110403 Thornhill, NPA webcast - Electric Universe chat.txt (Howell came in 30 minutes late to the webcast) Welcome to your Web Meeting. James Sorensen: W Bob de Hilster: Pal, good question! It asks for an absolute. Length, time, mass and force all all assigned. James Sorensen: We are all electric people, read the Body Electric and other similar books Mark Spann: and Rischard Carrrington provided the empirical evidence in 1859 to prove Herschel correct Our PAL Asija: James! If Greg is an electric person, you have already fulfilled his wishes. Mark Spann: ah, yes, The Great Comet Venus ! Our PAL Asija: I think the term electric universe is at least as important as magnetic universe. Mark Spann: I am secretly hoping that Tony Peratt shows up in Maryland in July for NPA18 Our PAL Asija: Mark your hope is no longer secret Mark Spann: ooops Mark Spann: i.e judged by Natural Philoso phers Ammon: I would like references for the flash before the comet impact, and the comet tale on Venus. Our PAL Asija: Mark! Perhaps judged by NPA Mark Spann: Amoon....those references are all in the public domain... Ammon: viewers shouldn't have to hunt for authoritative references. Paulina: Ammon, here is a 5 second video of Deep Impact: Paulina: http://www.youtube.com/w​atch?v=dryvDlB1hWA James Sorensen: Read through the Deep impact articles here thundhttp://thunderbolts​.info/tpod/00subjectx.ht​m#Comets James Sorensen: oops, the thundhttp: should be http: Mark Spann: Wal, does the aether, and EM field provide the feedback mechanism required to explain the phenomena that Newton alluded to in quote you posted in slide22? dehilster has left the meeting. Attendee9 has left the meeting. Mark Spann: Steven Crothers could explain that well I think Greg Volk: Poor Uncle Albert. We'll mis him. Greg Volk: miss Our PAL Asija: I didn't know Al had borthers. Our PAL Asija: Greg but since you exist,I stand corrected. Mark Spann: So, does this mean that cause and effect may never be violated (quantum theory aside), since the most popular sci-fi theme is time travel? Our PAL Asija: I think under some conditions effect can precede the cause Our PAL Asija: especially when the time dimension is obviated. Curtis Camell has left the meeting. Mark Spann: Wal, does the aether, and EM field provide the feedback mechanism required to explain the phenomena that Sir Oliver Lodg alluded to in quote you posted in slide 27 ? kc0itf: Look up the work of Bill Gaede and his thoughts on the structure of atoms! www.youstupidrelativist.​com Mark Spann: i.e Yin-Yang? Mark Spann: and, of course whenever the math needs to be elucidated, Gaede always defers to the Tasmanian Devil, Stephen Crothers BobG has left the meeting. Mark Spann: Wal, are ALL comets blasted rocky mantle from planetary/moon bodies within our Solar Sytem? Mark Spann: comet nuclei, that is? grizmar has left the meeting. Mark Spann: and a slight dipolar EM field I believe Tim Malone has left the meeting. David de Hilster: Yipee! Energy is a concept. David de Hilster: Agreed. Mark Spann: energy requires the presence of matter....can we quote you as the author of that statement, Wal? Our PAL Asija: How was the universe created without some form of energy? David de Hilster: Making my documentary "Einstein Wrong", I often get the equation is E = mc^2 wrong? I ask people: what is E? Mark Spann: the universe is created by INTENT alone, is my gut feel about the matter ted banta: breathe David Our PAL Asija: So either intent is energy or has access to energy or nexus to some energy David de Hilster: Neutrinos exist because of the application of special relativity to decay or radioactivity. Mark Spann: is the longitudanl frce the "scalar" force, or field? David de Hilster: I'm continually surprised that no one studies the origin of the neutrino. It ONLY exists because of Special Ralativity. David de Hilster: If you believe the neutrino to be correct, you have to accept its origin and special relativity as being correct. I do not. David de Hilster: Call the particle something else - aether particle or something. Our PAL Asija: Rose by any other name David de Hilster: Pal: why don't dissidents bother to study the origin of the neutrino when they poo-poo many other things? It's surprising. Curt: Isn't big G really just a result of our particular selection of definition of meter, etc. With proper definitions, big