UPDATED!!!! FIGURED IT OUT!!! See the bottom of this post. Time is faster closer to gravity between fixed points of reference, without motion and speed being involved. 3/28/15
Recently, I've been thinking about higher frequency atmospheric conditions over the surface charge of Earth ground. Particularly where UFO sightings are found to be more common. Some we can see from the ground, some requires a certain frequency field to be able to see UFO's vibrating in a higher frequency in the air.
It doesn't really have anything to do with curved space or gravity, but with frequency conditions.
The Tesla tower showed that higher frequency occurred over the surface of the Earth; the higher over the surface, the higher the frequency.
A starship would have to lower its frequency in order to land on the surface.
What if a starship comes from another place than Earth, for example from a higher-frequency system? How would the ship lower its frequency lower than the place where it was constructed, to land on Earth (Earth would be vibrating at a lower frequency then say, an Ascended planetary "life-sphere")?
It would have to make an electrical ground connection with Earth surface (like a rod stuck in the surface), and reverse its internal transformers and carry that frequency throughout the ship, electrically "grounding out" the ship.
Frequency deals with time and vibration more than gravity does. The frequency increase in the upper atmosphere of Earth and above the atmosphere (resonance of higher frequency atmosphere through the vacuum of space) would affect time, speeding up time farther from gravity, but without having anything at all to do with gravity being the thing that affects time.
Because if gravity were the thing that affected time, the more gravity is at a higher frequency of mass concentration. Space and Time is one fabric. So there are two conditions that affect time: Gravity Frequency (inertial energy) -- indirect, and Electrical Frequency (magneto-electrostatic) -- direct.
The OTC-X1 engine (and the Outer Ring engine) doesn't necessarily use the principles of gravity at all, because all inertial forces are in balance and equilibrium at all times.
The Vertical engine of the LAU-X3 (central vertical core of cones) however uses both gravity and electrical principles (electro-gravity).
This could very well explain the difference between General and Special Relativity, and Tesla Frequency Relativity, as far as how those situations affect time-measurements and time dilations (different "time zones" of how fast or slow time flows).
Magneto-electrostatic energy alone is not what makes such changes, unless it is in the same geometry of a stellar object such as a planet, star or black hole (double vortex), or as the magneto-electrostatic resonance field of a gravity frequency.
As a result, these physics at this website have inadvertently become a unified hybrid, and in some parts without clearly making the distinctions about what causes what (although there is no causality, a black hole causes the existence of a galaxy; the universe is the result of our existence; the biological fractal causality is in the middle of all known frequency ranges of the universe, shown by Nassim Haramein
https://vimeo.com/51309681).
That would certainly make it more difficult for mathematicians to calculate precise Relativity, possibly explaining imprecision in certain GPS systems. Also, it explains why Special and General relativity seem to "get things backwards" in instances where we can observe objects visually closer to the sun and planets, in those static frequency fields.
All a higher-frequency starship (and crew) has to do is electrically ground their systems, in the ship and biologically, to match Earth surface frequency. Maybe it would make it harder for them to raise their frequency back up to depart and return to their origin, but I doubt it. Frequency transformation can easily be done. A ship engines alone makes it to where all frequencies can be experienced.
A higher gravity-field electrical resonance in the atmosphere would imply that there is stronger inertial frequency there (not necessarily stronger gravity). Gravitational resonance increases the normal effect of gravity, and that can be seen throughout galactic geometry. The gravitational force at the surface of Earth would become less at higher altitudes, due to the increased frequency resonance of the field at higher altitude, making the gravity weaker by a phasing polarity of gravity, relatively, the higher one is over the surface if we consider gravitational resonance fields. Likewise, there would be neutral gravity at some point directly between the Earth and moon, which cancels the gravity effect of the Earth, and of the moon individually.
I think that's more of an oddity, though. I'm thinking about deleting that paragraph above, it's rather counter-intuitive. I do want to point something out, though. On the Home page I mention forces of "relative acceleration" and "relative deceleration," particularly dealing with near-Earth orbit and atmospheric travel and motion. Magneto-electrostatic resonance fields can occur in both atmosphere, and in a vacuum (near-Earth orbit, where there is no atmosphere). For example a satellite can generate an electrostatic energy wave from working with ions and gas in an engine, but the electrostatic wave will still propagate through a vacuum as long as it's first generated in air (static).
If a jet or near-Earth orbiting rocket or satellite travels in the same curved path and speed both around the Earth, and out deeper in space away from the Earth, there will be a measured difference in temporal relativity due to the proximity to Earth because Earth generates a resonance field gravitationally, inertially, and electrically. You could observe the same thing geometrically, as well.
