If it did not exist, the earth would fall toward the sun and the poor soul that accused me of a mistatement would not be around to do so. It can be argued that its name is wrong, but check the dictionary and see if it does not exist, regardless of what it is named.

Question (accusation):

"You stated: `The laws of physics are the same everywhere in the universe, and at every time that the universe has existed'. Misunderstanding of relativity. Go back to college".


First of all this quote was taken out of context from under the heading showing that it was from late 19th century physics. Second, it is special relativity to which that the person is referring - not simply "relativity". And third, neither special nor general relativity says anything about one part of the universe having laws that are any different to those in this part of the universe.

Question (accusation):

You have no empirical evidence.


On the contrary, there is universe full of empirical evidence when one bothers to see it. Much of it is on this website. See the part of the site called "Empirical Evidence" for more details.

This accusation was probably not a malicious one, but the accuser probably had no idea of the definition of empirical evidence, is unable to see it when it is presented, or cannot understand the math that shows that it applies here. This is not too bad from this individual, but there are many editors and so-called scientists who use this accusation to deliberately block scientific progress.

Question (accusation):

Calculus was not used, so the theory is not valid. Probably the website author does not know calculus.


This is what I call a stupid accusation, indicating very little knowledge of math. If this person understood the math on this site, he would not have made such a silly statement. The second part of his accusation is one that indicates he has no knowledge of real engineering (as opposed to "title" engineering - remember that today a "sanitary engineer" is the title that was given to a garbage collector). Furthermore, it is easy to verify what real engineers must know - and any moron who examines the website can verify where I went to school. I classify this as a malicious accusation. Click on "Using the Right Tools" on the home page for further information.


"What is meant by "instantaneous velocity" as regards nether inflow?" After this was explained, "Couldn't this be explained with calculus?"


This term was coined to make it clear that the nether in a gravity funnel is always accelerating. Yes, it could be explained using the terms of calculus. I did not do so because many people have not studied calculus.

For those who have studied calculus, "instantaneous velocity" is the same as ds/dt where "s" is distance and "t" is time. This velocity is increasing so that dv/dt is there right along with the velocity. The acceleration is constant for one level such as earth's surface. It changes as the altitude changes according to the inverse square law. It is the acceleration which is the acceleration of gravity. So ds/dt is about 6.94 miles per second at the earth's surface where dv/dt is about 32.2 feet per second.

It is the mathematical proofs which can be clicked on in the Appendix Menu for Is There a Dynamic Ether that make the points about nether inflow as being gravity.

In my book on gravity I explain "instantaneous velocity" more fully for those who have not taken calculus. " Truly, the nether within the funnel has no velocity because velocity is based upon distance over a time. Here we have only acceleration at all points and no time allowed for constant rate of movement. So we must use a hypothetical something called instantaneous velocity which is the velocity we would have at a point if the point were extended to allow a time to measure the velocity."

The last sentence in the preceding paragraph is a verbal description of what is being done in calculus when a curved line on a graph is given a tangent at a point (extending the point) to show the slope. This should not confuse either the calculus student or those who have not taken calculus.

Unfortunately, most of the people who are more interested in forcing me to use calculus fail to look at the important things. The nether "falling" into a mass producing gravity has an infinite series of kinetic energy levels which cause it to create the inverse square law for gravity. This is the most important point to be noticed. Another point is the adherence to the Mass equivalency law.

One thing some of these questions illustrate quite well is the emotional disturbance that this site creates within some of those who feel threatened by anything that may upset their world view. These questions also confirm what has been said regarding our so-called scientists (science fiction writers) who are accepted and mean to stay in charge at all costs. True science is not being practiced when self-interest supercedes the desire to discover the answers.

Luther Burbank (1849-1929), the famous American horticulturist, once said

Less than fifteen per cent of the people do any original thinking on any subject... The greatest torture in the world for most people is to think.

The scientist is a lover of truth for the very love of truth itself, wherever it may lead.

We must learn that any person who will not accept what he knows to be truth, for the very love of truth alone, is very definitely undermining his mental integrity. You have not been a close observer of such men if you have not seen them shrivel, become commonplace, mean, without influence, without friends and without the enthusiasm of youth and growth, like a tree covered with fungus, the foliage diseased, the life gone out of the heart with dry rot, and indelibly marked for destruction - dead, but not yet handed over to the undertaker.

Main Menu