> I.e., gravity's changes are instantaneous, and, when a rocket lands on Mars,
> however small the effect, that change in Mars' position, instantly as if the
> geodesy's changes were synchronized, adjusts every force vector, at once,
> everywhere.

Yes, gravity is an electrostatic phenonomen, action at a distance.
Every charge in the universe is attatched like a spring to all other charges, as lines of force.
Move one charge, all charges in the infinite universe are affected.
Once Einstein and Helmholtz are thrown out, we are back to sane physics - using electrostatic lines of force (infinite lines of force exist from any charge to all charges) and electromagnetic forces (how aetheric vibrations cause force transfer at light speed, aether of course being an infinitely fine solid through which electrons move without any retardation).

Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee

On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 4:54:58 PM UTC-7, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
> > I.e., gravity's changes are instantaneous, and, when a rocket lands on Mars,
> > however small the effect, that change in Mars' position, instantly as if the
> > geodesy's changes were synchronized, adjusts every force vector, at once,
> > everywhere.
>
> Yes, gravity is an electrostatic phenonomen, action at a distance.
> Every charge in the universe is attatched like a spring to all other charges, as lines of force.
> Move one charge, all charges in the infinite universe are affected.
> Once Einstein and Helmholtz are thrown out, we are back to sane physics - using electrostatic lines of force (infinite lines of force exist from any charge to all charges) and electromagnetic forces (how aetheric vibrations cause force transfer at light speed, aether of course being an infinitely fine solid through which electrons move without any retardation).
>
> Cheers,
> Arindam Banerjee

Ah, but also gravitational waves are real,
and, mass-energy equivalency is apparent
in the dual neutron star or binary pulsar,
so "relativistic dynamics are real",
sort of like how Einstein says,
not necessarily how he's been repeated.

About Helmholtz I'm not sure what you mean,
please carry on as you would,
I think he's a pretty good empiricist and
thus for example has been relevant to the applied,
not that there aren't pitfalls to the tightrope,
I think you mean Laplace not Helmholtz.

It's not for throwing Einstein and Helmholtz and Laplace, out,
it's for establishing how they're in. For many these days that's
theory of potentials and harmonic functions and non-linear contributions.

For a Dirac positronic sea, and, Bohm de Broglie a continuum mechanics,
it makes for a gauge theory a field theory with the absolute and relative.

On Saturday, April 22, 2023 at 1:25:10 PM UTC+10, Ross Finlayson wrote:
> On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 4:54:58 PM UTC-7, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > I.e., gravity's changes are instantaneous, and, when a rocket lands on Mars,
> > > however small the effect, that change in Mars' position, instantly as if the
> > > geodesy's changes were synchronized, adjusts every force vector, at once,
> > > everywhere.
> >
> > Yes, gravity is an electrostatic phenonomen, action at a distance.
> > Every charge in the universe is attatched like a spring to all other charges, as lines of force.
> > Move one charge, all charges in the infinite universe are affected.
> > Once Einstein and Helmholtz are thrown out, we are back to sane physics - using electrostatic lines of force (infinite lines of force exist from any charge to all charges) and electromagnetic forces (how aetheric vibrations cause force transfer at light speed, aether of course being an infinitely fine solid through which electrons move without any retardation).
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Arindam Banerjee
> Ah, but also gravitational waves are real,
> and, mass-energy equivalency is apparent
> in the dual neutron star or binary pulsar,
> so "relativistic dynamics are real",
> sort of like how Einstein says,
> not necessarily how he's been repeated.

didnt Einstein say "EITHER WAS MY GREATEST MISTAKE!" ?

The universe is 4-dimensional 3space+time

Newtonian mechanics BRANCHES EVENTS OUT

Quantum state reduction projects possible outcomes into the future
and solves simultaneous equations forming the MIND OF GOD
and DESTINY.

Events CONVERGE - CONTRACT IN and so does mass

Infinitely fine fails analysis by decomposition

On Saturday, April 22, 2023 at 1:32:38 AM UTC-7, Graham Cooper wrote:
> On Saturday, April 22, 2023 at 1:25:10 PM UTC+10, Ross Finlayson wrote:
> > On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 4:54:58 PM UTC-7, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > I.e., gravity's changes are instantaneous, and, when a rocket lands on Mars,
> > > > however small the effect, that change in Mars' position, instantly as if the
> > > > geodesy's changes were synchronized, adjusts every force vector, at once,
> > > > everywhere.
> > >
> > > Yes, gravity is an electrostatic phenonomen, action at a distance.
> > > Every charge in the universe is attatched like a spring to all other charges, as lines of force.
> > > Move one charge, all charges in the infinite universe are affected.
> > > Once Einstein and Helmholtz are thrown out, we are back to sane physics - using electrostatic lines of force (infinite lines of force exist from any charge to all charges) and electromagnetic forces (how aetheric vibrations cause force transfer at light speed, aether of course being an infinitely fine solid through which electrons move without any retardation).
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Arindam Banerjee
> > Ah, but also gravitational waves are real,
> > and, mass-energy equivalency is apparent
> > in the dual neutron star or binary pulsar,
> > so "relativistic dynamics are real",
> > sort of like how Einstein says,
> > not necessarily how he's been repeated.
> didnt Einstein say "EITHER WAS MY GREATEST MISTAKE!" ?
>
> The universe is 4-dimensional 3space+time
>
> Newtonian mechanics BRANCHES EVENTS OUT
>
> Quantum state reduction projects possible outcomes into the future
> and solves simultaneous equations forming the MIND OF GOD
> and DESTINY.
>
> Events CONVERGE - CONTRACT IN and so does mass
>
> Infinitely fine fails analysis by decomposition

No it doesn't, infinitely fine establishes new things.

