Re: Article - =?iso-8859-1?Q?Gravity=92s?= Equal Pull
Warren York ( infonet@home.com )
Tue, 31 Aug 1999 18:24:45 -0500
Steve wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> http://abcnews.go.com/sections/science/DailyNews/gravity990830.html
>
> Something about this doesn't seem right to me.. with push gravity or
> pull gravity. Can't put my finger on it tho.. In pull gravity,
> wouldn't larger, more dense objects fall faster? Since they don't,
> push gravity, or at least something very similar to the concept I
> understand as push gravity, seems to be the only explanation. This is
> totally different with black holes on the other hand, their "pull"
> seems dependant on the surface area, not volume.
>
> ttyl
> - -Steve
>
> steve@primeline.net | ICQ: 5113616
> Digital Fusion: http://www.digitalfusion.on.ca
=======================================================================
Warren writes:
I don't know if you were addressing this question to me because of my
comment about gravity having a "Push" and a "Pull" force or just in
general but I will respond to it anyway. The theory is in total
agreement with the findings. Look at what the force in gravity is that
is causing all the work as to theory. The size of the mass is only the
virtual base line (TIME). The actual attraction are the lines of TIME
(Time tunnels caused by paired photons) trying to return to ZPEL which
are all the same point in TIME. The TIME factor should remain constant.
Man needs to learn more on just what TIME is than he currently has on
his logs. The theory is all based on Light and the Speed of Light as I
have stated before. Interesting note about temperature and 459 degrees
Fahrenheit. I wonder if there is a direct connection between F temp and
a single photon or a single electron? Warren