US Town Rejects Solar Panels Because They May “Drain The Sun”...

[BADecker]

Answer my fucking question how does the "Airy's Failure" fail?

What does sex have to do with it?   

All right, all right. Airy's Failure fails because nobody takes into account that the ether penetrates right down through the center of the earth. The density of the water related to the air makes such a tiny amount of difference with regard to light traveling through the ether from great distances, that the failure of Airy's Failure is due to the ether effect acting throughout all mediums, even solid earth. Only within the center of a black hole or some similarly dense object is there enough ether loss that something like Aries Failure might be proven true.

[larem]

Answer my fucking question how does the "Airy's Failure" fail?

What does sex have to do with it?   

All right, all right. Airy's Failure fails because nobody takes into account that the ether penetrates right down through the center of the earth. The density of the water related to the air makes such a tiny amount of difference with regard to light traveling through the ether from great distances, that the failure of Airy's Failure is due to the ether effect acting throughout all mediums, even solid earth. Only within the center of a black hole or some similarly dense object is there enough ether loss that something like Aries Failure might be proven true.

And.. now I have to Google this to learn what you guys are talking about, XD.

[BADecker]

Answer my fucking question how does the "Airy's Failure" fail?

What does sex have to do with it?    

All right, all right. Airy's Failure fails because nobody takes into account that the ether penetrates right down through the center of the earth. The density of the water related to the air makes such a tiny amount of difference with regard to light traveling through the ether from great distances, that the failure of Airy's Failure is due to the ether effect acting throughout all mediums, even solid earth. Only within the center of a black hole or some similarly dense object is there enough ether loss that something like Aries Failure might be proven true.

And.. now I have to Google this to learn what you guys are talking about, XD.

There isn't going to be a lot of information about the ether. Modern science tries to ignore it. Ether, also spelled aether, penetrates and fills the space between the electrons and the nuclei of atoms. We know little about it formally. However, as long as the electrons and nuclei of atoms have space between them, where the electrons are not riding directly on the nuclei of their atoms, there is ether in between them.



EDIT: And, of course, in any "empty" space between the atoms.

[notbatman]

Answer my fucking question how does the "Airy's Failure" fail?

What does sex have to do with it?   

All right, all right. Airy's Failure fails because nobody takes into account that the ether penetrates right down through the center of the earth. The density of the water related to the air makes such a tiny amount of difference with regard to light traveling through the ether from great distances, that the failure of Airy's Failure is due to the ether effect acting throughout all mediums, even solid earth. Only within the center of a black hole or some similarly dense object is there enough ether loss that something like Aries Failure might be proven true.

And.. now I have to Google this to learn what you guys are talking about, XD.

This is Airy's Failure experiment in a nutshell:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87M2i61N1cU

[notbatman]

Answer my fucking question how does the "Airy's Failure" fail?

What does sex have to do with it?    

All right, all right. Airy's Failure fails because nobody takes into account that the ether penetrates right down through the center of the earth. The density of the water related to the air makes such a tiny amount of difference with regard to light traveling through the ether from great distances, that the failure of Airy's Failure is due to the ether effect acting throughout all mediums, even solid earth. Only within the center of a black hole or some similarly dense object is there enough ether loss that something like Aries Failure might be proven true.

Check your facts, the difference in the speed of light in air vs. water is considerable.

Speed of light in air: 299,700 km/s
Speed of light in water: 225,070 km/s

[BADecker]

Answer my fucking question how does the "Airy's Failure" fail?

What does sex have to do with it?    

All right, all right. Airy's Failure fails because nobody takes into account that the ether penetrates right down through the center of the earth. The density of the water related to the air makes such a tiny amount of difference with regard to light traveling through the ether from great distances, that the failure of Airy's Failure is due to the ether effect acting throughout all mediums, even solid earth. Only within the center of a black hole or some similarly dense object is there enough ether loss that something like Aries Failure might be proven true.

Check you facts, the difference in the speed of light in air vs. water is considerable.

The speed of light in various mediums doesn't have anything to do with it. The thing that controls is the differences in the ether in different mediums. In other words, the ether acts differently in such a way that it "tricks" one into thinking that there is a difference in the way that light acts as it passes through different mediums of different densities.