G is 1. David de Hilster: Yea: G is not a constant! Ask my dad! Our PAL Asija: That's because most people intuitively agree with you Ammon: So our obstacle is that Big G works so well to calculate how projectiles from earth are going to respond celestial bodies on paths around the solar system, no? David de Hilster: G is a fudge factor we use on the SURFACE of the earth. Our PAL Asija: Like father like son Mark Spann: does this variablity of Big "G" explain why they can measure such different values of gravity at sean and on land, continental shelves etc, or is that simply due to electrical conductivty differences between salty seawater and earth mantle? Mark Spann: at sea* and land I meant to type Richard Jesch: This is so cool. Great new concepts. Well, new to me. Woot Mark Spann: is the lorentz force what you are refering to , Wal? Our PAL Asija: David! according to your emoticons, seems like your have sudden mood swings. Perhaps you should see a psychologist or worse Psychatrist Richard Jesch: I think not Mark. Robert Kemp: Mark, there is no experiment that has been recorded where Big "G" is anything but 6.6720e-11. Only crackpots consider the Gravitational Constant to be a variable. David Kuhness: Where does the gravitational field come from that induces the dipoles? Carol B has left the meeting. David de Hilster: I had an analyst for almost 2 years while living in Rio. It helped me immensely! Imagine me BEFORE therapy! Our PAL Asija: How can crackpots (like me) be sure that they/we are crackpots Bob de Hilster: Robert, that makes me a crackpot! Mark Spann: and me too ! Our PAL Asija: But you are still as good as ever Goran Mitic: David, neutrino is pure math invention (particle with energy but without mass) made by early nuclear physics. kc0itf: me too, is that a bad thing? Robert Kemp: crackpots pose theories without mathematical or experimental proof of their ideas. Richard Jesch: You have nothing to worry about Pal. David de Hilster: Goran: nice to hear someone else who has looked into the neutrino. The neutrino is the poster child for special relativity. Mark Spann: thinking out load.... What is Don Scott presenting at NPA18? Mark Spann: out loud kc0itf: Rob, why are you obsessed with math? I like EMPIRICAL data best! Richard Jesch: Z-Pinch is well known to Hot Fusion physics. Curt: Empirical - whoever has the biggest empire wins. I prefer math. Mark Spann: Medusa's hair Our PAL Asija: If neutrinos have energy but no mass then e = mc squared is or must be wrong David de Hilster: Mark: ask Greg Volk or Dave Talbot H Ricker: Rob, by your definition, Einstein is a crac kpot!!! Robert Kemp: kc0itf, it is not just math it is the Newton Method that works, conceptualize, do the math, then do the empirical data; then repeat, repeat, repeat. Ken Seto: David, how does the neutrino is the poster child of SR? Mark Spann: Oh, don't worry, I plan to in maryland, to pick David and Greg's brain on a whole bunch of stuff....don't worry H Ricker: Eunstein has no mathematical proof and no empirical evidence, just confusioning claims. Goran Mitic: David, neutrino is pure illusion as many others, including Einstein's relativity,Quantum physics, Atom model ect. Our PAL Asija: Did you catch the name of the Israeli scientist who proposed MOND? David de Hilster: The neutrino only exists because Pauli applied special relativity to decay cases (radioactivity). David de Hilster: If you take the neutrino away, you don't need to use relativistic mechanics in particle accelerators. Robert Kemp: Ricker, based on that definition Einstein was not a crackpot; he convinced Arthur Eddington to gather the empirical data for his GR concepts. Our PAL Asija: David I think, we know your position on neutrinos David de Hilster: Again, don't hang your theory on an illusion created by relativity. Mark Spann: great work, Manking in Amnesia Lou: Robert - What is found true at one level of structural complexity may not be true at another. Mark Spann: Mankind* H Ricker: Rob, I thought you would say that. they only difference detween a crackpot and a scientist is social definition. dahlenaz has left the meeting. Ammon: Supporting ideas by referencing literature within a fringe academia is not substantial. Offering narrative on youtube videos is not emperical. I'm not saying it is wrong, I just am frustrated by the lack of references. Mark