Ice Cube and Gravity Wave Telescopes.

What has LIGO found? As I say elsewhere I believe since Einstein like Mach believed that gravity and inertia are essentially the same thing and because gravity would radiate in not out, what LIGO may have found is the speed of inertia, not gravity. Gravity waves being much lighter than light may travel that much faster than light. (Einstein believed light was a particle in Special Relativity so it would have constant unchanged speed from source  to observer. Even so he also found the wave particle duality and Einstein uses the doppler shift often in Special Relativity, a wave event. So the waves being more continuous would have attraction and particles like inertia and as in Relativity would radiate out while the waves could radiate in unlike as with LIGO.)

Here I want to comment a bit first about the AI review or summary of this post. Ai makes a few claims that I want to discuss..it says that my claims are speculative and also how my page is complex as well as the claim that this is not about mainstream physics.

The reason my pages aren't simple is because relativity is actually quite complex and I seek to compare many events to see what they have in common.

I would reply that my ideas may have real potential at least till disproven mostly because I can use them to explain about 40 things otherwise unexplained  by relativity. 

That is to say if viable my ideas may solve problems like a real measure of creativity but also  make some definite predictions. For example my theory predicts that because space and time are not as unified by relativity because motion backwards through space would mean our motion could also be backwards through time, matter and antimatter spinning in opposite directions like a small clock moving backwards through time relative to each other in the gravitational field would make it so one would fall upward by relativity but not down but instead gravity is only attractive on the outside of the heavy quanta by what I call Line Removal (LR) (rather like paramagnetism) so matter and antimatter would fall almost at the same rate but not quite, Because for the gravity wrapping around the quanta at it's hugely faster rate to measure the spin or the acceleration of gravity by the spins of the quanta on the outside would not quite match up to that one extra spin around of the quanta if it's only with spin at the speed of light. By my idea there may be a slight distinction between the rate at which matter and antimatter fall but by no means would one fall up and the other fall down by relativity, And this would explain how gravity doesn't shield as for eclipse after eclipse over historical time because the speed of the eclipses would change with even the slightest amount of shielding.

My ideas may not be so outside the mainstream because Newton himself believed that gravity might have a speed hugely faster than the speed of light due to the lack of displacement of gravity towards the sun by any measure yet seen. And also for example the speed of tunneling has not yet found any upper limit.



Another definite prediction of my theory is that the galaxies would spin more in one direction than the other because of time asymmetry not found in relativity. This is also because when you reverse your motion through space you would reverse motion through time by relativity and the Galaxys spinning like a clock with much huger mass through the field of the cosmos would not have the symmetry of space and time unified, falling at a different rate just as the antimatter and matter would fall at a somewhat different rate. At first I was discouraged to find that apparently counts of the galaxy's spins In the nearby cosmos didn't show the spin events, but more recent counts of the galaxies near to the center of the cosmos show a definite asymmetry of the spins.

Click here for a Smithsonian page about this.

(Some say the clockwise spins may be caused by the Milky Way's own spin doppler shift, but this had been discounted by earlier astronomers as too small and also the near galaxies might show more spin not the distant events just as to see a distant star the apparent motion is much reduced compared to motion of a planet like Saturn. If the near galaxies are almost 50/50 about the spin, where is this change caused by our own motion? Not just disappeared.)

 

Another prediction of my idea I call GWD  (General Wave Dynamics) is that inside the singularity of a black hole there's faster than light spin of the heavy quanta I call superfusion quanta that have enough centrifugal force to send the beam out even against the faster than light motion of the gravitational field inward of the black hole. This idea of the jets of the supermassive bodies having faster than light shear forces for the field could mean that there might be other spectral lines and other anamolous changes In the spectra of the jets that are against both common chemistry and also disproving the standard model, and this is indeed what has been found.

This arxiv link discusses not only spectral anamolies but also nonlocal motions of the field on cosmic scales.

There's one unifying idea that all this is related to I think and that is that above all, the speed of light is constant in relativity and everything about relativity including the Lorentz contraction otherwise fits into this. This contraction fits into virtually all of modern physics and relativity doesn't explain it since there is no field there or nothing there to contract.