The moon doesn't appear to actually be traveling that rapidly because it's so far away from the Earth, and that is another aspect of relativity is relative motion (acceleration and/or deceleration) pertaining to orbits. There are many different ways to look at a countless number of finite variables involved, including with resonance. The Earth and the moon are in a type of gravitational resonance with each other but the vibration of one object can also be considered a resonance field, even though it may take two things to establish a resonance; a vibration is resonance of a one. Honestly, I just want to point out the existence of resonance fields at this point, and I'm not intending to explain it or do anything with it. I'm just somewhat loading it into the "up front memory buffer."
That tangent aside:
Time is at a higher frequency when GPS satellites are moving at a higher frequency, adding inertial frequency to the satellite, even though it is relatively in a fixed position over Earth via line-of-sight at all times (it has to move faster to keep up with the rotation over the Earth, and to balance out it's vector of motion to that of the vector of the pull of gravity).
As in the case of objects orbiting the Earth in a close orbit, like the space shuttle or the International Space Station (ISS), they would be in a different resonance like the rubber ball which rubbed against a crystal bowl causes the bowl to vibrate -- different "sounds" to each object. The resonance of its motion quickly across the Earth's sky, in either the forward direction of Earth's rotation or the backward direction, would create a frequency change that is different from a GPS satellite in a fixed position traveling in similar relative motion to the Earth.
Near-orbit objects or vehicles have a higher pull of gravity to overcome, and must travel faster. Their time frequency is a little slower to maintain that separation or distance over Earth because they're moving so fast in space (spatial distance) relative TO the Earth.
Higher-orbit GPS satellites don't have to deal with the close resonance of the static gravity field frequency of Earth, and have a little bit of a faster flow of time, because it's also generating its own resonance frequency.
What is the time zone of the moon? Hmm. It orbits the Earth. Orbiting the central sun, planetary time zones are merely relative according to their mass, and different harmonic distances from the sun, and relative motion with/against each other (coming and going) since all the planets orbit relative with the sun.
The moon has a slight relative acceleration (moving against Earth's spin), but is not traveling very fast (it travels 1/7th the arc of the sky per day). It has a lot of mass, but not nearly the amount of mass of Earth. It is far enough away from Earth so that it is not in Earth's immediate near-resonance field. It's spin is also very, very slow, enough to make one side somewhat affixed pointing to Earth. I would say Earth clock rate ticks faster, but it's fairly well-balanced.
Jupiter should have a little faster time frequency than the Earth (it's revolving around the sun slower, but it has more mass), but then Venus should have a slower time frequency than the Earth (Venus is closer in resonance to the sun, but is in motion faster, but the clock rate will change depending on when Venus is coming or going). Mercury should have a faster time frequency because it's just so close to the sun HOWEVER, there is a slow time speed-bump near gravitational sources as seen in the post below, "Starship Relativity," which shows Mercury's time zone ought to be slower. Special relativity adjusts the time frequency between the motions of the each planet to each other, as each planet also is in motion around the sun (coming or going relative to another planet, and on what side of the sun and in what gravitational alignments).
Gravity affects space, and frequency affects time (General, and Special inertial relativity).
If time flowed faster outside the solar system (away from gravity), it would have a limited range until the space started to be stretched between gravity fields beyond the normal time flow. On a sheet of rubber, Y is time, X is space. Stretch space and you still have to deal with it taking time to travel an even longer distance. Time also takes longer to cross the distance, and so time is also stretched (lowered in frequency) -- expansion of space due to acceleration and gravity. The stars are none-the-less in the same places and not moving farther or closer or farther. Gravity makes it appear as if distant star systems and galaxies are moving away from everything, but only because it is the pull of gravity that warps the spacetime frequencies. Dark matter has been attributed to keeping this balance, but there is a balance.
The red shifting of distant stars is not because they are moving farther away from us (the stars have been in the same places for thousands of years, look at the pyramids, the Sumerian Hall of Records, too), but it is because the force of gravity is Equivalent to an acceleration force. The distant stars are still in the same location, just red shifted due to gravity's pull, not because they are physically moving apart.
Equivalence means that Gravity is equivalent to acceleration. Gravity has a pull, it doesn't mean the stars are actually accelerating farther away. It's like saying a black hole's gravity is so strong not even light can escape it; meanwhile, light and gravity waves travel at the same speeds. Gravity waves are not somehow magically traveling faster than light waves at the same frequency (actually there is one exception; see "Starship Relativity" post down below). Gravity itself couldn't even be felt beyond the event horizon, and it would close itself off from the universe, and we wouldn't even know about a black hole'e existence. Thus, there is no event horizon, if it is claimed that light speed and gravity waves travel at the same speed. Particle fountains and high energy cosmic rays spew forth from a black hole, luminously.
An Event Horizon depends upon gravity waves traveling faster than the speed of light; and under normal conditions it does not, or does it? Does gravity actually have a wave? Or is "Gravitation" a force of resonance of the combination of waves that is the very shape of space itself?
Also, just because our Sun has been here long enough to receive 13 billion years of light from the universe (distant galaxies and what have you), doesn't mean the universe is 13 billion years old. It means our Sun is 13 billion years old. Paradoxes! It's just common sense! It's called "paradoxical relativity."