Spann: WOW Mark Bender: hank you! Our PAL Asija: Thank you for a great presentation mikeAndrescavage: applause longcircuit: Thank you, Wal. Casual Observer: Thank you, GREAT Greg Volk: Yay! Excellent Stiennon: wow2 dehilster: Thanks! Lou: Thank you, Wal. Very inspiring. Hal Lefferts: Thank you. Ammon: Thanks Wal. Mark Bender: That was "Thank"! Thomas Findlay: Thanks Wal ... great! chuck: thanks!! David Kuhness: Thanks Wal for this excellent presentation! Jim: Fascinating presentation! Goran Mitic: Right!Radioactivity as we think of now is absolutely impossible. Mark Spann: Wal, is this this presentation you just gave the basic framework of your upcoming keynote speech at NPA18? Jerry Sawyer: Thank you, sir. helen taylor: Thank you Wal, very pertinent to my presentaion of True Planetary Motions. Samwaru: Thanks, will need to download :) Mark Spann: EU = The New Mainstream longcircuit has left the meeting. shmuelw: Thanks Wal for your challenging talk. How do you see the breakup from the Polar configuration to the current Solar planetary orbits? Casual Observer: Keep on chipping away, the mainstream can be dragged into the light James Sorensen: "Science advances funeral by funeral" Mark Spann: yes David de Hilster: Mics anyone? Mark Spann: EU = The New Mainstream kc0itf: References? Do you need God to sign off on a statement that he created reality? You may be waiting for some time... Ammon: I like that James! Our PAL Asija: My Bishop says nothing is impossible for God. Even changing the minds of the main sreamers David Talbott: Dave, I might offer an opinion here Paul Sheridan: Wal: Mainstream? Vested interests? To increase the general awareness, and acceptance, of any "new" science such as The Thunderbolts Project, might be the offering of a general pragmatism. I have been thinking in terms of everything from weather/climate prediction (Piers Corbyn!) to mineral deposition to propulsion systems. In the alternative, the Big Bang pragmatizes next to nothing. Any thought along these lines, or is this way off? (Prof Gold and "abiogenic" hydrocarbons?) Mark Spann: that is why Velikovsky got the treatment he got back in the 1950's, and in 1974 at AAAS Richard: When I asked CERN what happens if they dont find the Higgs boson, they said well we will have to admit we have understood nothing and have to start from scratch again. David de Hilster: Again, we have mics available for comments from those attending. Charles Norman has left the meeting. Mark Bender: How do i Take part in a video comment David? H Ricker: David, I have lots of comments but I would like others to speak first. Bob de Hilster: I would like amike, butmy connectionis bad. Lou: We are all Galileo's to some degree Mark Spann: well, if Eric Lerner's Focus Fusion project is succesful, EU will become mainstream by necessity and default Our PAL Asija: what's the evidence for abiogentic hydrocarbons Lou: Shall we laugh or shall we cry David Talbott: Mark Bender, I'd be happy to have the mic go directly to you after I've introduced you. Mark Spann: Truth always trupms lies and delusion, no matter how institutionally entrenched David de Hilster: Mark, I pass you a microphone and you aacept. Mark Bender: i'd love to give it a try Mark Spann: Truth always trump s lies and delusion, no matter how institutionally entrenched Mark Bender: I am not ertain ho w to do this on my end Thomas Findlay: Perhaps we must wait till something physical in the heavens occurs that the mainstream just cannot explain. H Ricker: The essence of the problem is scientific conformity. Hartwig Thim: If gravitational force is related to electric force, is it possible to calculate the speed of gravitational waves from the speed of electrical waves (not electromagnetical waves!)