If you are going to consider the ether, you have to consider it all the way. You can't simply say that there is ether and that it is the density of water vs. the density of air that makes the difference, when all along it is the activity of the ether that is giving a false reading.

We simply don't know enough about the ether and how it acts and reacts. Because of what it might be, the ether that is located at the surface of the earth might actually cause a real reaction on the ether multitudes of light years away when it is disturbed here.

Airy's Failure was not a failure. It simply proved something completely different than Airy or anybody else generally considers... elasticity and reactivity of the ether.

[notbatman]

Answer my fucking question how does the "Airy's Failure" fail?

What does sex have to do with it?   

All right, all right. Airy's Failure fails because nobody takes into account that the ether penetrates right down through the center of the earth. The density of the water related to the air makes such a tiny amount of difference with regard to light traveling through the ether from great distances, that the failure of Airy's Failure is due to the ether effect acting throughout all mediums, even solid earth. Only within the center of a black hole or some similarly dense object is there enough ether loss that something like Aries Failure might be proven true.

Check your facts, the difference in the speed of light in air vs. water is considerable.

Speed of light in air: 299,700 km/s
Speed of light in water: 225,070 km/s

The speed of light in various mediums doesn't have anything to do with it. The thing that controls is the differences in the ether in different mediums. In other words, the ether acts differently in such a way that it "tricks" one into thinking that there is a difference in the way that light acts as it passes through different mediums of different densities.

If you are going to consider the ether, you have to consider it all the way. You can't simply say that there is ether and that it is the density of water vs. the density of air that makes the difference, when all along it is the activity of the ether that is giving a false reading.

We simply don't know enough about the ether and how it acts and reacts. Because of what it might be, the ether that is located at the surface of the earth might actually cause a real reaction on the ether multitudes of light years away when it is disturbed here.

Airy's failure was not a failure. It simply proved something completely different than Airy or anybody else generally considers... elasticity and reactivity of the ether.

Nothing to do with it? The whole fucking experiment is based on the difference in the speed of light in air vs. water.

[notbatman]

The Earth is not a spinning globe and the Airy's Failure proves it beyond a reasonable doubt.

[BADecker]

Answer my fucking question how does the "Airy's Failure" fail?

What does sex have to do with it?   

All right, all right. Airy's Failure fails because nobody takes into account that the ether penetrates right down through the center of the earth. The density of the water related to the air makes such a tiny amount of difference with regard to light traveling through the ether from great distances, that the failure of Airy's Failure is due to the ether effect acting throughout all mediums, even solid earth. Only within the center of a black hole or some similarly dense object is there enough ether loss that something like Aries Failure might be proven true.

Check your facts, the difference in the speed of light in air vs. water is considerable.

Speed of light in air: 299,700 km/s
Speed of light in water: 225,070 km/s

The speed of light in various mediums doesn't have anything to do with it. The thing that controls is the differences in the ether in different mediums. In other words, the ether acts differently in such a way that it "tricks" one into thinking that there is a difference in the way that light acts as it passes through different mediums of different densities.

If you are going to consider the ether, you have to consider it all the way. You can't simply say that there is ether and that it is the density of water vs. the density of air that makes the difference, when all along it is the activity of the ether that is giving a false reading.

We simply don't know enough about the ether and how it acts and reacts. Because of what it might be, the ether that is located at the surface of the earth might actually cause a real reaction on the ether multitudes of light years away when it is disturbed here.

Airy's failure was not a failure. It simply proved something completely different than Airy or anybody else generally considers... elasticity and reactivity of the ether.

Nothing to do with it? The whole fucking experiment is based on the difference in the speed of light in air vs. water.

The whole idea of the speed of light is that the speed is relatively constant. The constant part exists because Einstein's theories suggest that space is "empty." This means that you can't use the idea of a constant speed of light when you suggest that there is ether filling space. You have to consider the activity of the ether, something we know very little about.

In other words, if you are going to throw out the system of physics that is the standard of today, you can't simply pick and choose which parts of it you are going to accept, and which parts of it you are going to reject. The thing you need to do is develop ether physics as a whole unit of physics before you can determine what you are seeing with Airy's experiments.

