ah, okay Magnus, i will make a suggestion to set gravity aside for this moment , and move on it later on,
ok, i think it will become important, because it will show something I suppose you have the e-book lila, can you go to page 212-213, and read the squirrel part James introduced, and was recognised by pirsig? Than, if you re-read the parts we discussed on general relativity, relativity, quantum physiks, the many worlds interpretation Hawing is supporting as the momental mainstream science,pay special attention to the part is was pointing to as for the relative position of the observer James , Pirsig, Einstein,Hawking all on 1 line, in a sequence of recognised patterns regarding reality. saying the same,it takes a visionair to recognise a visionair i think it becomes important to list it up, sequentially. and set it to be read in one artikel, will take us some time i guess, its only a proposal of course. i'm still investigating this push-pull model of you, there seems to be some evidence, but very difficult to understand. working on it, probably it is not in conflict with Hawkings idea's, or general relativity, or supersymmetry probably it resides in the supersymetry-model.it willt ake time, the product is there. So can you read page 212-213, and recognise what James and Pirsig are saying? greetzz,Adrie 2010/9/6 Magnus Berg <[email protected]> > Hi Adrie > > Getting hard to distinguish the signals from all the noise around here. > Soon I'll start using Thunderbird's spam filter to cancel out the worst. > > Anyway, I was able to read some of the links you sent yesterday. Very > interesting, this geoid form vs the freatic surface. But I'm really not sure > if it can be used to hint either way on the gravity push/pull issue? But > perhaps that wasn't your intention? > > I also read the MWI page, at least parts of it. And even it sounds very > much like the quality event, I'm a little uncertain as to why it is > important here? > > Magnus > > > > > > > > On 2010-09-05 15:10, ADRIE KINTZIGER wrote: > >> Okay , lets compare , for now to explore our the geoidform of the earth,to >> make it possible to crossrefer this geoid >> to the freatic surface,the geoid shape is very important Magnus, can you >> read it carefully, and keep in mind that i want to compare the geoid shape >> with the freatic surface. >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoid >> >> >> >> And after that This will be the follow up, after we compared the geoid >> with >> the freatic field. >> >> It will lead to a field making your interpretation on gravity as good as >> any >> other scientifically projection, without conflicting other matters. >> It is surely nessesary to avoid conflicting matters, otherwise we will end >> up in a non-existing meta-gravity, that serves no purpose >> from the beginning. >> All details matter. >> >> Okay , this will be the field i propose, The many worlds interpretation, >> parented by Stephen Hawking,but he is incorporating all quantum physiks in >> his model, and the conflicting matter i was mentioning earlier, about the >> relative/absolute position of the observer is in conflict with the >> quantum-states supported by Hawking.In the Q P there is no absolute >> position >> unless proven. >> But for now , you can find what i'm pointing towards, in this regard, >> under >> "Interpreting waveform or function collapse" >> This will give the answer as to why its better to leave the absolute >> position as observer.Hawking's copenhagen interpretation is interwoven >> with >> that model,the relative model.the relative model is dynamical , the >> absolute >> is statical. >> Your clever enough to find it yourself, and than read our earlier matter >> back. >> I will come back on this later on, but i think its good to read yourself >> in >> a little bit in advance. >> Probably you will notice that Hawking allows multiple realitys and >> explains >> them, you will also notice that this material is not in conflict with any >> OTHER possible reality or history.Hawking merges all reality's. >> But as i come to think about it, you were the only one brave and bold >> enough >> to step into Andy's code, and to recognise the embedded >> idea within the formulation, so you are a very clever guy, i agree that >> the >> model was very difficult to peel open. >> >> greetzz, Adrie >> >> >> >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation >> >> >> >> >> 2010/9/5 ADRIE KINTZIGER<[email protected]> >> >> No, i only meant to say, Magnus, that accelerating is not in conflict >>> with >>> cooling down,and that there is evidence for the cooling down, >>> I was clumsy. >>> >>> Adrie >>> >>> 2010/9/5 Magnus Berg<[email protected]> >>> >>> >>>> Hi Adrie >>>> >>>> "ADRIE KINTZIGER"<[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> --quote,Magnus >>>>> Another line of thought is what Horse mentioned the other day. If >>>>> gravity >>>>> comes from space, and space is expanding, then it should get weaker >>>>> with >>>>> time. If we can find evidence that gravity was higher when the sun and >>>>> >>>> our >>>> >>>>> planets formed, then that could be a smoking gun. But I doubt anyone >>>>> has >>>>> searched for such evidence >>>>> >>>>> Yes , the universe is speeding up and cooling down at the same time, >>>>> >>>> there >>>> >>>>> is evidence for the cooling down and sedating. >>>>> This is not in conflict with accelerating speed. >>>>> >>>> >>>> That was a bit unclear. Of course "speeding up" is not in conflict with >>>> "accelerating speed", they are the same thing. >>>> >>>> Did something I say make you think I thought something conflicted? >>>> >>>> Magnus >>>> >>>> >>>> Moq_Discuss mailing list >>>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. >>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org >>>> Archives: >>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ >>>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> parser >>> >>> >> >> >> > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org/md/archives.html > -- parser Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