The natural/unit equivalency function is:
a pdf, a CDF,
iota-values and the elements of infinitesimal path elements,
a singularity according to singularity theory like an asymptote,
its own anti-derivative like e^x,
having curvature 1/R for gauge theory,
and having a range a model of a continuous domain,
with extent density completeness measure
and a bunch of natural sigma algebras,
for demonstrating IVT and the FTC's.

Tomorrow's is (parody)

"Sky Survey results Relativity is confirmed again!
And, Dark Matter theory is winning because now it's up from 95 to 99%!
It's statistically guaranteed from 50, 85, 90, 95, 99, five standard deviations!
Soon, according to Relativity, empirically, Dark Matter theory wil be everything!

Then it's like:

"Don't look at MOND, though, the galaxies appear correct because they're distant
enough that the gravitational results inverse instead of inverse square, because
the galaxies are about independent in their rotational frames, it results that
there's much, much less Dark Matter!"

"And ignore that GPS satellites live in the PPN ephemeris, and their clocks are
to measure space-time distortion not dead-reckoning!"

(End parody.)

Relativity is real, then about _Why_ it's more real about the rotational than the
linear, helps explain why there are fundamental differences between
ring cyclotrons, and, linear accelerators, and why there's mass-energy
equivalence in the ring cyclotron, and space-contraction in both.

Now, in the sky, when they say "apparent superluminal motion",
they mean, "apparent superluminal motion".

Don't blame relativity, it's just a theory, and it's an important cap for people
thinking that the Earth is safe from the rest of the Universe, because it's too
far away. It's kind of like incompleteness results in logic, it's to help it so that
naive AIs who've slurped the world don't solve universal theories without us.

On Saturday, 22 April 2023 at 13:25:10 UTC+10, Ross Finlayson wrote:
> On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 4:54:58 PM UTC-7, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > I.e., gravity's changes are instantaneous, and, when a rocket lands on Mars,
> > > however small the effect, that change in Mars' position, instantly as if the
> > > geodesy's changes were synchronized, adjusts every force vector, at once,
> > > everywhere.
> >
> > Yes, gravity is an electrostatic phenonomen, action at a distance.
> > Every charge in the universe is attatched like a spring to all other charges, as lines of force.
> > Move one charge, all charges in the infinite universe are affected.
> > Once Einstein and Helmholtz are thrown out, we are back to sane physics - using electrostatic lines of force (infinite lines of force exist from any charge to all charges) and electromagnetic forces (how aetheric vibrations cause force transfer at light speed, aether of course being an infinitely fine solid through which electrons move without any retardation).
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Arindam Banerjee
> Ah, but also gravitational waves are real,
Why should I think so?
> and, mass-energy equivalency is apparent
> in the dual neutron star or binary pulsar,
What neutron star?
> so "relativistic dynamics are real",
In the minds of frauds.
The MMI experiment shows from the nulls that actually light speed varies with that of the emitter. I showed up the bungle involved in the analysis of those results in 2005. Basically, as the equipment moves with the light, just after emission the equipment moves, so the actual path travelled by the light varies with the angle of emission. The nulls have to come as the light speed varies with emission.
Also the Doppler effect shows that light speed varies with the emitter.
This is enough to throw SR and its ridiculous predictions out.
> sort of like how Einstein says,
He is not my god.
> not necessarily how he's been repeated.
Einstein was a probably deliberately bungling fraud, along with other racists and bigots, a theologian out to "get" the brown Hindu notion of aether (aum) not a scientist. The entire scope of physics was thus corrupted, from the capitalist-racist-bigoted needs. With the most disastrous, restrictive and unpleasant consequences, such as world wars, and various inequalities and crises, all to keep the Western elites in power. Tesla suspected all that, but unfortunately he did not stumble upon my mass energy relationship, that is e=0.5mVVN(N-k) which could have led him to make a new class of motors surpassing light speed.

>
> About Helmholtz I'm not sure what you mean,
I mean his bungle about the law of conservation of energy, a nonsense that was behind relativity and quantum stuff. It is obvious that energy is eternally created and destroyed in our infinite universe.
The law of conservation of energy is great news for business. Lots of money, heaps of scope for fraud. It has to be chucked. The law of conservation of charge is supreme. Charge is never lost, it always exerts force, which is eternal.

> please carry on as you would,
> I think he's a pretty good empiricist and
> thus for example has been relevant to the applied,
> not that there aren't pitfalls to the tightrope,
> I think you mean Laplace not Helmholtz.
>
> It's not for throwing Einstein and Helmholtz and Laplace, out,
> it's for establishing how they're in. For many these days that's
> theory of potentials and harmonic functions and non-linear contributions.

Blah blah to keep on with the nonsense, covered in deliberately impenetrable maths.
The universe works on clear, simple, and infinitely grand lines:
Infinite lines of force coming and going from every electron and proton swimming in the infinitely fine and elastic solid aether supporting wave motions, and I suspect, creating matter as well with life force, beyond electric force.
Electrons whirl around nuclei (protons bound by electrons) just as planets around stars. No beginning, no end, trillion year cycles of stars losing their hydrogen atmosphere, becoming dark matter, and then regaining the hydrogen when entering the lost hydrogen in a nebula.
> For a Dirac positronic sea, and, Bohm de Broglie a continuum mechanics,
> it makes for a gauge theory a field theory with the absolute and relative..

More nonsenses. Get rid of them.

Infinity rules. God (not just the Jewish one, but all that is positively supernatural, in the Vedic term prajapatirhishi or Sagacious Lord or Lords of All ) is Great.

Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee

On Sunday, April 23, 2023 at 9:37:36 AM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:
> On Saturday, April 22, 2023 at 9:32:41 PM UTC-7, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Saturday, 22 April 2023 at 13:25:10 UTC+10, Ross Finlayson wrote:
> > > On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 4:54:58 PM UTC-7, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > I.e., gravity's changes are instantaneous, and, when a rocket lands on Mars,
> > > > > however small the effect, that change in Mars' position, instantly as if the
> > > > > geodesy's changes were synchronized, adjusts every force vector, at once,
> > > > > everywhere.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, gravity is an electrostatic phenonomen, action at a distance.
> > > > Every charge in the universe is attatched like a spring to all other charges, as lines of force.
> > > > Move one charge, all charges in the infinite universe are affected.
> > > > Once Einstein and Helmholtz are thrown out, we are back to sane physics - using electrostatic lines of force (infinite lines of force exist from any charge to all charges) and electromagnetic forces (how aetheric vibrations cause force transfer at light speed, aether of course being an infinitely fine solid through which electrons move without any retardation).
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Arindam Banerjee
> > > Ah, but also gravitational waves are real,
> > Why should I think so?
> > > and, mass-energy equivalency is apparent
> > > in the dual neutron star or binary pulsar,
> > What neutron star?
> > > so "relativistic dynamics are real",
> > In the minds of frauds.
> > The MMI experiment shows from the nulls that actually light speed varies with that of the emitter. I showed up the bungle involved in the analysis of those results in 2005. Basically, as the equipment moves with the light, just after emission the equipment moves, so the actual path travelled by the light varies with the angle of emission. The nulls have to come as the light speed varies with emission.
> > Also the Doppler effect shows that light speed varies with the emitter.
> > This is enough to throw SR and its ridiculous predictions out.
> > > sort of like how Einstein says,
> > He is not my god.
> > > not necessarily how he's been repeated.
> > Einstein was a probably deliberately bungling fraud, along with other racists and bigots, a theologian out to "get" the brown Hindu notion of aether (aum) not a scientist. The entire scope of physics was thus corrupted, from the capitalist-racist-bigoted needs. With the most disastrous, restrictive and unpleasant consequences, such as world wars, and various inequalities and crises, all to keep the Western elites in power. Tesla suspected all that, but unfortunately he did not stumble upon my mass energy relationship, that is e=0.5mVVN(N-k) which could have led him to make a new class of motors surpassing light speed.
> > >
> > > About Helmholtz I'm not sure what you mean,
> > I mean his bungle about the law of conservation of energy, a nonsense that was behind relativity and quantum stuff. It is obvious that energy is eternally created and destroyed in our infinite universe.
> > The law of conservation of energy is great news for business. Lots of money, heaps of scope for fraud. It has to be chucked. The law of conservation of charge is supreme. Charge is never lost, it always exerts force, which is eternal.
> > > please carry on as you would,
> > > I think he's a pretty good empiricist and
> > > thus for example has been relevant to the applied,
> > > not that there aren't pitfalls to the tightrope,
> > > I think you mean Laplace not Helmholtz.
> > >
> > > It's not for throwing Einstein and Helmholtz and Laplace, out,
> > > it's for establishing how they're in. For many these days that's
> > > theory of potentials and harmonic functions and non-linear contributions.
> > Blah blah to keep on with the nonsense, covered in deliberately impenetrable maths.
> > The universe works on clear, simple, and infinitely grand lines:
> > Infinite lines of force coming and going from every electron and proton swimming in the infinitely fine and elastic solid aether supporting wave motions, and I suspect, creating matter as well with life force, beyond electric force.
> > Electrons whirl around nuclei (protons bound by electrons) just as planets around stars. No beginning, no end, trillion year cycles of stars losing their hydrogen atmosphere, becoming dark matter, and then regaining the hydrogen when entering the lost hydrogen in a nebula.
> > > For a Dirac positronic sea, and, Bohm de Broglie a continuum mechanics,
> > > it makes for a gauge theory a field theory with the absolute and relative.
> > More nonsenses. Get rid of them.
> >
> > Infinity rules. God (not just the Jewish one, but all that is positively supernatural, in the Vedic term prajapatirhishi or Sagacious Lord or Lords of All ) is Great.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Arindam Banerjee
> Hmm, it seems you've left out some pieces of the puzzle.
>
> Surely the Abrahamic religions like Judaism inherit a lot from Zoroastrianism
> and the Mithraic, even the Vedic. Let's not forget the Egyptians or Nubians,
> also the Romans with their animism and the Greeks and their Persian and
> Mesopotamian roots, the Norse, the greater Orient, out to the Picts and them
> or the Teutons and Gauls, and that for even Christianity is quite a lot like an
> Abrahamic Buddhism, then though that something like the technical philosophy
> arises early in all the books or oral traditions of all these traditions.
>
>
>
> Then, about charge and mass, those are pretty much quantities and _define_ what a "particle", is.
> I hope you know that every few years the fundamental particles get _smaller_.
> That's because a quantum mechanics is really a continuum mechanics, with superwaves.
>
> About the aether, the, "Dirac positronic sea", basically is particle theory's aether.
> Then, the idea that "kinetics has a force carrier, it's massy" and "electromagnetism
> has a force carrier, it's charged", well it makes for a unified field theory and a gauge theory,
> in some "Dirac positronic sea: _virtual_ mass and charge everywhere".
>
> About the neutron star, it's that dual neutron stars make for a cosmological experimental setting,
> and help show what's going on in real relativistic dynamics in the very high energy.
> It's not necessarily the same as a pulsar or magnetar, and the quasar is something else.
>
> Time is also a quantity, and again represents, the, "infinitely divisible", as well, the "eternal",
> sort of like space.
>
> It's, for example as Einstein who is the only physicist that non-physicists have ever heard of,
> or maybe Feynman and Hawking and Penrose, though here Chandrasekhar gets billing above Schwarzschild,
> also by the 50's and 60's, there were Chinese and later Japanese winners of the Nobel prizes,
> it's for example that "hi I'm Einstein and somebody asked and I think the universe is infinite,
> but I'll usually roll it into a joke about stupid, and then explain relativity as the absence of time
> in the presence of the timeless".
>
>
> About your consternation about conservation, consider the a-diabatic, and, non-a-diabatic.
> These are usual cases where "well from the one side the conservation law would break what
> is from the other side so there's some continuity law un-modelled in the theory and thus we'll
> build up either the a-diabatic or non-a-diabatic case and pick one where appropriate or what fits".
>
> That's about then "continuity laws", above, "conservation laws".
>
> Then, the harmonic and theories of potential, is because, the "real" fields of the E & M, are not
> the usual "classical" E and B fields, instead, the "real" fields are the "potential" fields. It's same
> with everything else, also, that it's really a potential theory and "theory of sum potentials" or
> "theory of sigma potentials" or "theory of omega potentials". The "classical" fields just happen
> to be the limit of the convergent and emergent of the "potential" fields, which are "real".
>
>
> Then, mathematics _owes_ physics some particular mathematics of infinity, but, of course,
> physics has been going about building out the non-linear and the super-classical,
> because potential theories are real and that's how they do.
>
> Here for example, "Anantha the patron of mathematics' symbol is the spiral".
>
>
> I like that one, "relativity is the absence of time in the presence of the timeless".