One of the things that you might have done with all the flat earth stuff is, you might have shown where there are big holes and gaps in standard physics. But until you develop your physics to the point that it is a viable unit, your ideas fail faster than the ideas of standard physics.

[notbatman]

Bad if you want to claim the speed of light is the same in all mediums then you need to go join your buddies who say solar panels will drain the sun and kill all the plants.

There's no new physics here it's an established irrefutable fact that the speed of light depends on the medium it's traveling through.

The stars are moving and the earth is motionless, case closed.

[BADecker]

Bad if you want to claim the speed of light is the same in all mediums then you need to go join your buddies who say solar panels will drain the sun and kill all the plants.

There's no new physics here it's an established irrefutable fact that the speed of light depends on the medium it's traveling through.

The stars are moving and the earth is motionless, case closed.

Case not closed.

Speed of light is irrelevant.

Action of light traveling through a particular medium as opposed to some other medium is irrelevant.

The thing that rules is the action of light through the ether... or through space if you want to believe in space rather than the ether.

----------

Physics is flawed. It is flawed because basic math is flawed. For example, 1 + 1 never equals 2. Why not? Because there are no two things that are exactly the same. They are always at least a little different. Because of this, 1 + 1 will always equal 1 + 1... never 2.

When you consider this, the deeper you get into any form of physics, the greater will become the flaw. This is part of the reason why standard physics has more and greater holes in it as you apply greater math to describing that physics. Certainly the physics itself doesn't have any holes. It is the description of physics that produces understandings that are flaw, because the description is based on the flawed language of mathematics as it exists.

----------

When I say that "you can't," I don't mean that you are unable to make the attempt. But the thing that you are attempting to do is to take some pieces of a flawed description of physics, and apply them to a different description of physics to make a more accurate description of physics. If you don't apply quantum math to what you are doing, the odds are that your description will be more flawed than the one you are attempting to replace.

----------

Parallel universe theory suggests that there are as many as an infinite number of universes occupying the same space and time that ours occupies. Parallel universe theory never really got off the ground, because it requires the ether to make it work. The ether is the substance that the parallel universes are "made" out of.

We have mathematically (with our flawed math) described completely 6 or 8 dimensions. We have a good handle on another 6 or 8. Then there are 15 or so that we have some math for, but these are not seen at all clearly. Yet it is the dimensions that express the way the parallel universes exist in different "phases" that keep them separate while at the same time allowing them some interaction.

Let's say that some star out there somewhere, shoots out a photon of light. This photon makes it to earth and is observed. Yet the photon itself is a thing that has changed untold times over simply to "travel" the distances from the star to the earth. It is destroyed and recreated by interactions of the various universes according to dimensional laws (ether laws) that cannot be comprehended by space physics.

Flat earth is attempting to apply space physics to ether physics in some areas. It simply will not work. Flat earth ideas are just as flawed as current standard ideas.

----------

One + 1 does not = 2. Again, the reason is that there are no 2 1s that are the same. The closest that we can come to making 1 + 1 = 2 is found in quantum math, because it is the closest that we can come to finding two 1s that are the same. Where are these two extremely similar 1s? They are 1 and -1. The only difference between 1 and -1 is the "charge." Yet, with our math, 1 + -1 = 0.

The ancient peoples from the past, past that we formally calculate as, say, 14,000 years ago, recognized this. It is the reason their science was different than ours. It is the reason that their science was based on something more accurate. It is the reason that they were destroyed in a cataclysm that nearly destroyed the earth, because even THEIR math/science was flawed. We are heading the same direction as they, partially because our science, flat earth or round earth, is even more flawed than theirs.

----------

Flat earth and round earth are fun to play with. Play. But get down to life, as well.

[galdur]

For as long as I remember solar power has been about to take off, but its share in the U.S. electricity generation is still interestingly about zero.

In 2014, the United States generated about 4,093 billion kilowatthours of electricity.1  About 67% of the electricity generated was from fossil fuels (coal, natural gas, and petroleum).

Major energy sources and percent share of total U.S. electricity generation in 2014:

Coal = 39%
Natural gas = 27%
Nuclear = 19%
Hydropower = 6%
Other renewables = 7%
Biomass = 1.7%
Geothermal = 0.4%
Solar = 0.4%
Wind = 4.4%
Petroleum = 1%
Other gases < 1%

Energy Information Administration.