? Ken Seto: In order to change the mainstream you must perform experiments that refute the claims of relativity. The experiment in the following link is suggested: http://www.modelmechanic​s.org/2008experiment.pdf​ Thomas Findlay: Well, that's over and above what they cannot explain already and is obviously electrical in nature. H Ricker: Mianstream is what wikipedia defends. David de Hilster: Forget the mainstream. They will not change. We need to change science and the public and scientists and students will follow. dehilster: that was the briefest, most concise, statement I've ever seen David Talbott deliver! David de Hilster: dehilster, are you me? Joe has left the meeting. Hal Lefferts: lol Mark Spann: Mainstream Science is the Emperor with no Clothes H Ricker: Mainstream is what the socialociology of the scientific community imposes on the scolial culture at large. David de Hilster: I only believe in 3 dimensions but now I am in doubt with so many dehilster's here. Mark Spann: hi Mark Spann: hello Mark Bender Mark Bender: hi Mark! :) Our PAL Asija: Yes I can Bob de Hilster: Mt. Thornhill. Tanks for the presentation. Hope to talk to you sometime. My connection won't let me do it today. Greg Volk: Yup, we hear you. Our PAL Asija: YES Bob de Hilster: Bye! David Talbott: You're on Mark Mark Spann: yes, you are loud and clear Mark Greg Volk: Mark, go ahead Ammon: We hear you Roger Anderton has left the meeting. Our PAL Asija: and see you too Casual Observer has left the meeting. H Ricker: he is breaking up here. Goran Mitic: Mainstream science is created and designed to make us confused,it is totally controlled. Please, do not waste time trying to change it. It is impossible! Stephen Flaig: cutting in and out here Mark Spann: Don Scott's ELECTRIC SKY is the definitive book for understanding the Sun s bryant: Let's be careful in how we refer to "mainstream" scientist. I have been helped by more than one who would fall into the category of "mainstream." David de Hilster: If it breaks up, reload the video or refresh your browser. David de Hilster: http://www.einsteinwrong​.comfor my documentary coming out next year and hitting the festivals. Greg Volk: Thanks, Mark Mark Spann: Hannes Alven and Ralph Juerges of course are to be credited with the basically correct electrical circuit of how the Sun works Mark Bender: i have paused here David Talbott: Many thanks, Mark H Ricker: The criticusm of mainstream derives from their arrogant intolerant attitude. They refuse to prsent prrof of their claims and dismiss empirical evidence against their beliefs. Kevin Merrell: Good strength to you, Mark Mark Spann: thank you Mark Bender Bob de Hilster has left the meeting. Goran Mitic: Most of mainstream scientist are sincere, they are just not aware of the game which they are in. Mark Spann: agrred Chuck eskot has left the meeting. H Ricker: Goran, I think you are largly right about the ignorance of many scientists. Mark Spann: Wal, does the aether, and EM field provide the feedback mechanism required to explain the phenomena that Newton alluded to in quote you posted in slide22? Paul Sheridan: Wal: To increase a the general awareness, and acceptance, of any "new" science such as The Thunderbolts Project, might be the offering of a general pragmatism. I have been thinking in terms of everything from weather/climate prediction (Piers Corbyn!) to mineral deposition to propulsion systems. In the alternative, the Big Bang pragmatizes next to nothing. Any thought along these lines, or is this way off? (Prof Gold and "abiogenic hydrocarbons"?) Mark Bender: thank you for the oppurtunity Stephen Flaig: Is Mark's work available on the nat geog website? s bryant: @Harry. I think that we could say that people on both sides of fence would claim it is people on the other side who are dismissing evidence. henry broadbent: henry broadbent here Wal has anyone measured the forces between magnetized globes exchanging charge in a Birkland terella Mark Spann: Wal, does the aether, and EM field provide the feedback mechanism required to explain the phenomena that Newton alluded to in quote you posted in slide22? Mark Bender: Thank you D Talbott for your warm introduction again! :) Mark Spann: Wal, does the aether, and EM field provide the feedback mechanism required to explain the phenomena that Newton alluded to in quote you posted in slide22? Our PAL Asija: The questio is in the chat Goran Mitic: Ricker, we all have been played for such a long time. Mark Bender: Stephen. I don't think they are making the show available online just yet. :( I wish they would. Mark Spann: Thanks Wal Stiennon has left the meeting. H Ricker: Again, it is the intoreranant arrogance that is troubling. The existence of dark matter and energy is prima facia evidence that tradition coslology is false. Phil UK: Just watched Dr. Pollack's Water Energy and Life on Youtube. He talks about newly discovered double layer charge separation in water, like Plasma. Well worth