Gravity Theories, Theories on how gravity actually
works
What
this section of our anti gravity website will show is that the current accepted theory of
gravity known in schools and in science are wrong. We will include some of the best new
gravity theories that have been made on these pages. We will add new theories as we find
them.
The Universal Theory of Gravity is often taught in schools as
a “fact,” when in fact it is not even a good theory.
First of all, no one has measured gravity for every atom and every
star. It is simply a religious belief that it is “universal.” Secondly, school
textbooks routinely make false statements. For example, “the moon goes around the
earth.” If the theory of gravity were true, it would show that the sun's
gravitational force on the moon is much stronger than the earth's gravitational force on
the moon, so the moon would go around the sun. Anybody can look up at night and see the
obvious gaps in gravity theory.
The existence of tides is often taken as a proof of gravity, but
this is logically flawed. Because if the moon's “gravity” were responsible for a
bulge underneath it, then how can anyone explain a high tide on the opposite side of the
earth at the same time? Anyone can observe that there are 2 -- not 1 -- high tides every
day.
There are numerous other flaws. For example, astronomers, who seem
to have a fetish for gravity, tell us that the moon rotates on its axis but at the same
time it always presents the same face to the earth. This is patently absurd. Moreover, if
gravity were working on the early earth, then earth would have been bombarded out of
existence by falling asteroids, meteors, comets, and other space junk. Furthermore,
gravity theory suggests that the planets have been moving in orderly orbits for millions
and millions of years, which wholly contradicts the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Since
everything in the Universe tends to disorder according to the 2nd Law, orderly orbits are
impossible. This cannot be resolved by pointing to the huge outpouring of energy from the
sun. In fact, it is known that the flux of photons from the sun and the “solar
wind” actually tends to push earth away.
There are numerous alternative theories that should be taught on an
equal basis. For example, the observed behavior of the earth revolving around the sun can
be perfectly explained if the sun has a net positive charge and the planets have a net
negative charge, since opposite charges attract and the force is an inverse-square law,
exactly as the increasingly discredited Theory of Gravity. Physics and chemistry texts
emphasize that this is the explanation for electrons going around the nucleus, so if it
works for atoms, why not for the solar system? The answer is simple: scientific orthodoxy.
The US Patent Office has never issued a patent for anti-gravity. Why
is this? According to natural law and homeopathy, everything exists in opposites:
good-evil; grace-sin; positive charges-negative charges; north poles-south poles; good
vibes-bad vibes; etc. We know there are anti-evolutionists, so why not
anti-gravitationalists? It is clearly a matter of the scientific establishment elite
protecting their own. Anti-gravity papers are routinely rejected from peer-reviewed
journals, and scientists who propose anti-gravity quickly lose their funding. Universal
gravity theory is just a way to keep the grant money flowing.
Even Isaac Newton, said to be the discoverer of gravity, knew
there were problems with the theory. He claims to have invented the idea early in his
life, but he knew that no mathematician of his day would approve his theory, so he
invented a whole new branch of mathematics, called fluxions, just to
“prove” his theory. This became calculus, a deeply flawed branch having to do
with so-called “infinitesimals” which have never been observed. Then when Einstein
invented a new theory of gravity, he, too, used an obscure bit of mathematics called tensors.
It seems that every time there is a theory of gravity, it is mixed up with
“fringe” mathematics. Newton, by the way, was far from a secular scientist, and
the bulk of his writings is actually on theology and Christianity. His dabbling in
gravity, alchemy, and calculus was a mere sideline, perhaps an aberration best left
forgotten in describing his career and faith in a Creator.
Page 1 2 3 4
|
|
Take the Tour