[BADecker]

For as long as I remember solar power has been about to take off, but its share in the U.S. electricity generation is still interestingly about zero.

In 2014, the United States generated about 4,093 billion kilowatthours of electricity.1  About 67% of the electricity generated was from fossil fuels (coal, natural gas, and petroleum).

Major energy sources and percent share of total U.S. electricity generation in 2014:

Coal = 39%
Natural gas = 27%
Nuclear = 19%
Hydropower = 6%
Other renewables = 7%
Biomass = 1.7%
Geothermal = 0.4%
Solar = 0.4%
Wind = 4.4%
Petroleum = 1%
Other gases < 1%

Energy Information Administration.

When solar hits, it will be too late to get in on the ground floor.

25 Top Companies Investing in Solar - http://ecowatch.com/2014/10/15/companies-invest-solar-seia/

The comprehensive new report, which identifies major commercial solar projects and ranks top corporate solar users, shows Walmart at the top of the list for the third year in a row with 105 megawatts (MW) installed at 254 locations.

Rounding out the top 25 companies utilizing solar are Kohl’s, Costco, Apple, IKEA, Macy’s, Johnson & Johnson, Target, McGraw Hill, Staples, Campbell’s Soup, U.S. Foods, Bed Bath & Beyond, Kaiser Permanente, Volkswagen, Walgreens, Safeway, FedEx, Intel, L’Oreal, General Motors, Toys “R” Us, Verizon, White Rose Foods, Toyota and AT&T.

Don't think these companies aren't looking at solar as a sales item when the time is right.

[galdur]

Yeah well, that´s really minuscule generation there in the table. Will require much more adoption in the larger picture to get solar off the ground. Some European countries are pretty well off the ground. But overall
 it´s still microscopic.

[notbatman]

Bad if you want to claim the speed of light is the same in all mediums then you need to go join your buddies who say solar panels will drain the sun and kill all the plants.

There's no new physics here it's an established irrefutable fact that the speed of light depends on the medium it's traveling through.

The stars are moving and the earth is motionless, case closed.

Case not closed.

Speed of light is irrelevant.

Action of light traveling through a particular medium as opposed to some other medium is irrelevant.

The thing that rules is the action of light through the ether... or through space if you want to believe in space rather than the ether.

----------

The difference in the speed of light in air vs. water is the entire basis of Airy's experiment. It was intended as an experiment to test the æther but in this case we're appropriating it to determine weather it's the stars or the earth that's in motion and the results are irrefutable; the stars are in motion and and the earth is stationary.

Physics is flawed. It is flawed because basic math is flawed. For example, 1 + 1 never equals 2. Why not? Because there are no two things that are exactly the same. They are always at least a little different. Because of this, 1 + 1 will always equal 1 + 1... never 2.

When you consider this, the deeper you get into any form of physics, the greater will become the flaw. This is part of the reason why standard physics has more and greater holes in it as you apply greater math to describing that physics. Certainly the physics itself doesn't have any holes. It is the description of physics that produces understandings that are flaw, because the description is based on the flawed language of mathematics as it exists.

----------

The symbol "1" points to the number 1 i.e. the symbol "1" is not the number. Numbers are perfect, they can never be created, destroyed or modified in any way and they exist outside of space and time. 1 + 1 will = 2 every time, math is the only science where you can be 100% sure of the results.

...snip...

[BADecker]

Yeah well, that´s really minuscule generation there in the table. Will require much more adoption in the larger picture to get solar off the ground. Some European countries are pretty well off the ground. But overall
 it´s still microscopic.

image

The point isn't the amount of usage. The point is the companies that are doing it.

[galdur]

Yeah well, that´s really minuscule generation there in the table. Will require much more adoption in the larger picture to get solar off the ground. Some European countries are pretty well off the ground. But overall
 it´s still microscopic.

image

The point isn't the amount of usage. The point is the companies that are doing it.

Sure, it´s pretty meaningless in itself because it simply isn´t competitive in the market which is why it has about zero market share. If that´s what you´re saying I agree.