watching and his net radio interview too. Greg Volk: Ralph Sansbury will attend NPA-18. Stephen Flaig: @Mark Bender, have you read Cardona's works? Jerry Sawyer: I get a charge out of being an electoret. Mark Bender: I have not. What does it regard? Our PAL Asija: Can you repeat the question before answering it? Mark Spann: Wal, if Eric Lerner's Focus Fusion project is succesful, do you feel EU will become mainstream by necessity and default within the science and academia? paul schroeder: Mark Bender, I used my different concept of the suns energy source to simplify introduction to my ideas in 'gravity from the gounnd up' paper from npa 17 Paul Sheridan: Thank you Wal. I was pursuing the "mainstream" issue. Mark Spann: Wal, if Eric Lerner's Focus Fusion project is succesful, do you feel EU will become mainstream by necessity and default within the science and academia? Stan Byers: Does the elec univ. define an eather? Mark Bender: I'd love to read that! Stephen Flaig: @ Mark Bender his HUGE books: God Star, Flare Star, Primordial Star: incredibly wonderful. Takes up where Velikovsky left off/ blends with new discoveries in plasma physics (Saturn Theory) Mark Bender: oh, Thank you. I will look that up. Cheers! :) Paul Sheridan has left the meeting. Hal Lefferts: Fascinating ideas, will stay tuned. Thank you all! Hal Lefferts has left the meeting. Shirley has left the meeting. Mel has left the meeting. David de Hilster: anyone want a mic for commenting or asking a question? H Ricker: me dahlenaz: Here is a question: s bryant: [Q] Is there a maximum velocity with the Elec. Univ, as is the case with Relativity theory, where it is defined as c? Rev Nick Sykes: Do you think that in order to get EU ideas into the mainstream, schoolteachers and college lecturers might be key, in providing special lectures to young students who still understand the ideals of science and have not yet been corrupted by "big science"? Stephen Flaig: Earl Milton said a neutrino could trvel through a light year a lead before it would even know something was there. Stan Byers: Do neutrinos have mass?? Steve: yes David de Hilster: To Wall from David de Hilster: would you be accepting of calling the aether something other than a neutrino? Mark Spann: Wal, does this variablity of Big "G" explain why they can measure such different values of gravity at sea and on land, continental shelves etc, or is that simply due to electrical conductivty differences between salty seawater and earth mantle? H Ricker: Pass me mic David. Bob Kerr: Your assumption of an attractive force is backwards. f Stephen Flaig: @ Rev Nick Sykes, I work in a school district. The days are so short and the curriculum so tight, the best I could get the science teachers to do was mention "there are other theories" tiospaye1: Are these discussions archived anywhere? Michael Caplan: given that gravity is affected by charge, it should be expected that Mercury's G is high for that reason - being near the sun Do you expect the satellite going into orbit around Mercury to detect a change in G given its eliptical orbit? Mark Spann: plasma "Z" pinch David de Hilster: Neutrinos don't exist. Aether should be there but called aether since neutrinos don't exist. Stephen Flaig: that, and most science teachers simply refuse to look at the material. Mark Spann: wal, are those cores layered by Marklund Convection, or are the cores "isodense? Mark Bender: this model of the satr is a revelation and will really hsake up the science taken for granted at the moment Mark Bender: opps... star tiospaye1: No, this is correct internal model of Star: http://www.steinerbooks.​org/detail.html?session=​347dde487ad0773e9f599b1a​202e9276&id=085440726x David de Hilster: Neutrinos are seductive to dissidents but are wrong. See http://neutrinos.autodya​mics.org Robert Kemp: Mark, the acceleration of gravity from the surface of the earth towards the center of the earth is (g = 9.8 m/s^2), and since the earth is not perfectly spherical, mountainous terrain will have a different little(g) on sea, than on land. Stephen Flaig: lag helen taylor: the Sun (True Planetary Motions and Rhythmic Climatic Changes) operates as a giant COIL in its orbit with tthe planets crossing it at right angles at all times. This is one of the fundamental LAWS f my theory on TRUE PLANETARY MOTIONS. Bob Kerr: Force is comppression. ​ ​ Greg Volk: Harry is very hot Greg Volk: Too LOUD!! s bryant: Harry - Overmodulating Marianna has left the meeting. Stephen Flaig: dial back that mike Steve: this always happens gain too high mikeAndrescavage has left the meeting. Greg Volk: Still hot Steve: still too hot! Goran Mitic: Robert,g is less near volcanos! Mark Spann: Wal,can we quote you as the author of the statement...... "Energy requires Matter" Stephen Flaig: my ears are bleeding! Steve: can't understand him Ammon: move mic further from your mouth Our PAL Asija: Does Neutrino have an antiparticle companion? Steve: shattering the mic David de Hilster: Turn your own volume down to help. THen turn it up. Thomas Findlay: H Ricker ... turn your mic gain down. RobertL has left the meeting. Steve: my volume is low Our PAL Asija: Harry's mic is still over driven shmuelw has left the meeting. David de Hilster: I give up on this neutrino thing. My goodness. Please people, study this because "accepting". Wall says that aether particles exist and need to exist "call them what you may". Mark Spann: Wal, can we quote you as the author of the statement...... "Energy requires Matter" ? Or did someone else originate that statement? marz15 has left the meeting. Stan Byers: Do attractive forces exist in the elec. univ. ?? Steve: yes Steve: biot savart forces Steve: long-range attraction between Birkeland filaments Mark Spann: H ricker - we are getting lots of background noise from you, I think Hartwig Thim has left the meeting. Steve: yes Bill Lucas: Will Hal's slides be available online? Jim Rogers has left the meeting. Kathleen has left the meeting. David Talbott: Harry, turn your speakers off Our PAL Asija: I hear an alien in a UFA Rev Nick Sykes: To Stephen Flag. Agreed - same is true in most places. I work in the Cayman Islands. However I was able to do a 20-minute (!) presentation at a University conference here last month. There was lots of interest, not necessarily sustained for days after the talk but at least it was a start. David de Hilster: For why neutrinos don't exist and why we should call this aether particles, see: http://neutrinos.autodyn​amics.org tiospaye1: No matter 'inside' a star including of course our Sun. Is anti-space, or counterspace, if you will: Mark Spann: Wal, can we quote you as the author of the statement...... "Energy requires Matter" ? Or did someone else originate that statement? tiospaye1: http://www.steinerbooks.​org/detail.html?id=97819​02636023 dehilster: H RICKER, please mute David de Hilster: Neutrino detectors detect "false hits". This is why they spend so much money on shielding them. Mark Bender: this shape is what one sees in the corona during the eclipse Mark Spann: thank you H Ricker...much better audio now Mark Spann: Wal, can we quote you as the author of the statement...... "Energy requires Matter" ? Or did someone else originate that statement? Greg Volk: Better, but still hot. Thomas Findlay: Much better on the mic gain. Ammon: much better, stil loud. helen taylor: the Sun (True Planetary Motions and Rhythmic Climatic Changes) operates as a giant COIL in its orbit with tthe planets crossing it at right angles at all times. This is one of the fundamental LAWS f my theory on TRUE PLANETARY MOTIONS. Richard has left the meeting. Mark Spann: Wal, can we quote you as the author of the statement...... "Energy requires Matter" ? Or did someone else originate that statement? s bryant: Wal, very nice job on the look-and-feel, as well as the level of content, of the presentation. Robert Kemp: Wal [Q]: Current cosmological models such as the FLWR metric model the universe without electricity and magnetism, why do you think this is so? Goran Mitic: David, ether is medium and its vibrations we consider particles. Particle approach is all wrong! David de Hilster: For EU people at the NPA 18 conference, see: http://eu.worldnpa.org Steve Jackson: Is it conceivable that Einstein was put forward as disinformation agent, to put Physics onto a dead alley? Mark Spann: OK, great Wal Bob Kerr: The steady state is pressure maintaning the compression of exerted force equalibrium. Steve Mathews: This is wonderful David! Hope you do this again soon! H Ricker: Rob, The current scientific paradigm is that gravity is the only operative force on the scale of the universe. paul schroeder has left the meeting. Mark Spann: yes, Steve Jackson, I belive Einstein, just like Darwin, was promoted by the Powers That Be, to mislead the brightest minds down a dead-end street chuck: [Q] You mentioned that there are better ways to get energy out of the atom than by Eric Lerner's Fusion work. chuck: what is that way? Mark Spann: Wal, do you ever fear being drug before a AAAS court hearing and flogged like Sagan did rto Velikovsky in 1974 ? helen taylor: Wal, exactly,(mathematical equations) that is why the challenge for my theory on True Planetary Motions. Thomas Findlay: Wal: what would your concept of gravity shielding be - if, you think it would be possible to achieve? Mark Spann: Wal, do you ever fear being drug before a AAAS court hearing and flogged like Sagan did rto Velikovsky in 1974 ? ......tongue in cheek attempt at humour Michael Caplan: How about my earlier Q. helen taylor: Falsifiability, that is. Mark Spann: spelling? Stephen Flaig: Sagan later apologized for that rude behavior. H Ricker: The current scientific assumption being that gravity is the only operative force means that dominate paradigm must overrule other ideas so that they can not be entertained as "s cientific". Mark Spann: Kervin? Bob Kerr: Atraction is not the source of force. David Talbott: Louis Kervan, incredible and highly compelling work on biological transmutation of elements. Steve: facinating Steve: chickens and eggshells Our PAL Asija: How do they know that when neutrinos are electric when they pass through everything including our instruments we use to study them Bob Kerr: Force is compression. Mark Spann: Wal, do you ever fear being drug before a AAAS court hearing and flogged like Sagan did to Velikovsky in 1974 ? ......tongue in cheek attempt at humour Our PAL Asija: I like presentations like this that make me think. MarkS: Does the EU define or require a new atomic model in general? helen taylor: Then the Giant "COIL" of te sun's orbital path, creating gravitational force trapping the planets is the core of my theory, and makes sense, thanks Wal. David Kuhness: Wal, I agree that the gravitational force is some sort of net force effect coming from the electrical polarization of matter (with some minimal charge separation as seen in every atom). But the explanation about induced electrical dipoles through a gravitational field lets the question left, where does this initial gravitational field come from, that attracts the heavier protons more than the lighter electrons from the atoms forming the dipole towards the center of a sphere (= a celestial body). I think that attraction between neutral bodies can 'easily' be explained as some sort of dipole-dipole attraction (in some more complex form) of every neutral matter with some minimum charge separation inside without needing the initial gravitational field attraction inside a sphere towards Michael Caplan: Given that gravity is affected by charge, it should be expected that Mercury's G is high for that reason - being near the sun Do you expect the satellite going into orbit around Mercury to detect a change in G given its eliptical orbit? H Ricker: Michael, Another question would be does that effect explain the precession of its orbit? Bill Lucas: David Kuhness - see my derivation of the force of gravity from dipole-dipole interactions for NPA 18. Mark Spann: Observation and Intent are 2 sides of the same coin James Sorensen has left the meeting. Jim: Helen, do you have a website? David Kuhness: ...attraction inside a sphere towards the center. I just want to suggest to you to abandon the term 'gravitational field' and 'gravitational induced dipoles' in your explanation on slide 39. Mark Spann: yeah, they set Velikovsky up, did they not? helen taylor: Absolutely Jim: http://www.discoveryofth​ecentury.webs.com Jim: Thanks Helen! Mark Spann: that is a great article on Mercury Wal, Mark Spann: http://www.holoscience.c​om/news.php?article=e511​t4z2 helen taylor: Is the distance to the sun relative to a planet's core density? KuhnKat has left the meeting. Mark Spann: Wal, do you and dave Talbott discuss Comet Elenin between yourselves? Stan Byers: Wal, Do attractive forces exist in EU ?? David Talbott has left the meeting. helen taylor: Do leave a commentary Jim, upon visiting, I will present at this NPA18, look eagerly toward making substantial links! Ken Seto has left the meeting. Mark Spann: Yes, I