Re: Challenge to Jim Scotti

Article: <6icl9f$s22@sjx-ixn4.ix.netcom.com> 
Subject: Re: Challenge to Jim Scotti
Date: 1 May 1998 14:13:03 GMT

In article <35465F01.64DD@nospam.sc.hp.com> Chris Franks writes:
>> You conclude that all binaries must be in motion as SOME are, 
>> and ascribe the motion to an imperceptibly  slow orbit.  Why?
>
> Because if there were no circular motion around a common 
> point, called a barycenter, then the mutual gravitational 
> attraction between the 2 suns would cause them to draw towards
> each other and collide, resulting in no more binary system.   
> The slower the motion, the farther apart they must be in order 
> to stay there.

(Begin ZetaTalk[TM])
You weigh your formulas and assumptions down with ridiculous concepts,
and thus the more they are applied, the more ridiculous they become! 
You assume the motion of a large orbiting object, such as a planet, is
what keeps it there, ignoring the obvious!  Your Moon, a large moon
compared to most, is barely off your Earth's surface, drifting SLOWLY,
28 days to make an orbit.  By all the evidence you have at hand, this
has been going on for eons.  Does this compute?  Does this even compute
in YOUR formulas?  It computes only in those formulas which exclude
mass, and boggles the others.  Is this not true?

What you are missing is the compliment of gravity, what we call a
repulsion force, caused by the same sub-atomic particles that create
what you refer to as the force of gravity.  The gravity force presses
in toward the center of a large mass, but what goes in must come out,
and out it does go, as we have explained, in intense bursts of escaping
gravity particles that bump into each other when two large bodies come
close.  Your Moon is out there, floating on a level of escaping gravity
particles as though on air. Small object do not emit a large enough
repulsion force to keep them from falling, and falling fast and hard,
as humans are quite painfully aware.  

We will ask our emissary, Nancy, to post our existing words on the
Repulsion Force, again.  Do these not address the issue of why the Moon
floats up there more effectively than you silly assumption that it is
moving so fast that it can hardly keep from flying off into space?
(End ZetaTalk[TM])

........
ZetaTalk: Repulsion Force

Scientists are acutely aware of the attraction force inherent in
gravity, as are folks in general.  The babe learns about this early,
while taking his first few steps.  Oops.  Ouch!  It is assumed that
gravity has only an attractive force, and that the planets, in orbit
around the Sun, are held in place by their momentum.  Does this make
sense?  What caused the momentum in the first place?  Children play
with a ball on the end of a string, swinging it around and around their
head.  As long as the arm is tugging, the ball maintains its orbit,
else stops.  Why would the planets not drift into the Sun?  Are the
orbits all that swift so that centrifugal force is extreme?  

The reason mankind is unaware of a repulsive force, also inherent in
gravity, is that for this to become evident there must be a semblance
of equality in size and weight, i.e. the mass of the objects, and
freedom of movement such as exists in space, and lack of undue
influence from other nearby objects.  Objects on the surface of the
Earth have none of these.  They are infinitesimal in proportion to the
Earth itself, and thus any repulsion the Earth may have toward a tiny
speck on its surface is also infinitesimal.  Proportionally, its all
gravity, a one way trip.  The object on the surface, pushing away, is
overwhelmed by the Earth's gravitational pull, the attraction.  The
repulsion force is generated as a result of two bodies exerting a
gravitational force on each other.  In the case of a tiny object on the
surface of the Earth, its gravitational pull on the Earth is scarcely
noticed by the Earth.  A gnat or mite.  A nothing.  Where the repulsion
force has not been invoked within the Earth by any objects placed on
the surface of the Earth, this is in play between the Earth and her
Moon.  The repulsion force is invoked between objects on the surface of
the Earth, incessantly, but this is masked by the intense force of
gravity the Earth presents and other factors such as surface tension or
friction or chemical bonding so that the repulsion force cannot be
recognized.  

The gravitational force exists first.  It is the static condition.  The
repulsion phenomena only manifests when, as we said, the objects are of
equal size, are free to move, and dominate the immediate environment. 
Where the repulsion force comes to equal the force of gravity by the
time the objects in play would make contact, it builds at a rate that
differs from gravity.  Humans have calculated the force of gravity,
which at first they assumed was equal for all objects but lately have
come to understand is stronger for larger objects.  They have formulas
for the force of gravity which have proved accurate on the face of
their home planet.  These formulas are incomplete, and would not work
as expected elsewhere, however.  The repulsion force is infinitesimally
smaller than the force of gravity, but has a sharper curve so that it
equals the force of gravity at the point of contact.  For experimental
purposes, one would have to be almost at the point of contact for it to
come into play at all, and this in an environment where other factors
are eliminated or negated.  To examine the phenomena, Earth scientists
would have to set up a lab in space, far enough away from any planetary
body so that free movement is possible.  Place two balls in a cage. 
Put one in motion toward another.  Microscopically examine the
interchange.  They do not touch.  They do not bounce off one another. 
They do not touch.