Scientific Forums


Pages: (3) [1] 2 3   ( Go to first unread post )

Add reply · Start new topic · Start new poll


> Mercury... You Won't Believe This, see http://www.physorg.com/news124981209
Zarkov
  Posted: Mar 18 2008, 01:58 AM


Observer- Galactic Central
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 1399
Joined: 20-July 06

Positive Feedback: 28.57%
Feedback Score: -186


Well if you thought Zarkov's past threads were unbelievable
hold tight
this is a doosie

QUOTE
Patterns of scalloped-edged cliffs or lobate scarps on Mercury’s surface are thrust faults that are consistent with the planet shrinking and cooling with time. However, compression occurred in the planet’s early history and Mariner 10 images revealed decades ago that lobate scarps are among the youngest’ features on Mercury. Why don’t we find more evidence of older compressive features?



From ESGT analysis of the parameters of the planet Mercury
QUOTE
Derived Values for Mercury

Inertial orbit, Gcentral spin-mercury  = 2.2 X 10^4 km3 sec-2
Theoretical inertial mass    = 3.3    X 10^23 kg
Inertial radius    = 2439 km
L1 inertial orbit    = 3.18  X 10^5 km
g      = 3.7 m sec-2
Surface field velocity    = 3 km / sec

At aphelion,
Gcentral spin-mercury    = 1.14  X 10^4 km3 sec-2
Distance to the Sun    = 70    X 10^6 km
L1 at aphelion    = 3.1    X 10^5 km
g      = 2.49 m sec-2

At perihelion,
Gcentral spin-sun    = 2.43  X 10^11 km3 sec-2
Gcentral spin-mercury    = 4.0    X 10^4 km3 sec-2
Distance to the Sun    = 46    X 10^6 km
L1 at perihelion    = 3.1    X 10^5 km
g      = 5.4 m sec-2

Gcentral spin-mercury = ( Gcentral spin-aphelion X Gcentral spin-perihelion )^0.5
     
                                            = (1.14 X 4.0 X108 )^0.5

                                            = 2.14 X 104 km3 sec-2

This derived value of Gcentral spin-mercury compares well with the value 2.2 X 10^4 km3 sec-2 derived in section 12.

The results listed below are the induced values and represent a virtual set of parameters to describe the orbit of Mercury.  There is no change in the intrinsic parameters because in reality the real parameters, such as mass and size, do not vary.  This can be shown by the constancy of the surface B field density and the size of the secondary field of Mercury, when the calculations are made using normalised values.


Apparent Values for Mercury

At aphelion
Mass    = 1.7  X 10^23 kg
Radius    = 1947 km
Surface field velocity  = 2.2 km sec-1


At perihelion
Mass    = 6.0  X 10^23 kg
Radius    = 2962 km
Surface field velocity  = 4 km / sec


Just an example of an edited analysis of the most interesting newest planet of the Solar System.

The Solar System was boring, I thought..., but a thorough analysis has shown so many exciting and unexpected surprises, I can now say it really is a VERY interesting place.

Mercury has lobate scrapes.... high ridges criss-crossing the planet's surface.

These are formed by the changing gravity at the surface due to the planet's highly elliptical orbit.

If you care to view the g values listed above, as Mercury completes its orbit the value of gravity at its surface cycles from a low value to a value almost double, causing considerable expansion and compression of the planet.

Just thought I would share some insights


biggrin.gif

PS, the article quoted above has one interpretation, with no supporting evidence

I present another interpretation WITH evidence. ph34r.gif


--------------------
http://www.omegafour.com/forum2/

All bets are off
Ignore List:- Everyone
Top
TheDoc
Posted: Mar 18 2008, 03:13 AM


Not from Mars
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 2819
Joined: 6-March 08

Positive Feedback: 55.56%
Feedback Score: 128


QUOTE (Zarkov)
Just thought I would share some insights


Insights or delusions?

QUOTE
I present another interpretation WITH evidence.


AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA BWAHAHAHAHAHA AHAHAHAHAHA laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

This post has been edited by TheDoc on Mar 18 2008, 03:14 AM


--------------------
Member of Forum Mafia
Send PM ·
Top
adoucette
Posted: Mar 18 2008, 03:33 AM


Illegitimi non carborundum
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 12894
Joined: 14-April 05

Positive Feedback: 77.59%
Feedback Score: 205


QUOTE (Zarkov @ Mar 17 2008, 08:58 PM)
These are formed by the changing gravity at the surface due to the planet's  highly elliptical orbit.


