LIGO: Gravitational attraction is dead

Blog 20160217 LIGO: Gravitational attraction is dead

Numerous readers have requested that I comment on all the commotion concerning the recent discovery of gravitational waves via the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO). I will assume that this is the real thing and not just another false alarm.

First, let me quote from page 190 of "The Scientific Worldview" (2007),[1] which is similar to what I wrote in my early manuscript of 1984:[2]

“Current government-supported work involves the search for gravitational waves, the general idea being to detect the results of explosions or collapses of celestial bodies. The success of the project would put the kibosh on the attraction hypothesis. Systems philosophy would shudder, but probably would regain composure by interpreting the data as yet another “proof” of Einstein’s “space curvature” as the “mechanism” of gravitation. Of course, it really would prove nothing more than that space is not empty and that it contains a material medium capable of transmitting motion over great distances.”

Second, let me mention that this is just another “Einsteinism”:  “correct prediction, wrong reason.” Although the gravitational-wave press conference totally ignored it, the long-awaited discovery of gravity waves means that THE ATTRACTION HYPOTHESIS IS DEAD—we will have to adopt the push hypothesis instead. A gravitational signal proven to come from a source a billion light years away certainly did not arrive here because of any “attraction” we might have. It is much like a far-away explosion that we hear via the normal changes in air pressure that travel from source to ear. Can we educated folks now refrain from thinking of gravitation as an attraction? Please?

Third, we can now give up the idea that space is empty. The experiment confirms that AETHER MUST EXIST. The press reports stating that the waves travelled through perfectly empty space via compression and decompression are ludicrous. That could never happen. All wave motion requires a medium. That is why Einstein’s corpuscular theory of light is equally ludicrous. Wave motion without a medium is like having water waves without water.

Fourth, the experiment did add one bit of information: the speed of gravitation and the speed of light are identical. That is because they both use the same medium: aether. Presumably, the investigators were able to see the explosion through telescopes and measure the gravitation effect at the same time. This destroys the Le Sage push theory,[3] which requires gravitation to travel at 20 billion times the speed of light.[4] The LIGO signal was delayed by 6.9+0.5 milliseconds due to the distance between the two measurement stations (Livingston, LA and Hanford, WA). It would take light 10 milliseconds to travel the 3,030 km distance overland along the curvature of Earth and slightly less time to travel the 3002 km distance along the chord directly through Earth. Presumably, the black hole merger did not occur exactly along the projected line between the two stations. If the waves traveled at the speed of light, any value less than 10 milliseconds would indicate there was an angle involved. A value greater than 10 milliseconds would indicate that the velocity was less than c.

Fifth, the correct theory of gravitation is the one we proposed in 2012 as the "Neomechanical Gravitation Theory" (NGT).[5] The theory states that aether pressure tends to be highest away from ordinary baryonic matter—just the opposite of atmospheric pressure. Baryonic matter then acts like a vacuum, causing errant material objects to be pushed toward massive objects. Thus, in NGT, gravitation acts locally, in the same way that a helium balloon is pushed upward in the atmosphere due to local pressure differences. Unlike other push theories, NGT does not hypothesize corpuscles or gravitons rushing toward objects from far away at superluminal velocities. The aether particles are already there, surrounding and permeating all baryonic matter. Actually, NGT has much in common with the much-ignored theory proposed by Newton 300 years ago.[6] The key feature of both theories is the presence of aether, which has just been confirmed by the gravitational wave experiment.

The universal presence of aether makes it possible for us to detect waves from distant galaxies, whether they are waves due to light or waves due to explosions that appear as changes in gravitational pressure. The waves detected by LIGO really are not a significant cause of most gravitation, but they are proof that the aether exists.

The discovery gets us closer to finding out what is causing Steve Puetz’s Universal Wave Series cycles[7] that are appearing in our analyses of time series data of historic geological, astronomical, biological, and climatic records.[8] There seem to be no limits to the frequencies of these cycles. They range from days to billions of years.

And from George Coyne:

“This article on gravity is quite interesting:


I think that the LIGO discovery gives much support to your NGT. The fact that Einstein predicted gravitational waves does not make his GRT correct. It seems more rational that these waves are occurring in the medium of aether than empty space.”


[1] Borchardt, Glenn, 2007, The Scientific Worldview: Beyond Newton and Einstein: Lincoln, NE, iUniverse, 411 p. [ http://www.scientificphilosophy.com/ ].

[2] Borchardt, Glenn, 1984, The scientific worldview: Berkeley, California, Progressive Science Institute, 343 p. [ http://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.16123.52006 ].

[3] Le Sage, G.L., 1784, Corpuscular theory of gravitation: Memoires de Berlin for 1782, v. 404 [ http://bibliothek.bbaw.de/bibliothek-digital/digitalequellen/schriften/anzeige/index_html?band=03-nouv/1782&seite:int=0495 ].