I do want to be careful about saying there is no event horizon to a black hole, however. The situation above is an exercise in logic only. However the age of the sun is correct.
I keep coming back to this one thing -- "Unifiable" Relativity -- and it seems to be the most important "reality" to "graph."
If one shot a powerful visible laser to Jupiter from Earth, they would have to aim where they visually see that Jupiter will be in seconds, because the light takes time to travel from Jupiter to Earth. Observers would watch in amazement as the laser took a curved path to Jupiter. The light from Jupiter is where it was, not where it is, just like hearing the sound from a Jet crossing overhead. Special relativity is a necessary inclusion of calculation to launch a probe to another planet.
As the planet Mercury passes around behind the Sun, at some distance across the midpoint behind the Sun, the light from Mercury will be bent around the Sun so it appears as if it comes out from around the Sun faster than when we expect it to be. But it's spin is also increased, and we can't make up the difference unless we factor in the Sun's gravity field and how it speeds up time.
Special relativity is different than General relativity. General relativity deals with the mass of the planet or star or stellar object (even a massive probe), of how its mass affects time and space.
"Tesla relativity" is the direct frequency adjustment of spacetime, directly transforming the frequency of spacetime through an energy field, rather than accelerating forces of inertial mass.
~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.
Take a look at the image below. Modern General Relativity shows that time is slower closer to a gravitational source. But Historical Record from the Sumerian Hall of Records show that time passes faster in the star system than outside the star system. The Nephlim used monoatomic gold to stay young and healthy for the duration that the Elder gods (Anunnaki) were gone. 3600 years (one "Shar" or "day") would pass to one "Anunnaki Day" where they are from, just outside the solar system (that pertains to the orbits, not the time dilation). The same people would return to Earth, but their children, the Nephlim were older because more time passed on Earth, and less time passed in the time zone just outside the Solar system. Ancient record is opposite of what General Relativity states. "Rule by Secrecy" by Jim Marrs also correlates with information out of the Sumerian Hall of Records.
The picture below is a rough representation of the time dilation, in a visual form, according to General Relativity. According to General Relativity, it is indeed possible for a gravity force to be completely neutralized, thus proving that the OTC-X1 does indeed lower inertial mass, where the mass of a space vehicle to go to zero in an energy field. By reducing mass, gravity is neutralized (phased to zero, or to a very low number), which allows for the time frequency of the ship to be much higher. So the pilots would witness time slowing down dramatically all around them, while they were sped up in a faster flow of time in the ship. Gravity (inertial mass) neutralization.
The point of reference is outside the solar system, but General Relativity is measured from Earth as the fixed point of reference usually. That may change the results. If only 10 years pass in time frame (A), and say 100 years passes in time frame (B), then time-frame B is at a faster frequency, and thus spatial distance is shortest.
Expansion of space stretches the space, and thus it takes longer time to travel a distance -- a temporal distance is lengthened in its frequency. Expansion of space violates General Relativity, if we are to consider time speeds up away from a gravitationally high inertial mass frequency (frequency = in time).
Expansion of space actually violates Special Relativity though, not General Relativity.
The picture below is Special Relativity, not GR.
Recently, I've been thinking about higher frequency atmospheric conditions over the surface charge of Earth ground. Particularly where UFO sightings are found to be more common. Some we can see from the ground, some requires a certain frequency field to be able to see UFO's vibrating in a higher frequency in the air.
It doesn't really have anything to do with curved space or gravity, but with frequency conditions.
The Tesla tower showed that higher frequency occurred over the surface of the Earth; the higher over the surface, the higher the frequency.
A starship would have to lower its frequency in order to land on the surface.
What if a starship comes from another place than Earth, for example from a higher-frequency system? How would the ship lower its frequency lower than the place where it was constructed, to land on Earth (Earth would be vibrating at a lower frequency then say, an Ascended planetary "life-sphere")?
It would have to make an electrical ground connection with Earth surface (like a rod stuck in the surface), and reverse its internal transformers and carry that frequency throughout the ship, electrically "grounding out" the ship.
Frequency deals with time and vibration more than gravity does. The frequency increase in the upper atmosphere of Earth and above the atmosphere (resonance of higher frequency atmosphere through the vacuum of space) would affect time, speeding up time farther from gravity, but without having anything at all to do with gravity being the thing that affects time.
Because if gravity were the thing that affected time, the more gravity is at a higher frequency of mass concentration. Space and Time is one fabric. So there are two conditions that affect time: Gravity Frequency (inertial energy) -- indirect, and Electrical Frequency (magneto-electrostatic) -- direct.
The OTC-X1 engine (and the Outer Ring engine) doesn't necessarily use the principles of gravity at all, because all inertial forces are in balance and equilibrium at all times.
The Vertical engine of the LAU-X3 (central vertical core of cones) however uses both gravity and electrical principles (electro-gravity).