All planets have elliptical orbits.

Does the gravity also change on the other planets?

If not, why not?

Arthur

This post has been edited by adoucette on Mar 18 2008, 03:33 AM


--------------------
"We cannot prove that those are in error who tell us that society has reached a turning point; that we have seen our best days. But so said all before us, and with just as much apparent reason. On what principle is it that, when we see nothing but improvement behind us, we are to expect nothing but deterioration before us?"

Thomas B. Macaulay
Top
N O M
Posted: Mar 18 2008, 03:33 AM


on holiday, get your abuse elsewhere
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 3691
Joined: 4-December 06

Positive Feedback: 56.72%
Feedback Score: 94


QUOTE (Zarkov @ Mar 18 2008, 02:58 PM)
PS, the article quoted above has one interpretation, with no supporting evidence

They have plenty of supporting evidence. They also have more in depth data than the brief summary that was released.

QUOTE
I present another interpretation WITH evidence.
This must be some meaning of the word "evidence" that we are previously unaware of blink.gif

Unless it's evidence of you being an idiot. You oversupply on this.


--------------------
Proud owner of negative feedback from: 555Joshua, alokmohan, bee, BigFairy, Bi shadi, Bloy, Bryn Richards, bukh, Confused2, DavidD, deadbeat, Derek1148, eyeque, Farsight, fivedoughnut, freethis, Gizmo, Gorgeous, howtothinklikegod, inQZtive, insight, kaneda, landon, LeTUOtter, Majkl, meBigGirl'sBlouse, Mediocre-Minded, midwestern, Mike Adams, Mirrorman, Morpheus, Mr. Robin Parsons, newton, Nick, on2thiests, oracle1, philip347, PIATLAS, PJParent001, Precursor562, Quatermass, Raphie Frank, reasonwhy, rethinker, Samantha Hildreth, A•SHEOL, Solid State Universe, Soultechs, Squeeze, SteveA2, StevenA, stundie, Sylwester Kornowski, (name removed by request), ubavontuba, vkamath, wbraxtonwilson, xtrmn8r, Zarabtul, Zephir, [please insert name here]

"A quotation is a handy thing to have about, saving one the trouble of thinking for oneself." - A. A. Milne
Top
TheDoc
Posted: Mar 18 2008, 03:34 AM


Not from Mars
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 2819
Joined: 6-March 08

Positive Feedback: 55.56%
Feedback Score: 128


QUOTE (N O M)
Unless it's evidence of you being an idiot. You oversupply on this.


Seconded.


--------------------
Member of Forum Mafia
Send PM ·
Top
Zarkov
Posted: Mar 18 2008, 04:22 AM


Observer- Galactic Central
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 1399
Joined: 20-July 06

Positive Feedback: 28.57%
Feedback Score: -186


QUOTE
(1) All planets have elliptical orbits.

(2) Does the gravity also change on the other planets?


yes to 1 and yes to 2

however the gravity changes are minute for the "domesticated" planets,
because the orbital velocity variance is very small, and because of the low sun-spin-gradient at distance.

Mercury's orbital velocity changes dramatically with distance from the Sun, and therefore its field spin velocity driven by the Sun changes dramatically, and because it is so close to the Sun there is a high sun-spin-gradient couple.

therefore as the calculations demonstrate, surface gravity changes enormously.

Mercury is a very interesting planet.

wink.gif

I expect the effects are set in stone, however since Mercury has a liquid core, surface effects would still be measured. (on edit... hey hey a prediction !)

These lobate scrapes, of course will weather down as the planet recedes from the Sun and becomes domesticated.

This post has been edited by Zarkov on Mar 18 2008, 04:26 AM


--------------------
http://www.omegafour.com/forum2/

All bets are off
Ignore List:- Everyone
Top
adoucette
Posted: Mar 18 2008, 01:22 PM


Illegitimi non carborundum
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 12894
Joined: 14-April 05

Positive Feedback: 77.59%
Feedback Score: 205


QUOTE (Zarkov @ Mar 17 2008, 11:22 PM)

yes to 1 and yes to 2

however the gravity changes are minute for the "domesticated" planets,
because the orbital velocity variance is very small, and because of the low sun-spin-gradient at distance.