 Even so I believe it can be explained by simple mechanical pressure of the field on a high-speed mass. (The field isn't directly seen because it's low energy and fast adapting, and in balance like the weight and counterweight of an elevator as Maxwell believed for electric charges and the exact speed of light. Like a chipmunk on a power wire, there is no shock because no net current flows when a mass is in uniform motion. Even so there is enough evidence for these dark matter and dark energy fields, and the field being based on energy conservation can both make and store changes in acceleration and uniform motion by way of the low energy fields
as would be expected if computers are so common in nature.)

And the speed of light change might be explained by the simple phase change by the gravity wrapping around the outside of each heavy quanta each being a source of gravity even if they don't shield just as the neutrino may wrap around all the heavy quanta without much change. Line Removal and this simple phase change combined with Newton's observation that the displacement for gravity is almost zero towards the sun I believe might be a window to another type of physics, not a disproof of special relativity which is well proven but rather a possible extension into other science.

 I agree with Van Flandern that the apparent near 0 displacement seen for gravity from the Sun to the Earth is also like the lower density as Maxwell believed for light and the pressure may result in higher speed in my more general use of Maxwell's method he used to predict the speed of light exactly. 

(Gravity is in general the opposite of relativity since it radiates down to one, and the Earth is more priveliged and at rest than the moon, and the thermodynamic speed of light and high speed motion of Relativity radiate outward, so when light slows down in gravity the gravity speeds up. So lower density for gravity might mean higher speed). 

 I name my hopeful use of Maxwell's method General Wave Dynamics GWD. 

 
   
As Van Flandern notes, there is no yet measurable displacement for gravity. (Tesla and Van Flandern get the credit for priority about the idea of the speed of gravity being fast, I have used the idea of FTL gravity

Earthquakes And Rocks as Magnetic fossils to Find Evidence Possibly More Useful in Predicting Earthquakes

Siesmologists were suprised by the Tokyo earthquake since they thought the fault line near Japan wasn't so powerful to cause the magnitude 9.0 Tokohu quake. Megaquakes of 8.5 or higher seem to cluster according to records of the last 100 years. E.g. six of them were in the last decade, yet none in the thirty years before that. By current methods we can't know based on current data if this is just a fluke or relates to deeper events.

I believe we might find rocks that have been unchanged in stratigraphy since the time we want to research. The quakes we want to find may shake them so violently in the earth's magnetic field or in the field of other rocks nearby, they would help us find when the quakes occurred even over long eras of time by a sort of magnetic fossil record. If the quakes are near the spreading centers of the ocean floors they are known to register magnetic fields as the iron in the lava oozes out and solidifies. (This was one reason continental drift was eventually accepted by geologists). By the magnetic fields with reliable changes of larger quakes seen we would know if large quakes are in clusters, and so we might improve our earthquake science.

Outfits of 2798 AD, Why Cows Like Laughs, Though I'm a Veggitarian, Except When Eat Cheese Then I Eat Richer!

   They have been inventing computer chips that just print out, not in a billion dollar clean room but real cheap  invented by the inventor of epaper. This may be useful for clothes that change their look no more outfits to wash save 1,000's washing the machine, so the washing machine washer dryer combo will never cancel out! You just buy three outfits for 50$ for life self cleaning inside and or auto odor control, ahh! Refresh air!  New outfit hour by hour, unlimited outfits, shields for the army, and more. The best inventors could think up in days of old before was a robo hamper that used codes and magnets with a sniffer to know if the outfit is clean or odified (it's been seen most people sorting clothes use this method). And a loop to hang the outfit on. Another use might be computerized wallpaper but a better way devised may be epaint you just spray or paint it on. No wires just beam it up to each pixel it gives your wall lots of options, a new wall each month or hour, it's the wall not the washline! Like the mall where they have a the Bizware family reunion!

   
  Actually a computerized cow milker has been invented about 10 years ago, it has computerized methods that don't tickle the cow, this was how it became usual to see cows rolling over in laughter!