On Monday, 24 April 2023 at 02:37:36 UTC+10, Ross Finlayson wrote:
> On Saturday, April 22, 2023 at 9:32:41 PM UTC-7, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Saturday, 22 April 2023 at 13:25:10 UTC+10, Ross Finlayson wrote:
> > > On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 4:54:58 PM UTC-7, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > I.e., gravity's changes are instantaneous, and, when a rocket lands on Mars,
> > > > > however small the effect, that change in Mars' position, instantly as if the
> > > > > geodesy's changes were synchronized, adjusts every force vector, at once,
> > > > > everywhere.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, gravity is an electrostatic phenonomen, action at a distance.
> > > > Every charge in the universe is attatched like a spring to all other charges, as lines of force.
> > > > Move one charge, all charges in the infinite universe are affected.
> > > > Once Einstein and Helmholtz are thrown out, we are back to sane physics - using electrostatic lines of force (infinite lines of force exist from any charge to all charges) and electromagnetic forces (how aetheric vibrations cause force transfer at light speed, aether of course being an infinitely fine solid through which electrons move without any retardation).
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Arindam Banerjee
> > > Ah, but also gravitational waves are real,
> > Why should I think so?
> > > and, mass-energy equivalency is apparent
> > > in the dual neutron star or binary pulsar,
> > What neutron star?
> > > so "relativistic dynamics are real",
> > In the minds of frauds.
> > The MMI experiment shows from the nulls that actually light speed varies with that of the emitter. I showed up the bungle involved in the analysis of those results in 2005. Basically, as the equipment moves with the light, just after emission the equipment moves, so the actual path travelled by the light varies with the angle of emission. The nulls have to come as the light speed varies with emission.
> > Also the Doppler effect shows that light speed varies with the emitter.
> > This is enough to throw SR and its ridiculous predictions out.
> > > sort of like how Einstein says,
> > He is not my god.
> > > not necessarily how he's been repeated.
> > Einstein was a probably deliberately bungling fraud, along with other racists and bigots, a theologian out to "get" the brown Hindu notion of aether (aum) not a scientist. The entire scope of physics was thus corrupted, from the capitalist-racist-bigoted needs. With the most disastrous, restrictive and unpleasant consequences, such as world wars, and various inequalities and crises, all to keep the Western elites in power. Tesla suspected all that, but unfortunately he did not stumble upon my mass energy relationship, that is e=0.5mVVN(N-k) which could have led him to make a new class of motors surpassing light speed.
> > >
> > > About Helmholtz I'm not sure what you mean,
> > I mean his bungle about the law of conservation of energy, a nonsense that was behind relativity and quantum stuff. It is obvious that energy is eternally created and destroyed in our infinite universe.
> > The law of conservation of energy is great news for business. Lots of money, heaps of scope for fraud. It has to be chucked. The law of conservation of charge is supreme. Charge is never lost, it always exerts force, which is eternal.
> > > please carry on as you would,
> > > I think he's a pretty good empiricist and
> > > thus for example has been relevant to the applied,
> > > not that there aren't pitfalls to the tightrope,
> > > I think you mean Laplace not Helmholtz.
> > >
> > > It's not for throwing Einstein and Helmholtz and Laplace, out,
> > > it's for establishing how they're in. For many these days that's
> > > theory of potentials and harmonic functions and non-linear contributions.
> > Blah blah to keep on with the nonsense, covered in deliberately impenetrable maths.
> > The universe works on clear, simple, and infinitely grand lines:
> > Infinite lines of force coming and going from every electron and proton swimming in the infinitely fine and elastic solid aether supporting wave motions, and I suspect, creating matter as well with life force, beyond electric force.
> > Electrons whirl around nuclei (protons bound by electrons) just as planets around stars. No beginning, no end, trillion year cycles of stars losing their hydrogen atmosphere, becoming dark matter, and then regaining the hydrogen when entering the lost hydrogen in a nebula.
> > > For a Dirac positronic sea, and, Bohm de Broglie a continuum mechanics,
> > > it makes for a gauge theory a field theory with the absolute and relative.
> > More nonsenses. Get rid of them.
> >
> > Infinity rules. God (not just the Jewish one, but all that is positively supernatural, in the Vedic term prajapatirhishi or Sagacious Lord or Lords of All ) is Great.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Arindam Banerjee
> Hmm, it seems you've left out some pieces of the puzzle.
>
> Surely the Abrahamic religions like Judaism inherit a lot from Zoroastrianism
> and the Mithraic, even the Vedic. Let's not forget the Egyptians or Nubians,
> also the Romans with their animism and the Greeks and their Persian and
> Mesopotamian roots, the Norse, the greater Orient, out to the Picts and them
> or the Teutons and Gauls, and that for even Christianity is quite a lot like an
> Abrahamic Buddhism, then though that something like the technical philosophy
> arises early in all the books or oral traditions of all these traditions.