[4] Van Flandern, Tom, 1998, The speed of gravity - What the experiments say: Physics Letters A, v. 250, no. 1-3, p. 11 [ http://www.ldolphin.org/vanFlandern/gravityspeed.html ].

[5] Borchardt, Glenn, and Puetz, Stephen J., 2012, Neomechanical gravitation theory, in Volk, Greg, Proceedings of the Natural Philosophy Alliance, 19th Conference of the NPA, 25-28 July: Albuquerque, NM, Natural Philosophy Alliance, Mt. Airy, MD, v. 9, p. 53-58 [ http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.3991.0483 ].

[6] Newton, Isaac, 1718, Opticks or, a treatise of the reflections, refractions, inflections and colours of light. The second edition, with additions. By Sir Isaac Newton (Second ed.): London, Printed for W. and J. Innys, printers to the Royal Society, 382 p.  [ http://books.google.com/books?continue=http%3A%2F%2Fbooks.google.com%2Fbooks%2Fdownload%2FOpticks_or_A_treatise_of_the_reflections.pdf%3Fid%3DTwhbAAAAQAAJ%26output%3Dpdf%26hl%3Den&id=TwhbAAAAQAAJ&q=queries#v=snippet&q=query%2021&f=false ].

[7] Puetz, Stephen J., and Borchardt, Glenn, 2011, Universal cycle theory: Neomechanics of the hierarchically infinite universe: Denver, Outskirts Press, 626 p. [ http://www.scientificphilosophy.com/

[8] Borchardt, Glenn, and Puetz, Stephen J., 2010, Unified cycle theory: Integration toward a cause: Proceedings of the Natural Philosophy Alliance, 17th Conference of the NPA, 23-26 June, v. 7, p. 46-52 [ http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.2990.7361 ].

Prokoph, Andreas, and Puetz, Stephen J., 2015, Period-Tripling and Fractal Features in Multi-Billion Year Geological Records: Mathematical Geosciences, p. 1-20 [ http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11004-015-9593-y ].

Puetz, Stephen J., and Borchardt, Glenn, 2015, Quasi-periodic fractal patterns in geomagnetic reversals, geological activity, and astronomical events: Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, v. 81, no. Part A, p. 246–270 [ http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2015.09.029 ].

Puetz, Stephen J., Prokoph, Andreas, and Borchardt, Glenn, 2016, Evaluating alternatives to the Milankovitch theory: Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, v. 170, p. 158–165 [ http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jspi.2015.10.006 ].

Puetz, Stephen J., Prokoph, Andreas, Borchardt, Glenn, and Mason, Edward W., 2014, Evidence of synchronous, decadal to billion year cycles in geological, genetic, and astronomical events: Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, v. 62–63, no. 0, p. 55-75 [ http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2014.04.001 ].

1 comment:

George Coyne said...

The discovery of gravitational waves not only proves the existence of aether but also shows that the most cherished and accepted theory in regressive physics, specifically Einstein's General Relativity “providing a unified description of gravity as a geometric property of space and time, or spacetime” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_relativity.
is untenable.

I understand why physicists who are heavily invested in regressive physics tenets have not immediately come to this conclusion, but what is preventing the young physicists who are less committed in this ideology from reaching the logical realization that GRT must be false? Could it be the affect of many years of studying regressive physics resulting in gradual indoctrination into this orthodoxy? Is it possible to attain a PhD in physics if one rejects General Relativity Theory? I very much doubt it would be.

Physicists interested in gaining more accurate knowledge and increased understanding of how the universe works need to abandon GRT as an explanation for gravity and seriously consider Dr. Borchardt's Neomechanical Gravitation Theory which maintains that gravitation is the result of “pressure gradients that develop initially due to vortex motion in the aether” with “variations in aether density produced by compression waves”.

Post a Comment

Thanks so much for your comment. Be sure to hit "Preview" to see if it will publish correctly. Then hit "Publish". Include your email address if you wish to receive copies of your comment as well as all other published comments to this Blog.

For those having trouble getting this comment section to work:

Nitecruzr writes:

[FAQ] Why can't people post comments on my blog?

The Blogger / Google login status, and the ability to post comments, is sensitive to both cookie and script filters. Your readers may need to enable (stop filtering) "third party cookies", in their browser and on their computer. The effects of the newly unavoidable CAPTCHA, and the Google "One account" login, requires third party cookies, even more than before.




Third party cookies filtering, in a browser setting, is the most common solution, overall - but your readers may have to search for other filter(s) that affect their use of Blogger / Google.

Any filters are subject to update, by the creator. If the problem started a few days ago, your readers may have to look on their computers, and find out what product or accessory was updated, a few days ago.