Mercury's orbital velocity changes dramatically with distance from the Sun, and therefore its field spin velocity driven by the Sun changes dramatically, and because it is so close to the Sun there is a high sun-spin-gradient couple.

therefore as the calculations demonstrate, surface gravity changes enormously.

Mercury is a very interesting planet.

wink.gif

I expect the effects are set in stone, however since Mercury has a liquid core, surface effects would still be measured. (on edit... hey hey a prediction !)

These lobate scrapes, of course will weather down as the planet recedes from the Sun and becomes domesticated.

Actually you have made many predictions.


Zarkov predictions based on ESGT:

1) The surface gravity varies on all planets due to the eliptical nature of their orbits.

2) The surface gravity on Mercury varies from 2.49 m/s^2 at aphelion to 5.4 m/s^2 at perihelion

3) The surface gravity on Earth varies from X m/s^2 at aphelion to Y m/s^2 at perihelion (Zarkov could you fill in the X and Y values here please)

Arthur


--------------------
"We cannot prove that those are in error who tell us that society has reached a turning point; that we have seen our best days. But so said all before us, and with just as much apparent reason. On what principle is it that, when we see nothing but improvement behind us, we are to expect nothing but deterioration before us?"

Thomas B. Macaulay
Top
Zarkov
Posted: Mar 18 2008, 09:57 PM


Observer- Galactic Central
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 1399
Joined: 20-July 06

Positive Feedback: 28.57%
Feedback Score: -186


QUOTE
(Zarkov could you fill in the X and Y values here please)


yes easily....... reason ? but NO


If you knew anything about "gravity" you would know it changes OFTEN

here is another prediction, since you LOVE predictions

the Earth is moving away from the Sun
it is moving into a lower velocity sun-spin-field-gradient

EARTH's GRAVITY will just get weaker

AND as the Earth spirals out from the Sun, the radius of the planet will GROW (see volcanoes,quakes etc)

and gravity will get weaker

It seems that you have failed in your appreciation of the data

The data CLEARLY shows gravity IS NOT linked to mass ! PREDICTION (from math)

you guys are really getting boring, for me and I am sure, for the readers.



--------------------
http://www.omegafour.com/forum2/

All bets are off
Ignore List:- Everyone
Top
TheDoc
Posted: Mar 18 2008, 09:59 PM


Not from Mars
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 2819
Joined: 6-March 08

Positive Feedback: 55.56%
Feedback Score: 128


QUOTE (Zarkov)
you guys are really getting boring, for me and I am sure, for the readers.


Keep telling yourself that, bobo laugh.gif


--------------------
Member of Forum Mafia
Send PM ·
Top
adoucette
Posted: Mar 19 2008, 12:21 AM


Illegitimi non carborundum
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 12894
Joined: 14-April 05

Positive Feedback: 77.59%
Feedback Score: 205


QUOTE (Zarkov @ Mar 18 2008, 04:57 PM)

QUOTE (adoucette)

Zarkov predictions based on ESGT:
...

3) The surface gravity on Earth varies from X m/s^2 at aphelion to Y m/s^2 at perihelion (Zarkov could you fill in the X and Y values here please)


yes easily....... reason ? but NO


Now wait a second Zarkov.

You WANT your theory of ESGT to be believed, but you WON'T provide the data that would allow for it to be experimentally verified?

Why is that?

Clearly that is NOT how science works and if you really believe in your theory then this would be the IDEAL way for it to be independently verified.

Then you say:

QUOTE (Zarkov)
The data CLEARLY shows gravity IS NOT linked to mass ! PREDICTION (from math)


No, Zarkov, the data DOESN'T show that.

Why?

Because you haven't provided the DATA.

Arthur

This post has been edited by adoucette on Mar 19 2008, 12:22 AM


--------------------
"We cannot prove that those are in error who tell us that society has reached a turning point; that we have seen our best days. But so said all before us, and with just as much apparent reason. On what principle is it that, when we see nothing but improvement behind us, we are to expect nothing but deterioration before us?"