agree they want the EU model discredited by false predictions Bob Kerr: Vision is the reflection of light. helen taylor: Are the sunspots 11 year cycle about to climax within a year or so? Ammon: Wal, Though math can be used to make flawed models, can the models you are discussing be explained with mathematical models? If so what luck have you had publishing those? Mark Spann: Thanks for everything Wal dehilster has left the meeting. Richard Jesch: Wow, Thanks for staying up for this Wal! Jim: Wal, does the work of Patrick Geryls have any efficacy? David de Hilster: Yes! Australia was too displaced during the earth growing. helen taylor: There is perfect order in te universe....no chaos. Mark Bender: Thank you so much. This is the future of cosmology. Bob Kerr: Electrons are are formed from photons. Marko72 has left the meeting. chuck: [Q] Where do "photons" fit in the EU model? David de Hilster: Mark: there are also many more scienctists in the NPA that have great ideas. Amazing people all around. Mark Spann: go ahead, spill the beans on it, Wal ! helen taylor: Thanks Wal, some thought this (sun spots) had something to do with the GLOBAL WARMING scare farce. Mark Spann: subtrons Mark Bender: I am very excited to be there! Mark Spann: Is Piers Corbyn an EU advocate, Wal? chuck: [Q] wait! what was the more 'mind blowing' consequences you mentioned? Our PAL Asija: Quite the contrary sometimes I think all real particles are virtual. Ammon: If electrons are not there, couldn't you re-design an electron scanning microscope with electrons out of the picture? Mark Bender: Thanks all! How wonderful! :) Mark Spann: delay is very bad Dowdye has left the meeting. helen taylor: The look everywher except teh sun, ice samples, tree barks, etc. LOOK UP! My theory will explain alot of cosmology unanswered questions by the TREU PLANETARY MOTIONS model. Greg Volk: Great job, Wal. Hope you get a good night's sleep. See you at NPA-18. dehilster: I would like to hear about the expanding of earth Mark Spann: Looking forward to NPA18 Jerry Sawyer: Thank You, Wal. Ammon: Thanks. Wish MarkS: Thanks! Thomas Findlay: Thank you again Wal, much appreciated ... Our PAL Asija: Lost sound in the middle of answer to my question Thomas Findlay has left the meeting. David Kuhness: Thank you very much everybody! helen taylor: Thanks Wal for your expertise. David de Hilster: http://www.worldsci.org/​php/index.php?tab0=Topic​s&tab1=Expansion_Tectoni​cs chuck: This was great!!! Black Holes blew my mind in in 76 and then later they made NO sense!! Phil UK: Brilliant as usual Wal. Keep up the good work. dehilster: this has been terrific! tnx for your efforts! Rev Nick Sykes: Thanks for a great videoconference. Planning to be present at NPA-18 and to rejoin EU people netera: amazing - many thanks! David de Hilster: lag chuck: lag not your problem!!! dehilster: Finns thanks! It´s all electric,baby! Evonne K: Thanks for your presentation and expertise! Thanks for letting us participate. Dionysios G. Raftopoulos: Thanks Wal.Thanks everybody Stephen Flaig: Thanks! chuck: Thanks for staying up so late to present this Mark Spann: Good Night Wal !! John Parker has left the meeting. stephen: Thanks, great presentation Mark Spann: do we have the Dorm? Stephen Flaig: ..or Good Morning Our PAL Asija: The arbitrary distinction between rel and virtual particles based on mass and duration is arbitrary and meaning less David Kuhness has left the meeting. Robert Kemp: Wal Great Presenttion! Mark Spann: what is number at the moment, david? Phil UK: I hope there will be vids of that conference, particularly the EU presentations Mark Bender: I plan to film Steve Jackson has left the meeting. ehdowdye has left the meeting. Samwaru has left the meeting. Todd H has left the meeting. Paulina has left the meeting. stephenboelc has left the meeting. Stephen Flaig: @ Mark Bender. and post! Our PAL Asija: David you have competition Curt Youngs has left the meeting. Stephen Flaig: bye for now Stephen Flaig has left the meeting. Paul UK has left the meeting. robert bennett has left the meeting. dahlenaz: me: Newton recognized gravity through the observation of a falling object and then that object bounced. Is there an electrical explanation for the recoil,,, even hard objects recoil. recoil is against gravity, would the gyroscops explanation for antigravity apply here.