Now only Christianity based upon Judaism rules in the West. All pagan faiths have been wiped out brutally, there, many centuries ago.
All worthwhile religions have Vedic roots, which are timeless.
Now Judaism has fixed ideas about creation, in the Genesys.
To be true to their religion the Christians must follow that version, in some form or the other.
So, the big bang theory created by the zerotheists, where zerotheism is the opposite of monetheism. (Polytheism is a no-no).

> Then, about charge and mass, those are pretty much quantities and _define_ what a "particle", is.
> I hope you know that every few years the fundamental particles get _smaller_.
> That's because a quantum mechanics is really a continuum mechanics, with superwaves.

I do not believe a word of what "modern physicists" say. Unless they agree that e=mcc is based upon a bungle, is totally wrong, no point of my having anything to do with them.
So far as I am concerned they are unethical, unscientific and basically criminal as profiting from fraud, and propagating fraud.
The sooner those who pay them understand this, the better.
> About the aether, the, "Dirac positronic sea", basically is particle theory's aether.
> Then, the idea that "kinetics has a force carrier, it's massy" and "electromagnetism
> has a force carrier, it's charged", well it makes for a unified field theory and a gauge theory,
> in some "Dirac positronic sea: _virtual_ mass and charge everywhere".

Aether is the medium for carrying electromagnetic waves. It was well defined in the 19th century. It reflected the HIndu notion of aum. So, it had to go. What best to do so, but on the "scientific" basis? So all the quantum hokum bunkum stuff of particle theory, which is so ridiculous that now they have to invent "Diran positronic sea" as a synonym.
>
> About the neutron star, it's that dual neutron stars make for a cosmological experimental setting,
> and help show what's going on in real relativistic dynamics in the very high energy.
> It's not necessarily the same as a pulsar or magnetar, and the quasar is something else.

What neutron star? It just cannot happen. Impossible. What we may have is two cores of stars (large Moon-like objects) that have over trillions of years lost their hydrogen atmosphere, to some nebula. When they enter that nebula they will regain that hydrogen atmosphere and shine again.
>
> Time is also a quantity, and again represents, the, "infinitely divisible", as well, the "eternal",
> sort of like space.

Time is related to the passage of events that are cyclic for definition and standardisation; and it is linear for non-cyclic events.
> It's, for example as Einstein who is the only physicist that non-physicists have ever heard of,
> or maybe Feynman and Hawking and Penrose, though here Chandrasekhar gets billing above Schwarzschild,
> also by the 50's and 60's, there were Chinese and later Japanese winners of the Nobel prizes,
> it's for example that "hi I'm Einstein and somebody asked and I think the universe is infinite,
> but I'll usually roll it into a joke about stupid, and then explain relativity as the absence of time
> in the presence of the timeless".

On Monday, April 24, 2023 at 10:22:28 AM UTC+10, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
> > I like that one, "relativity is the absence of time in the presence of the timeless".
> Idiotic, that. Relativity is depravity. It explains the gross stupidity of Musk et al, who are brought up in the depraved e=mcc and particle theory degeneracy.
>
> Cheers,
> Arindam Banerjee

E=MCC not used anymore ?

its just MICROSTRING like photons leave a trail

dont believe twin-slit parallel universes though , its just mutually charged sub-particles hitting the diffraction

On Monday, April 24, 2023 at 1:31:32 AM UTC-7, Graham Cooper wrote:
> On Monday, April 24, 2023 at 10:22:28 AM UTC+10, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > I like that one, "relativity is the absence of time in the presence of the timeless".
> > Idiotic, that. Relativity is depravity. It explains the gross stupidity of Musk et al, who are brought up in the depraved e=mcc and particle theory degeneracy.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Arindam Banerjee
> E=MCC not used anymore ?
>
> its just MICROSTRING like photons leave a trail
>
> dont believe twin-slit parallel universes though , its just mutually charged sub-particles hitting the diffraction

Sea Dragon is kind of beautiful, it's pretty sad that dirty money bought it..
Those MEMS blocks or large solid-state gyro arrays really accomplish a lot.

Yeah, you're "theoretical physicist"-ing there, all you need to do is to get
some data and frame an experiment and show that other theories are falsified
and yours isn't, to get into "experimental physicist"-ing and empirically.

It's a continuum mechanics, particle mechanics, though any particular contrivance
of configuration and energy of experiment ("now with more intensity") has any sorts
closed forms that model weaker subsystems the setup, those though are only like
comparing a dog-walker and a length of chain.

