[DobDobDob (Ron)]

[quote=xelasnave;213936]The idea of gravity rain is simply that each object in the Universe (be it a infinite or finite Universe) throws out particles or energy such that creates a pressure through out the Universe.

I would agree that everything of substance in the universe is a part of the universe, thus no matter how minute, still plays a role in the makeup of said universe. I would not say that in this sense I radiate energy that could travel beyond my immediate locality and I would not think my presence would exert pressure on anything other than my shoes.

The effect of gravity comes from the shielding of an object locally from this pressure.

You seem to be inferring negative gravity, a force equal to and opposite to positive gravity, if this is your meaning I am not opposed to that.

This pressure blows at "C" so think of it as a wind from everywhere..I expect the particles to be small as they may well have mass yet travel at c.

This does sound very much like the Neutrino, and the jury is still out on whether Neutrinos are the fabled 'Dark Energy, Dark Matter'.

We are held on the planet by the "rain" (or wind) coming down ..the rain from thru the planet having lost some of its energy cant "push us up" so the "push" from above is greater..we now have gravity.

I don't buy this, gravity from our planets perspective is clearly understood, so much in fact that we can re-create it and sell it off to wealthy tourists. When you leave our atmosphere and go into space, our humans that float around in say the ISS do not have an upwards force or inwards force from the actual space station which weights vastly more than the human, which in your model should be forced and jammed clearly in the centre of the space station hemmed in on all sides by opposing forces.

The energy lost from GR in the middle of the planet may provide the "heat" "speed" whatever we believe to be there.

Without giving it much thought, I would suspect that gravity is strongest at the Earths core, I would take this under advisement however from anyone that knows better.

Galaxies will not sit the way they do if they rely on the mythical force of attraction... even at the speed of light an attraction form of gravity will not hold them in shape..the force must be an external pushing force..they call it dark energy..I call it gravity rain..I see that it does not stop somewhere outside the solar system but in fact is the force that "pushes" us to the planet.

You cover three large areas of science in that one very complex sentence. However, I do not disagree that what ever we call it that some explanation must exist that causes the galaxies in the universe to act as they do. Of course I have explained to you previously that using Doughnut Theory the forces are not what you think, it is more of a flow along a well trodden route. If you don't like the doughnut shape, think of the universe as a very large river that is essentially circular. Then think of a cross section of the river as being almost without end, so that it would be considered infinite but not quiet. Think of the cross section as flowing in a similar circular pattern as the the entire circular pattern of the river in the first place. This is hard to visualise, so don't worry if you don't get it, but bending space-time is not what you think, it is more along the lines of the flow of existence always heading towards where it came from in every direction, grasp that and you are with me.

Space time offers no explanation of the force that "bends" space time I simply say it is this "rain" or particles from "everywhere" that bends space time.

I explained above that there is no actual bending per se, bending implies a rigidness at some point that no longer remains rigid i.e. bends, this is a nonsense, space-time flows bubbling along by existence, and all that goes to make existence up. All the forces within nature/existence flow from the beginning of existence to the end of existence, the end of existence signals the beginning of the next iteration of existence and so it goes...if you like you can use the word infinite in this sense, but it's not truly infinite because at the point of annihilation, all existence ceases, thus not infinite. The act of ceasing to exist, that 'Universal singularity' is what fuels the creation of existence, how do I know this? I suspect it because this follows the immutable laws of the universe that we have all observed, the continual birth, growth and death of the individual parts that the universe is comprised of. Thus the saying that the sum is greater than the whole could be rewritten slightly to, The Sum should follow the same fate as the component parts.

Neutrinos are a great for the job... but if you think of the fact that all points everywhere are reached by every part of the Universe and then ask could not each of these particles "push" you may see where I am coming from.

Don't like your use of the word push, however I know what you mean. You mean cause an effect on something, if that's what you mean, I agree.


So don't be afraid to ask if you do not grasp something or there is an inconsistency that troubles you... I will be the happiest person if this can be show to be wrong..so does your best...to help me face the reality that maybe I am on the wrong track.

Thank you, you are beyond generous

I say the space craft leaving the solar system will find they become "stuck" because of the pushing approach to gravity..they will then appear to fly off at 350 klms approx per sec... being the speed the solar system runs away from them at... they are slowing down now and no one knows why... unless they use the mystery dark energy card...mmm

I need more time to think about this, I have no comment at this stage. Can you give a far more detailed explanation of what you mean?

The heat away from the Sun that can not be explained is simply an interaction between the GR and the outpour of the Sun... current attempts to get energy "up there" to me are fanciful ... but we shall see.

Not sure of your point here, please rephrase.

There is one other guy who sees it somewhat similar to me.. I have just started contact.

Does he have a beard?

Notwithstanding his ideas being similar to mine he seems ok.

Hmnnnnnn

Has qualifications and good at math and physics.. its nice to have one other person out there I guess. But he calls it SPUE dynamics..mmm it does stick in the mind I suppose.

Yes indeed, and people instinctively react to my Doughnut Theory, perhaps I will search for another name after all

So the fact you have not really disagreed with anything to date means you more or less agree with the general propositions ..the reasonable general propositions.

No because I have not disagreed does not infer that I more or less agree, it simply means I have not disagreed before. Like you I am open to input on a continual basis, and should I be shown I am in error in one part or all of what I say then I will immediately acknowledge it and add the new learning into my heap, which continues to grow every single day. My fondest wish, like you, is to be shown categorically that I am wrong, this is the only way that I will evolve and grow, this trial and error and testing and observing results is science and like you, is the tenant by which I abide.

[quote]