Thomas B. Macaulay
Top
Zarkov
Posted: Mar 19 2008, 01:01 AM


Observer- Galactic Central
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 1399
Joined: 20-July 06

Positive Feedback: 28.57%
Feedback Score: -186


QUOTE
Why is that?


There is a saying about pearls and pigs... no I think swine is the word, not pigs.

Valid discussion is good, goading is not, demanding is a total turn off... and then I bring my AK47 LOL,.... (is that a gun?) .. no, I just turn off to all but a genuine thirst for knowledge

You expect me to waste my time doing trivial work for you. I said the result would be very small... experimental evidence shows that measured small changes/variations in g are "confusingly" to THEM, but seen all the time.

Here is a job for you... to improve your understanding..

Find the history for the measurement of g on Earth?
Has it changed?
Why is the kilo losing weight?

do some background.... I am not interested in a one sided discussion, with inane/insane and derogatory comments as the other side !!!!

You are not even interested in the basics and yet you criticise the outcomes.

Human beings, you really are a total drag.


--------------------
http://www.omegafour.com/forum2/

All bets are off
Ignore List:- Everyone
Top
Username
  Posted: Mar 19 2008, 01:29 AM


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 185
Joined: 3-March 08

Positive Feedback: 64.71%
Feedback Score: 13


QUOTE (Zarkov @ Mar 19 2008, 01:01 AM)
Human beings, you really are a total drag.

Equus asinus, STFGiddy-Up.




dry.gif
Top
rpenner
Posted: Mar 19 2008, 02:22 AM


Fully Wired
*****

Group: Moderators
Posts: 5779
Joined: 27-December 04

Positive Feedback: 84.5%
Feedback Score: 397


It is hard to catalog the hypothetical disconnect with experiment which would allow Zarkov to maintain his beliefs.

Here is an animation by a crackpot who has invested time and effort into the sale pitch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjgidAICoQI

Interview with animator:
http://www.theskepticsguide.org/skepticsgu...info.asp?pid=51

Credit for discovery to:
http://scienceblogs.com/pontiff/2008/02/th...g_the_earth.php

This post has been edited by rpenner on Mar 19 2008, 02:23 AM


--------------------
愛平兎仏主
"And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus." Philippians 4:7
It's just good Netiquette. Failing that, Chlorpromazine.
Top
barakn
Posted: Mar 19 2008, 02:25 AM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 632
Joined: 20-December 07

Positive Feedback: 85.29%
Feedback Score: 42


Hi Zarkov,

Remember when I showed you that your formula for Gcentral-spin was simply a rehashing of Kepler's Third Law in this post http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtop...ndpost&p=306548 ? It's not very honest of you to claim that ESGT is your own new theory when in fact it is 400 years old.



--------------------
bark'n mad
Top
Zarkov
Posted: Mar 19 2008, 03:35 AM


Observer- Galactic Central
*****

Group: Power Member
Posts: 1399
Joined: 20-July 06

Positive Feedback: 28.57%
Feedback Score: -186


QUOTE
Gcentral-spin was simply a rehashing of Kepler's Third Law


indeed (no idea who you are)
however I have given rv^2 a NAME
and as such it can not be broken apart

yes, Gcentral spin = Gnewton X mass

the last formulation is what NASA uses
however they believe Gcentral spin is more accurate, they call it mu (written as the greek letter )

ALL NEWTONIAN

I have never claimed different
HOWEVER

QUOTE
I do claim spin fields and their structure

I do claim the electrodynamic extensions that characterise the Universe

I do claim the proposed mechanism of gravity

and much more...

none of this is Newtonian


What do you now claim

I made it ALL up ???? LOL

I stand on the shoulders of a GIANT... that ain't no disgrace

I did not fabricate as Dr E has.... LOL "attraction at a distance, disguised as "space-time-curvature".

Treating rv^2 as a CONSTANT for a spin system allowed a complete unraveling of the cosmic mystery; by accurately quantifying the Lagrangian points the spin fields could be mapped
and the quantum structure of the Solar System exposed.

now please get back on-topic.

This post has been edited by Zarkov on Mar 19 2008, 03:38 AM


--------------------
http://www.omegafour.com/forum2/

All bets are off
Ignore List:- Everyone
Top

Topic Options Pages: (3) [1] 2 3 

Add reply · Start new topic · Start new poll


 

Terms of use