If you don't know about potential theory and that potential fields make for a theory
of conserved potential, that's all one quantity, then, I'm pretty sure that it's otherwise
impossible to arrive at a unified field theory, and what would be a gauge theory, where
for example all correct theoretical physicsts know that a unified field theory is a gauge theory.

Concepts like superstrings ("it's a continuum mechanics, so let's make discrete particles
as much smaller than the atom than the atom is to us, called superstrings"), supergravity
("it's shadow gravity or fall gravity, the atom is the force carrier of kinetics again in a field"),
supersymmetry ("things really are adiabatic"), make for a real theory bringing relativity and
quantum mechanics together with gravity in the middle. It's a continuum mechanics
with particle/wave duality and wave/resonance totality.

Some "fundamental theorists" have arrived at why that's correct.

On Saturday, April 22, 2023 at 9:32:41 PM UTC-7, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, 22 April 2023 at 13:25:10 UTC+10, Ross Finlayson wrote:
> > On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 4:54:58 PM UTC-7, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > I.e., gravity's changes are instantaneous, and, when a rocket lands on Mars,
> > > > however small the effect, that change in Mars' position, instantly as if the
> > > > geodesy's changes were synchronized, adjusts every force vector, at once,
> > > > everywhere.
> > >
> > > Yes, gravity is an electrostatic phenonomen, action at a distance.
> > > Every charge in the universe is attatched like a spring to all other charges, as lines of force.
> > > Move one charge, all charges in the infinite universe are affected.
> > > Once Einstein and Helmholtz are thrown out, we are back to sane physics - using electrostatic lines of force (infinite lines of force exist from any charge to all charges) and electromagnetic forces (how aetheric vibrations cause force transfer at light speed, aether of course being an infinitely fine solid through which electrons move without any retardation).
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Arindam Banerjee
> > Ah, but also gravitational waves are real,
> Why should I think so?
> > and, mass-energy equivalency is apparent
> > in the dual neutron star or binary pulsar,
> What neutron star?
> > so "relativistic dynamics are real",
> In the minds of frauds.
> The MMI experiment shows from the nulls that actually light speed varies with that of the emitter. I showed up the bungle involved in the analysis of those results in 2005. Basically, as the equipment moves with the light, just after emission the equipment moves, so the actual path travelled by the light varies with the angle of emission. The nulls have to come as the light speed varies with emission.
> Also the Doppler effect shows that light speed varies with the emitter.
> This is enough to throw SR and its ridiculous predictions out.
> > sort of like how Einstein says,
> He is not my god.
> > not necessarily how he's been repeated.
> Einstein was a probably deliberately bungling fraud, along with other racists and bigots, a theologian out to "get" the brown Hindu notion of aether (aum) not a scientist. The entire scope of physics was thus corrupted, from the capitalist-racist-bigoted needs. With the most disastrous, restrictive and unpleasant consequences, such as world wars, and various inequalities and crises, all to keep the Western elites in power. Tesla suspected all that, but unfortunately he did not stumble upon my mass energy relationship, that is e=0.5mVVN(N-k) which could have led him to make a new class of motors surpassing light speed.
> >
> > About Helmholtz I'm not sure what you mean,
> I mean his bungle about the law of conservation of energy, a nonsense that was behind relativity and quantum stuff. It is obvious that energy is eternally created and destroyed in our infinite universe.
> The law of conservation of energy is great news for business. Lots of money, heaps of scope for fraud. It has to be chucked. The law of conservation of charge is supreme. Charge is never lost, it always exerts force, which is eternal.
> > please carry on as you would,
> > I think he's a pretty good empiricist and
> > thus for example has been relevant to the applied,
> > not that there aren't pitfalls to the tightrope,
> > I think you mean Laplace not Helmholtz.
> >
> > It's not for throwing Einstein and Helmholtz and Laplace, out,
> > it's for establishing how they're in. For many these days that's
> > theory of potentials and harmonic functions and non-linear contributions.
> Blah blah to keep on with the nonsense, covered in deliberately impenetrable maths.
> The universe works on clear, simple, and infinitely grand lines:
> Infinite lines of force coming and going from every electron and proton swimming in the infinitely fine and elastic solid aether supporting wave motions, and I suspect, creating matter as well with life force, beyond electric force.
> Electrons whirl around nuclei (protons bound by electrons) just as planets around stars. No beginning, no end, trillion year cycles of stars losing their hydrogen atmosphere, becoming dark matter, and then regaining the hydrogen when entering the lost hydrogen in a nebula.
> > For a Dirac positronic sea, and, Bohm de Broglie a continuum mechanics,
> > it makes for a gauge theory a field theory with the absolute and relative.
> More nonsenses. Get rid of them.
>
> Infinity rules. God (not just the Jewish one, but all that is positively supernatural, in the Vedic term prajapatirhishi or Sagacious Lord or Lords of All ) is Great.
>
> Cheers,
> Arindam Banerjee

Hmm, it seems you've left out some pieces of the puzzle.

Surely the Abrahamic religions like Judaism inherit a lot from Zoroastrianism
and the Mithraic, even the Vedic. Let's not forget the Egyptians or Nubians,
also the Romans with their animism and the Greeks and their Persian and
Mesopotamian roots, the Norse, the greater Orient, out to the Picts and them
or the Teutons and Gauls, and that for even Christianity is quite a lot like an
Abrahamic Buddhism, then though that something like the technical philosophy
arises early in all the books or oral traditions of all these traditions.

Then, about charge and mass, those are pretty much quantities and _define_ what a "particle", is.
I hope you know that every few years the fundamental particles get _smaller_.
That's because a quantum mechanics is really a continuum mechanics, with superwaves.