This could very well explain the difference between General and Special Relativity, and Tesla Frequency Relativity, as far as how those situations affect time-measurements and time dilations (different "time zones" of how fast or slow time flows).
Magneto-electrostatic energy alone is not what makes such changes, unless it is in the same geometry of a stellar object such as a planet, star or black hole (double vortex), or as the magneto-electrostatic resonance field of a gravity frequency.
As a result, these physics at this website have inadvertently become a unified hybrid, and in some parts without clearly making the distinctions about what causes what (although there is no causality, a black hole causes the existence of a galaxy; the universe is the result of our existence; the biological fractal causality is in the middle of all known frequency ranges of the universe, shown by Nassim Haramein
https://vimeo.com/51309681).
That would certainly make it more difficult for mathematicians to calculate precise Relativity, possibly explaining imprecision in certain GPS systems. Also, it explains why Special and General relativity seem to "get things backwards" in instances where we can observe objects visually closer to the sun and planets, in those static frequency fields.
All a higher-frequency starship (and crew) has to do is electrically ground their systems, in the ship and biologically, to match Earth surface frequency. Maybe it would make it harder for them to raise their frequency back up to depart and return to their origin, but I doubt it. Frequency transformation can easily be done. A ship engines alone makes it to where all frequencies can be experienced.
A higher gravity-field electrical resonance in the atmosphere would imply that there is stronger inertial frequency there (not necessarily stronger gravity). Gravitational resonance increases the normal effect of gravity, and that can be seen throughout galactic geometry. The gravitational force at the surface of Earth would become less at higher altitudes, due to the increased frequency resonance of the field at higher altitude, making the gravity weaker by a phasing polarity of gravity, relatively, the higher one is over the surface if we consider gravitational resonance fields. Likewise, there would be neutral gravity at some point directly between the Earth and moon, which cancels the gravity effect of the Earth, and of the moon individually.
I think that's more of an oddity, though. I'm thinking about deleting that paragraph above, it's rather counter-intuitive. I do want to point something out, though. On the Home page I mention forces of "relative acceleration" and "relative deceleration," particularly dealing with near-Earth orbit and atmospheric travel and motion. Magneto-electrostatic resonance fields can occur in both atmosphere, and in a vacuum (near-Earth orbit, where there is no atmosphere). For example a satellite can generate an electrostatic energy wave from working with ions and gas in an engine, but the electrostatic wave will still propagate through a vacuum as long as it's first generated in air (static).
If a jet or near-Earth orbiting rocket or satellite travels in the same curved path and speed both around the Earth, and out deeper in space away from the Earth, there will be a measured difference in temporal relativity due to the proximity to Earth because Earth generates a resonance field gravitationally, inertially, and electrically. You could observe the same thing geometrically, as well.
The moon doesn't appear to actually be traveling that rapidly because it's so far away from the Earth, and that is another aspect of relativity is relative motion (acceleration and/or deceleration) pertaining to orbits. There are many different ways to look at a countless number of finite variables involved, including with resonance. The Earth and the moon are in a type of gravitational resonance with each other but the vibration of one object can also be considered a resonance field, even though it may take two things to establish a resonance; a vibration is resonance of a one. Honestly, I just want to point out the existence of resonance fields at this point, and I'm not intending to explain it or do anything with it. I'm just somewhat loading it into the "up front memory buffer."
That tangent aside:
Time is at a higher frequency when GPS satellites are moving at a higher frequency, adding inertial frequency to the satellite, even though it is relatively in a fixed position over Earth via line-of-sight at all times (it has to move faster to keep up with the rotation over the Earth, and to balance out it's vector of motion to that of the vector of the pull of gravity).
As in the case of objects orbiting the Earth in a close orbit, like the space shuttle or the International Space Station (ISS), they would be in a different resonance like the rubber ball which rubbed against a crystal bowl causes the bowl to vibrate -- different "sounds" to each object. The resonance of its motion quickly across the Earth's sky, in either the forward direction of Earth's rotation or the backward direction, would create a frequency change that is different from a GPS satellite in a fixed position traveling in similar relative motion to the Earth.
Near-orbit objects or vehicles have a higher pull of gravity to overcome, and must travel faster. Their time frequency is a little slower to maintain that separation or distance over Earth because they're moving so fast in space (spatial distance) relative TO the Earth.
Higher-orbit GPS satellites don't have to deal with the close resonance of the static gravity field frequency of Earth, and have a little bit of a faster flow of time, because it's also generating its own resonance frequency.
What is the time zone of the moon? Hmm. It orbits the Earth. Orbiting the central sun, planetary time zones are merely relative according to their mass, and different harmonic distances from the sun, and relative motion with/against each other (coming and going) since all the planets orbit relative with the sun.
The moon has a slight relative acceleration (moving against Earth's spin), but is not traveling very fast (it travels 1/7th the arc of the sky per day). It has a lot of mass, but not nearly the amount of mass of Earth. It is far enough away from Earth so that it is not in Earth's immediate near-resonance field. It's spin is also very, very slow, enough to make one side somewhat affixed pointing to Earth. I would say Earth clock rate ticks faster, but it's fairly well-balanced.