[BADecker]

Bad if you want to claim the speed of light is the same in all mediums then you need to go join your buddies who say solar panels will drain the sun and kill all the plants.

There's no new physics here it's an established irrefutable fact that the speed of light depends on the medium it's traveling through.

The stars are moving and the earth is motionless, case closed.

Case not closed.

Speed of light is irrelevant.

Action of light traveling through a particular medium as opposed to some other medium is irrelevant.

The thing that rules is the action of light through the ether... or through space if you want to believe in space rather than the ether.

----------

The difference in the speed of light in air vs. water is the entire basis of Airy's experiment. It was intended as an experiment to test the æther but in this case we're appropriating it to determine weather it's the stars or the earth that's in motion and the results are irrefutable; the stars are in motion and and the earth is stationary.

Physics is flawed. It is flawed because basic math is flawed. For example, 1 + 1 never equals 2. Why not? Because there are no two things that are exactly the same. They are always at least a little different. Because of this, 1 + 1 will always equal 1 + 1... never 2.

When you consider this, the deeper you get into any form of physics, the greater will become the flaw. This is part of the reason why standard physics has more and greater holes in it as you apply greater math to describing that physics. Certainly the physics itself doesn't have any holes. It is the description of physics that produces understandings that are flaw, because the description is based on the flawed language of mathematics as it exists.

----------

The symbol "1" points to the number 1 i.e. the symbol "1" is not the number. Numbers are perfect, they can never be created, destroyed or modified in any way and they exist outside of space and time. 1 + 1 will = 2 every time, math is the only science where you can be 100% sure of the results.

...snip...

All right. Either you do not understand, or you simply do not want to acknowledge.

[BADecker]

Yeah well, that´s really minuscule generation there in the table. Will require much more adoption in the larger picture to get solar off the ground. Some European countries are pretty well off the ground. But overall
 it´s still microscopic.

image

The point isn't the amount of usage. The point is the companies that are doing it.

Sure, it´s pretty meaningless in itself because it simply isn´t competitive in the market which is why it has about zero market share. If that´s what you´re saying I agree.

Are you trying to say that these companies succeed because they are not doing something competitive? Why would you think they are going to all the trouble of installing solar if it didn't work? It works. They are proving it. And many of them are looking to the future when solar will be even more competitive.

[notbatman]

Bad if you want to claim the speed of light is the same in all mediums then you need to go join your buddies who say solar panels will drain the sun and kill all the plants.

There's no new physics here it's an established irrefutable fact that the speed of light depends on the medium it's traveling through.

The stars are moving and the earth is motionless, case closed.

Case not closed.

Speed of light is irrelevant.

Action of light traveling through a particular medium as opposed to some other medium is irrelevant.

The thing that rules is the action of light through the ether... or through space if you want to believe in space rather than the ether.

----------

The difference in the speed of light in air vs. water is the entire basis of Airy's experiment. It was intended as an experiment to test the æther but in this case we're appropriating it to determine weather it's the stars or the earth that's in motion and the results are irrefutable; the stars are in motion and and the earth is stationary.

Physics is flawed. It is flawed because basic math is flawed. For example, 1 + 1 never equals 2. Why not? Because there are no two things that are exactly the same. They are always at least a little different. Because of this, 1 + 1 will always equal 1 + 1... never 2.

When you consider this, the deeper you get into any form of physics, the greater will become the flaw. This is part of the reason why standard physics has more and greater holes in it as you apply greater math to describing that physics. Certainly the physics itself doesn't have any holes. It is the description of physics that produces understandings that are flaw, because the description is based on the flawed language of mathematics as it exists.

----------

The symbol "1" points to the number 1 i.e. the symbol "1" is not the number. Numbers are perfect, they can never be created, destroyed or modified in any way and they exist outside of space and time. 1 + 1 will = 2 every time, math is the only science where you can be 100% sure of the results.

...snip...

All right. Either you do not understand, or you simply do not want to acknowledge.

I acknowledge that we live in an imperfect world it's you that's in denial. You're materialist views are a fallacy, Plato despite being a flat-headed goldbricking scumbag is correct in regards to the subjective nature of the universe. You obviously didn't pay attention during theology class.

This being the case it looks like you need some spoon-feeding: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_Forms