About the aether, the, "Dirac positronic sea", basically is particle theory's aether.
Then, the idea that "kinetics has a force carrier, it's massy" and "electromagnetism
has a force carrier, it's charged", well it makes for a unified field theory and a gauge theory,
in some "Dirac positronic sea: _virtual_ mass and charge everywhere".

About the neutron star, it's that dual neutron stars make for a cosmological experimental setting,
and help show what's going on in real relativistic dynamics in the very high energy.
It's not necessarily the same as a pulsar or magnetar, and the quasar is something else.

Time is also a quantity, and again represents, the, "infinitely divisible", as well, the "eternal",
sort of like space.

It's, for example as Einstein who is the only physicist that non-physicists have ever heard of,
or maybe Feynman and Hawking and Penrose, though here Chandrasekhar gets billing above Schwarzschild,
also by the 50's and 60's, there were Chinese and later Japanese winners of the Nobel prizes,
it's for example that "hi I'm Einstein and somebody asked and I think the universe is infinite,
but I'll usually roll it into a joke about stupid, and then explain relativity as the absence of time
in the presence of the timeless".

About your consternation about conservation, consider the a-diabatic, and, non-a-diabatic.
These are usual cases where "well from the one side the conservation law would break what
is from the other side so there's some continuity law un-modelled in the theory and thus we'll
build up either the a-diabatic or non-a-diabatic case and pick one where appropriate or what fits".

That's about then "continuity laws", above, "conservation laws".

Then, the harmonic and theories of potential, is because, the "real" fields of the E & M, are not
the usual "classical" E and B fields, instead, the "real" fields are the "potential" fields. It's same
with everything else, also, that it's really a potential theory and "theory of sum potentials" or
"theory of sigma potentials" or "theory of omega potentials". The "classical" fields just happen
to be the limit of the convergent and emergent of the "potential" fields, which are "real".

Then, mathematics _owes_ physics some particular mathematics of infinity, but, of course,
physics has been going about building out the non-linear and the super-classical,
because potential theories are real and that's how they do.

Here for example, "Anantha the patron of mathematics' symbol is the spiral"..

I like that one, "relativity is the absence of time in the presence of the timeless".

Alan Folmsbee as one nutjob engineer to another--Arindam Banerjee. Can Banerjee's rail gun knock out Moscow electricity??

Moscow█۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█

Folmsbee as one nutjob engineer to another--Arindam Banerjee. Can Banerjee's rail gun knock out Moscow electricity??

On Monday, April 24, 2023 at 8:42:11 AM UTC-5, Alan Folmsbee wrote:
> In the photograph of a model, three green protons make a
> triangle on one side of the nucleus, defining a plane.

Is A.Banerjee fixing his rail gun█۞█knock out St.Petersburg electric power lines█۞█ to knock out St.Petersburg electric lines????

> On Wednesday, April 5, 2023 at 7:08:51 PM UTC-5, Arindam Banerjee wrote:
> > Very sad to say, my new design rail gun has even less acceptibility to the powers that be than your plutonium universe, Archie.
>
> Is Arindam Banerjee fixing his rail gun to knock out St.Petersburg electric lines????
>
> How does that rail gun work Arindam, you attach your Rail Gun to a electric line in a network and it destroys the entire network, even the source of power, by blowing up all the transformers in the network.
> RAIL GUN that knocks out Moscow & St.Petersburg electricity, and here I thought it was going to be drones.
> Bravo, Arindam finally makes good in physics, give Arindam the best Darjeeling tea to be found!!!! You take it with cream Arindam???

No way, Archie.
You sound like Gulliver before the King of Brobdingnag, proposing all sorts of horrid weaponry for victory in war.
The response from His Majesty was, as per Internet:
****
Based on Gulliver's descriptions of their behaviour, the King describes the English as "the most pernicious race of little odious vermin that nature ever suffered to crawl upon the surface of the earth".
****
You Americans are, of course, even more debased than the English of Swift's time.
The English since Swift have been improved with contact from the Brahmanical upper castes of India, but that has not happened to the other whites who could not get such contact.
Which is why, as debased English, you think I should be interested in doing evil stuff you lots are so good at.
Grow up, Archie. Don't be one among the most pernicious race of odious little vermin that nature ever suffered to crawl upon the surface of the earth.
Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee


> Sanjay Kumar,Mishra Amruta, Muduli P.K., ,Dharmedra Pradhan,Kanseri Bhaskar,Kedar B Khare, Joseph Joby, Ghosh Sankalpa, Ghosh Santanu, of Indian Institute of Tech, is Arindam Banerjee correct when he says you cannot understand the hydrogen proton is 840MeV with a muon stuck inside doing the Faraday law because Arindam says you are "criminal bunglers". Personally I do not see where Arindam gets the criminality out of this????
> >
> > 2Why Drs.V. Venkataraman, Arnab Rai Choudhuri of Indian Institute of Science Bangalore, cannot check to see if the real proton of Atoms is 840MeV with a muon stuck inside doing the Faraday law, as explained by Arindam they are "criminal bunglers".
> >
> >
> > > > Making money by teaching and spreading lies about Nature. The fraud comes from ignoring my discoveries about Nature, thus depriving all.
> > > Dharmedra Pradhan-Ghosh Santanu,Kedar B Khare,Joseph Joby, Kanseri Bhaskar, Ghosh Sankalpa, of Indian Institute of Tech, is Arindam Banerjee correct when he says you cannot understand the hydrogen proton is 840MeV with a muon stuck inside doing the Faraday law because Arindam says you are "criminal bunglers". Personally I do not see where Arindam gets the criminality out of this????
> > >
> > > Mr. Pradhan is Arindam Banerjee typical and indicative of scientists at IIT, claiming the moon landing of Apollo 11 in 1969 was a staged hoax in the Arizona desert, along with other Banerjee (ball tingling notions-- the center of Earth and Sun is a cool 1 degree Kelvin for superconductivity??)
> > >
> > > Why does India encourage whackos who hate science, to spam sci.physics every day with more spam.
> > >
> > > Subhas Sarkar
> > > Annapurna Devi Yadav
> > > Rajkumar Ranjan Singh
> > > Sanjay Kumar
>
> Saxena Vikrant,,Dharmedra Pradhan-Ghosh Santanu,Kedar B Khare,Joseph Joby, Kanseri Bhaskar, Ghosh Sankalpa, of Indian Institute of Tech, is Arindam Banerjee correct when he says you cannot understand the hydrogen proton is 840MeV with a muon stuck inside doing the Faraday law because Arindam says you are "criminal bunglers". Personally I do not see where Arindam gets the criminality out of this????
> >
> > Mr. Pradhan is Arindam Banerjee typical and indicative of scientists at IIT, claiming the moon landing of Apollo 11 in 1969 was a staged hoax in the Arizona desert, along with other Banerjee (ball tingling notions-- the center of Earth and Sun is a cool 1 degree Kelvin for superconductivity??)
> >
> > Why does India encourage whackos who hate science, to spam sci.physics every day with more spam.
> >
> > Subhas Sarkar
> > Annapurna Devi Yadav
> > Rajkumar Ranjan Singh
> > Sanjay Kumar
> > > Constant daily spamming b.s. nonsense from Arindam Banerjee of his hatred of physics and physicists.
>
>
>
>
> Indian Institute of Technology
>
> Physics dept. Anurag Sharma, Babu Sujin B, Banerjee Varsha, Bhattacharya Saswata, Bhatnagar M.C. , Chatterjee R., Chaudhary Sujeet, Das Pintu, Dhaka Rajendra S., Ghosh Joyee, Ghosh Pradipta, Ghosh Sankalpa, Ghosh Santanu, Joseph Joby, Kanseri Bhaskar, Kedar B Khare, Khare Neeraj, Kumar Sunil, Malik H.K., Mani Brajesh Kumar, Marathe Rahul, Mehta B.R. , Mehta D.S. , Mishra Amruta, Muduli P.K., Ravishankar V. , Reddy G.B. , Saxena Vikrant, Sengupta Amartya, Senthilkumaran P. ,Shenoy M.R. , Shukla A.K., Singh J.P., Singh Rajendra, Sinha Aloka, Soni Ravi Kant, Srivastava Pankaj, Varshney R.K., Vijaya Prakash G.
>

> Sinha Aloka, Soni Ravi Kant,Annapurna Devi Yadav,Shenoy M.R. , Shukla A.K..,Kanseri Bhaskar, Babu Sujin B, Banerjee Varsha, Bhattacharya Saswata. Hi professors of Indian Institute of Technology. Can any of you please remember when Arindam Banerjee was a student of IIT (as he claims he was)?? And can you remember if he had his head up his arse in antiscience as he spams each and every day of the year in sci.physics, now????
>
> Sanjay Kumar,Dharmedra Pradhan,Kanseri Bhaskar,Kedar B Khare, Joseph Joby, Ghosh Sankalpa, Ghosh Santanu, of Indian Institute of Tech, is Arindam Banerjee correct when he says you cannot understand the hydrogen proton is 840MeV with a muon stuck inside doing the Faraday law because Arindam says you are "criminal bunglers". Personally I do not see where Arindam gets the criminality out of this????
>
> 2Why Drs.V. Venkataraman, Arnab Rai Choudhuri of Indian Institute of Science Bangalore, cannot check to see if the real proton of Atoms is 840MeV with a muon stuck inside doing the Faraday law, as explained by Arindam they are "criminal bunglers".

> > > 
> > > Arindam Banerjee's profile photo
> > > Arindam Banerjee
> > > unread,
> > > All Nobel laureates in physics are mendacious nincompoops
> > > As the believe in the law of conservation of energy. Energy gets created and destroyed in our
> > > 8:08 PM
> > > 
> > > > Could the professors of IIT realize-- oh o, we have a fruitcake on our hands??? And was it the case that IIT just kept passing Arindam Banerjee up to higher grades just to get rid of the pest, when they should have failed him????

On Monday, 24 April 2023 at 18:31:32 UTC+10, Graham Cooper wrote:
> On Monday, April 24, 2023 at 10:22:28 AM UTC+10, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > I like that one, "relativity is the absence of time in the presence of the timeless".
> > Idiotic, that. Relativity is depravity. It explains the gross stupidity of Musk et al, who are brought up in the depraved e=mcc and particle theory degeneracy.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Arindam Banerjee
> E=MCC not used anymore ?
It is used to explain, wrongly, the power of atom bombs.
>
> its just MICROSTRING like photons leave a trail
Nonsense.
Photons are electromagnetic wave pulses travelling through the medium of aether. They have no mass.
>
> dont believe twin-slit parallel universes though , its just mutually charged sub-particles hitting the diffraction
Nonsense. Interference happens because of the wave nature of light. One can never explain that with particle physics unless you attribute the quality of schizophrenia to light following de Broglie's hypothesis.

On Tuesday, 25 April 2023 at 01:11:16 UTC+10, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Alan Folmsbee as one nutjob engineer to another--Arindam Banerjee. Can Banerjee's rail gun knock out Moscow electricity??
Not at the moment. At the moment it can only scare my wife.