Jupiter should have a little faster time frequency than the Earth (it's revolving around the sun slower, but it has more mass), but then Venus should have a slower time frequency than the Earth (Venus is closer in resonance to the sun, but is in motion faster, but the clock rate will change depending on when Venus is coming or going). Mercury should have a faster time frequency because it's just so close to the sun HOWEVER, there is a slow time speed-bump near gravitational sources as seen in the post below, "Starship Relativity," which shows Mercury's time zone ought to be slower. Special relativity adjusts the time frequency between the motions of the each planet to each other, as each planet also is in motion around the sun (coming or going relative to another planet, and on what side of the sun and in what gravitational alignments).
Gravity affects space, and frequency affects time (General, and Special inertial relativity).
If time flowed faster outside the solar system (away from gravity), it would have a limited range until the space started to be stretched between gravity fields beyond the normal time flow. On a sheet of rubber, Y is time, X is space. Stretch space and you still have to deal with it taking time to travel an even longer distance. Time also takes longer to cross the distance, and so time is also stretched (lowered in frequency) -- expansion of space due to acceleration and gravity. The stars are none-the-less in the same places and not moving farther or closer or farther. Gravity makes it appear as if distant star systems and galaxies are moving away from everything, but only because it is the pull of gravity that warps the spacetime frequencies. Dark matter has been attributed to keeping this balance, but there is a balance.
The red shifting of distant stars is not because they are moving farther away from us (the stars have been in the same places for thousands of years, look at the pyramids, the Sumerian Hall of Records, too), but it is because the force of gravity is Equivalent to an acceleration force. The distant stars are still in the same location, just red shifted due to gravity's pull, not because they are physically moving apart.
Equivalence means that Gravity is equivalent to acceleration. Gravity has a pull, it doesn't mean the stars are actually accelerating farther away. It's like saying a black hole's gravity is so strong not even light can escape it; meanwhile, light and gravity waves travel at the same speeds. Gravity waves are not somehow magically traveling faster than light waves at the same frequency (actually there is one exception; see "Starship Relativity" post down below). Gravity itself couldn't even be felt beyond the event horizon, and it would close itself off from the universe, and we wouldn't even know about a black hole'e existence. Thus, there is no event horizon, if it is claimed that light speed and gravity waves travel at the same speed. Particle fountains and high energy cosmic rays spew forth from a black hole, luminously.
An Event Horizon depends upon gravity waves traveling faster than the speed of light; and under normal conditions it does not, or does it? Does gravity actually have a wave? Or is "Gravitation" a force of resonance of the combination of waves that is the very shape of space itself?
Also, just because our Sun has been here long enough to receive 13 billion years of light from the universe (distant galaxies and what have you), doesn't mean the universe is 13 billion years old. It means our Sun is 13 billion years old. Paradoxes! It's just common sense! It's called "paradoxical relativity."
I do want to be careful about saying there is no event horizon to a black hole, however. The situation above is an exercise in logic only. However the age of the sun is correct.
I keep coming back to this one thing -- "Unifiable" Relativity -- and it seems to be the most important "reality" to "graph."
If one shot a powerful visible laser to Jupiter from Earth, they would have to aim where they visually see that Jupiter will be in seconds, because the light takes time to travel from Jupiter to Earth. Observers would watch in amazement as the laser took a curved path to Jupiter. The light from Jupiter is where it was, not where it is, just like hearing the sound from a Jet crossing overhead. Special relativity is a necessary inclusion of calculation to launch a probe to another planet.
As the planet Mercury passes around behind the Sun, at some distance across the midpoint behind the Sun, the light from Mercury will be bent around the Sun so it appears as if it comes out from around the Sun faster than when we expect it to be. But it's spin is also increased, and we can't make up the difference unless we factor in the Sun's gravity field and how it speeds up time.
Special relativity is different than General relativity. General relativity deals with the mass of the planet or star or stellar object (even a massive probe), of how its mass affects time and space.
"Tesla relativity" is the direct frequency adjustment of spacetime, directly transforming the frequency of spacetime through an energy field, rather than accelerating forces of inertial mass.
~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.
Take a look at the image below. Modern General Relativity shows that time is slower closer to a gravitational source. But Historical Record from the Sumerian Hall of Records show that time passes faster in the star system than outside the star system. The Nephlim used monoatomic gold to stay young and healthy for the duration that the Elder gods (Anunnaki) were gone. 3600 years (one "Shar" or "day") would pass to one "Anunnaki Day" where they are from, just outside the solar system (that pertains to the orbits, not the time dilation). The same people would return to Earth, but their children, the Nephlim were older because more time passed on Earth, and less time passed in the time zone just outside the Solar system. Ancient record is opposite of what General Relativity states. "Rule by Secrecy" by Jim Marrs also correlates with information out of the Sumerian Hall of Records.
