[allplanets-hollow] Gravity and the Sun

Dean,

        I like you have been very intrigued by this tide factor and how
much
of the tidal effect is attributable to the sun and how much is accounted
for
by the moon. You state below that something is an "inescapable" fact.
After my study of tides which I spent some time on, I have determined
that
anyone who considers the tides strictly from the aspect of gravitational
influence is dealing only with static numbers and frankly in my book is
all wet.
        The tides are very complex and by that I digress from the idea of
a
comparison of static forces being compounded by earth related
considerations
like environment, humidity, wind patterns, barometric pressure,
temperature or
any other earth based causalities that might be also interpreted to
effect the
activity of tides. These factors surely have their place but I consider
that tides
are more a function of the rotation of the planet and the acceleration
curve of the
planet earth as it orbits the Sun. There are mathematical calculations
for this, and,
I have even written a small program in Pascal to illustrate some of this
orbital function.
        I have been trying to make up my mind each time this subject of
tides
comes up whether to spill what I know now or wait till later until I have
all the
particulars of my theory on tides worked out. Just to give you another
hint on this
though, consider the fact that the peak tide swell for the moon actually
doesn't correlate
to the point in time when the ocean is directly beneath the moon, or at
right angles to the
moon. The peak in my understanding doesn't occur after this moment but
actually slightly
before which would not be what one would assume to have happen if the
most important
factor was the point of closest proximity to the gravitational source.
        In stating all of this I have not as yet read the article on
tides located at
http://www.skyboom.com/hollowearthpuranas/index8.html. However, to
speculate that
the Sun produces less gravitational influence than the moon is incorrect
in the extreme!
You see it is my steadfast belief that the effect of the the Sun's
gravitational influence is
not even the correct question to ask. The sun could actually have 5 times
the amount of
gravitational influence than it does and it would not necessarily make
that much of a difference
on the actual height of tides. I am quite serious about this.
        If live in the continental US and would give me your phone
number, I would like to call you
up and give you some of the particulars regarding my theory. You should
include the time and
day this should happen if you take me up on it.
     
Scott

Members,

I am interested in taking a look at Cater's comments about gravity
and the Sun. I don't want to do this in didactic sort of way- over the

last several months

we've gone over the arguments in favor of gravity as an electrostatic

force and it's probably

up to you all to consider and follow up as you please. But I am

interested in a little feedback

insofar as the strength of these two arguments which Cater presents in

relation to gravity and the

Sun. Would a physicist have an easy time with these arguments? Would

he be evasive and

say something about more research being needed.

Cater concludes that the Sun lacks a strong gravitational field because

it

has little effect on the tides ( from the chapter on tides ):

" The analysis of tides presented above
http://www.skyboom.com/hollowearthpuranas/index8.html [ second
article down ] forms the basis for proving that the surface gravity of

the

Moon is greater than that on the sun. Since the sun and the Moon have

the

same apparent diameters, viewed from the Earth, tidal effects produced

by

them are directly proportional to their surface gravities. ...
gravitational effects vary inversely as the square of the distance

away. Their [

the Sun and the Moon ] aaparent diameters are inversely proportional to

the

distance; therefore, their apparent surface areas also vary inversely

as the

square of the distance Since the moon is a greater factor in producing
tides, the conclusion that the Moon has a greater surface gravity than

the

Sun is inescapable! To the orthodox mind this produces insurmountable
paradoxes. The time has come for these to be resolved. This can only be
accomplished by probing deeper into basic causes."

He also concludes from the following observation of the solar surface

that

the Sun does not exhibit gravity in relation to its mass, i.e., that

gravity

is not caused by mass. From the subsection Gravitational Anomalies:
" The behavior of matte ejected by explosions on the Sun's surface

defies

all of the popular laws of gravity. This matter occasionally rises to

altitudes

of several hundred thousand miles. It does not follow a trajectory in

descending

as it is supposed to. Also, its speed of descent does not follow the

law of falling

bodies at any time. In fact, the velocity of fall is much lower than

expected. One

of the reasons is the low surface gravity of the Sun. Another reason is

the variable

···

On Tue, 2 Jan 2001 12:42:30 -0200 "Dean" <[email protected]> writes:

quantity of negative charges which impregnate these masses."

Dharma/Dean

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

Scott,

How interesting to find somebody who is interested in the tides. They
suggest so much in relation to gravity. You'll see in Cater's article on
tides that he makes a case such that:

Tide behavior disproves the concept of gravity having uniform penetration
and that

The Sun produces little gravity.

I know that you don't agree that the Sun produces little gravity, but it
fits in so well with observation and the soft particle concept on gravity.
Cater feels that the gravity-inducing charge lies between the lower infrared
and the upper radar band, but the sun just doesn't emit much in that
frequency. Lo and behold, the sun doesn't seem to have much effect on the
tides, either, so what does that tell you?

I really think that gravity has the main impact on tides.

That the peak of the tidal bulge does not occur directly below the Moon is
accounted for with ease by that explanation which Cater offers, though the
explanation is not his. The Moon's gravity, directly opposed by the Earth's
gravity when the Moon is directly above, has zero impact on tides. In any
given instance, it was the horizontal, tractive gravity of the Moon, acting
on the horizon from a distance, which initiated the tidal bulge. The closer
the Moon gets to that bulge, the more directly overhead that the Moon gets,
the lesser force it exerts on the tides because the Earth's gravity comes
into play more and more. By the time the Moon gets directly over the tidal
bulge, not only is the Moon's force upon it practically null, but the bulge
had already started to decline as a result. The bulge on the other side of
the globe is an oscillatory remanent from the Moon's previous pass.

Give Cater's article a chance.

I live in Brazil, but let's do consider that article before we go to the
phone.

Later,

Dharma/Dean