The picture below is a rough representation of the time dilation, in a visual form, according to General Relativity. According to General Relativity, it is indeed possible for a gravity force to be completely neutralized, thus proving that the OTC-X1 does indeed lower inertial mass, where the mass of a space vehicle to go to zero in an energy field. By reducing mass, gravity is neutralized (phased to zero, or to a very low number), which allows for the time frequency of the ship to be much higher. So the pilots would witness time slowing down dramatically all around them, while they were sped up in a faster flow of time in the ship. Gravity (inertial mass) neutralization.
The point of reference is outside the solar system, but General Relativity is measured from Earth as the fixed point of reference usually. That may change the results. If only 10 years pass in time frame (A), and say 100 years passes in time frame (B), then time-frame B is at a faster frequency, and thus spatial distance is shortest.
Expansion of space stretches the space, and thus it takes longer time to travel a distance -- a temporal distance is lengthened in its frequency. Expansion of space violates General Relativity, if we are to consider time speeds up away from a gravitationally high inertial mass frequency (frequency = in time).
Expansion of space actually violates Special Relativity though, not General Relativity.
The picture below is Special Relativity, not GR.
This is what many scientists consider "General Relativity," but it is really SPECIAL Relativity! As you read below, all planets are in a state of spin and rotation. This data does not take into consideration gravitational mass, but rather acceleration.
The picture above is Special Relativity. And yet it is called and considered General by many scientists, because the spin and rotation of the planets relative to each other, and to the sun in particular has the highest factors involving the changes of time, which are measured as being very, very, very, very slight! (See the Caption)
General Relativity is one of the most confusing things ever, because of the conflicts and violations with other well-known theories. Special Relativity is more commonly used than General Relativity because all bodies are in motion relative with other bodies. But atomic clocks have measured the difference in time dilation at sea level, and on top of a mountain.
Could those clocks have been misread, or the results falsified? Neutralizing the gravity field would bring time to a zero, frozen; but nothing can reach an absolute zero because all motion stops, and we see UFO's zipping around rapidly in the skies.
According to General Relativity:
Time going to a zero is the result of frequency acceleration, to where the spaces in between each moment get less and less, so that much, much more time actually passes within the field. That doesn't make sense, does it? It would appear that engines accelerating mass electrostatically (220,000 miles per second) accomplishes the electrical energy of mass moving in parallel instead of being electromagnetically accelerated in a transverse wave (at 90 degrees, see: Tesla Engineering Physics page); and also acceleration at light speed increases the gravitational force (Equivalence: gravity and acceleration is the same) thereby bringing time to a stand-still because the more gravity means the slower the time flow. But that makes no sense, because protons can be accelerated at the speed of light in a particle accelerator, generating a huge inertial mass field of a single proton (enough to shake the entire ground for miles), but does NOT slow the proton down to a halt.
Bringing gravity to a zero should speed up time infinitely, to that of light itself -- a photon. At the level of infinity, zero is the same as infinite. Zero time, meaning no time is just the same as meaning all time at once, simultaneously.
We have two zero conditions, one of Special Relativity, and the other of General Relativity. Therefore testing mass accelerated to light speed is the same as testing the flow of time closer to a huge gravitational source like the sun, since acceleration and gravity is EQUIVALENT. The difference is that a proton at light speed has a huge inertial mass and gravitational force, BUT the accelerated proton does not meet the condition of: "The faster it goes, the slower it goes."
A proton in an accelerated frequency of spacetime, and thus having a higher gravity does NOT slow down time in its frequency frame of motion and energy. Electricity moves at light speed. What is electrons but the movement of electron-mass carried along via charge either di-electrically in parallel, or electromagnetically in transverse? An electron however, is much different than a proton. Electrons adjust frequency, protons adjust gravity. Adjusting frequency can adjust gravity, and adjusting gravity (inertial mass) can adjust frequency. How can frequency and gravity be transformed?
As frequency increases, inertial mass (gravity) decreases? But it is those higher frequencies which causes the proton to move faster, increasing its inertial frequency so that it's mass increases and has stronger gravity. They move together! Only in an engine like the OTC-X1 do you see an increase in frequency (time; Y-axis) with a decrease in gravity (space; X-axis), but that is due to simultaneous co-counter-spins of electrical inertial force.
So therefore, General Relativity violates Equivalence, and thus violates Special Relativity conditions.
Houston we have a problem.
The only way to solve this is to assume time speeds up closer to gravity, like the Sumerian Hall of Records also shows. The hyper-accurate starcharts in the ancient records were finally able to be verified by NASA in the 1970's. Could it be that gravitational frequency resonance affects the measurements of the atomic clocks used to test GR, as stated toward the beginning of this post? To be clear, I have no issue with Special Relativity, only with General Relativity where two atomic clocks are BOTH at rest at different elevations on the surface of the planet.
However, notice, at higher altitudes, there is faster speed involved. And so there still has not been any test of General Relativity, but it is still a test of Special Relativity!
Zero time is also infinite time. As shown in the book "The Edge of Infinity" by Paul Davies, the event horizon of a black hole is a perfect zero frozen time; and upon crossing that horizon, ALL of time of the infinite universe passes by at that moment, and one enters a pure system of light -- simultaneous infinity.
However that is operating under the assumption of General Relativity's claim, meanwhile violating several well-known and observed conditions of the universe. The event horizon means no information can escape and return out into the universe. But, as we have seen from Bob Lazar's experiment with ET gravity engines at the top of the Home page, light still shines because light is independent of time. Furthermore, X-rays and high-frequency energy particle fountains flow from a Black hole, violating the conditions of General Relativity's claim. How can there be ANY high frequency particles when time, at the event horizon is at the lowest frequency possible, zero, meanwhile upon crossing it, time suddenly reverses to infinite time passing all at once?
The event horizon is due to the "tipping" of the light cone to where one edge is straight up and down, whereas X (space) = 0, and time (Y) = infinity. But as one travels into the "gravity well" of a black hole, the pilot will continue to travel and travel and travel, chasing that zero time barrier, and never catching it because it is always just over the event horizon.
To explain a light cone: from a point of origin of turning on a light bulb, light moves through time and space on a rectilinear coordinate graph at a 45 degree angle as the light travels through space, and takes time to travel that space (traveling through space and time). 2-D space curves (like a ball of weight on a flexible rubber sheet, making a dent, or a well because of the ball's weight), and as the Y axis is always perpendicular to the X axis, at a certain point where space is curved at a 45 degree angle, the light from the origin no longer escapes out into space at all. It goes straight up along the Y axis, not traveling any distance in space.
At the point where time is a zero, there should not be any space! The ratio of X/Y is undefined when Y = 0. If there is no space, then time is at a zero, but actually the "edge of infinity" is because light cannot travel anywhere out in space, but it can take all the time in the universe to try. That Y axis, any movement parallel to the Y axis away from the gravity well is infinity. Infinity is common in mathematics. As a curve on a graph always approaches the Y axis infinitely but never touching it, is indeed a common condition of a mathematical limit. So time becomes infinite, and space becomes zero -- NO SPACE AT ALL. That is the condition of light itself, which has no time, or rather, all time happens all at once.
There are two logical possibilities (actually three): The data of the atomic clocks was falsified, or gravitational frequency resonance increases the clock-rate. Out of every two possibilities, there's always a third. All things are in motion. The ONLY place we can test General Relativity is upon the Earth, where everything is in constant motion at the same rate, relative to the planet itself. Measuring at sea level, and measuring on top of Mt. Everest, the frequency of time is slower at sea level but NOT due to the effects of gravity at all, but instead due to the frequency differences of magneto-electrostatic energy fields, and only relative to Earth! If we get far enough away from Earth, the time frequency should start to become slower again because of the dissipation of Earth's static field of electro-inertial energy. Dissipation is the wrong word. Less-concentrated and less-dense are better words.
When we get farther away from the Earth, Special Relativity applies more than General Relativity.
By now it should be seen the differences, and how gravitational time zones actually work, if you have read the Home page, parts of the Warp Drive News page, and the Starship Relativity post below (and maybe the engineering pages) ... enough to give one a good idea of the functioning and relationships of time and space and gravity and frequency.
There's a lot of data to sort through and study, but I believe it's worth it, to get a better idea of how starships operate.
SOLUTION REVEALED!!!!!
Here's the situation with General Relativity. An atomic clock is at sea level, and an atomic clock is on top of Mt. Everest. The clock goes faster at Mt. Everest. Why?
Simple! If a wheel is spinning on a rod or drive shaft, the speed is slower closer to the center of the circle. Out along the outer edge of the wheel, the speed is faster to keep up. Make sense?
The speed of the rotation of Earth along sea level is at a certain speed, around 2,000 miles per hour if memory serves. But, a GPS satellite affixed over that location in high Earth orbit must travel much faster to keep up with that affixed spot on the ground. It's like if your friend is on a merry-go-round and is spinning around, and he is holding one end of a 20 foot pole, and you are holding the other end, then if you are 20 feet away from that merry-go-round, you'd really have to run super fast to keep up with his motion.
So it is not General Relativity that is being measured with the atomic clocks at Sea level, and at high elevation. It's SPECIAL Relativity!
The best way to test for General Relativity to show time speeds up closer to gravity is to get in a fast jet that can travel faster than 2,000 miles per hour, and fly from East to West (the Earth's rotation spins from West to East) at the same rate that Earth spins. The jet can hold a relative fixed location in altitude as the Earth spins out from under the Jet. The pilots of the Jet would see the sun always sitting in the same place in the sky, but see the Earth moving very rapidly below. Conditions like this HAVE been tested, and they really DO show that time is faster in this condition, but ONLY relative to a stationary spot on the ground, like an airport or another jet parked at an airport, and unfortunately, that stationary spot on the ground is rotating with the Earth.
The only true way to test for General relativity is to have two super-fast jets, one at high altitude, and one at low altitude, traveling at the rate of speeds which makes the two jets always directly in alignment with each other. The pilot in the lower jet can look up and always see the second jet right where it is, and the sun right where it is. Each jet carrying an atomic clock could then compare the rate of time difference, directly as it pertains to gravity alone, and not due to motion alone, as in the case of Special Relativity.
The lower jet should show a faster rate of time than the top jet. Well, actually since the top jet is having to travel a little faster, then it is in a higher frame of acceleration, and thus having a higher frequency of gravity time, and so its clock must run a little faster, actually. So the lower jet should have a slower rate of time, and the upper jet a faster rate of time, due to acceleration within relative gravity conditions of Earth.
But that shows the Equivalence between acceleration and gravity. And also it shows the relationship between frequency and gravitytime. Higher frequencies of gravitytime have faster clock-rates. This means that close to the sun, due to the higher acceleration frame of its gravity alone, the clock should tick faster.
The jet above has a faster rate of time in relative acceleration with Earth Gravity Field, and it is based upon the Earth Gravity Field, acceleration relative to it. The The clock tick-rates of the jets are relative with Earth's gravitational frequency.
And so, time speeds up closer to gravity, and slows down farther from gravity, as a rule of thumb involving relative frequencies of gravitytime (which also includes acceleration rates within relative fields of gravitation -- recall "gravitation" from the "Gravitational Resonance" post above). However that also MUST involve relative changes of speed and motion (Special Relativity) as well, since everything is in motion, and it is the frequency of motion and gravity which is the fabric of time and space!
That way, all the physics work like they are supposed to, and General Relativity is not in any violation with any other theories of known physics that can be observed for accuracy and validity. But even better! We can build hyperdrives, warp drives, light drives, and fly to another star, and return home in time for dinner.
Expansion and contraction of space concept in the post "Gravitational Resonance" and in the "Inflation of Space" section at the bottom of the Warp Drive News page certainly predict such a condition of gravitational frequency relativity mathematically (Alcubierre), and engineered as the X-1 engine. The condition that time speeds up closer to a gravitationally massive body generally is an integral component and aspect of interstellar transportation physics.
In the negative energy model, a negative energy warp bubble is the result of accelerating fields of gravitation. It seems the universe is a natural paradox that applies generally in deep space, but paradoxically (specially) in stellar space (in a star's stellar capacitor of gravitation).
It is now a logical possibility that Nibiru (Marduk), the planet mentioned in the Sumerian Hall of Records can really have a time dilation ratio of 1 : 3600 years when two factors are taken into consideration: Distance from the Sun's gravity, and speed of Nibiru's orbit, either in the same direction of Earth or in the different direction of Earth's orbit. For such a huge gap, Nibiru would have to be traveling in an orbit in the opposite direction of Earth's orbit, and be a considerable distance from the Sun at its highest peak of relative time dilation.
To be clear, that ratio 1 : 3600 years actually refers to planetary orbits rather than such an extreme time dilation. In fact, that is how a Shar (the 3600 year difference) was determined, is to be the actual time of Nibiru's orbit (called the "Tablet of Destiny" in the Records). However, the time dilation is unrevealed, but it should be known that there is an extreme time dilation involved. In one case of an ET contact situation, the ET had said a window of 3 days was all that was allowable to spend any time on Earth, due to the time dilation of the distance and speeds (general and special relativity) involved.
So to recap: Gravity-time is inertial frequency
We can derive these simple laws:
The faster something goes, as a rule of thumb, the faster it's time frequency, because it is in a higher accelerated frame of gravity-time. A jet traveling near Earth has a higher gravitytime frequency than rocket out in deep space traveling at the exact same speed. That is also dependent on if the rocket is traveling in the same direction, or opposite directions; and since the Earth is round and spins, a jet will have a higher acceleration curve then a rocket at the same speed traveling in a straight line.
Any change in inertial mass of an object also proportionately changes a field of gravity of that object.
The higher the inertial mass, the higher the frequency in both space, and time.
Likewise, the higher the gravity field, the higher the frequency in both space, and time.
So out in deep space away from gravity fields, time is slower and distance is longer and frequency is lower (see the comment on this post).
How this applies:
Traveling at the speed of light (roughly) incurs a tremendously higher gravitytime frequency (more inertial mass). This then appears that Earth time is much slower, just barely creeping along. The ship can fly to Alpha star and back, without much time actually passing on Earth, both according to the pilots, and to the people on Earth.
A ship that uses a hyperdrive can fly to a distant star much faster, not taking much time at all to actually arrive there. The ship can fly to Alpha and return to Earth, and not much time on Earth has passed.
On the condition that the hyperdrive actually lowers the gravity and inertial mass of the ship, yet increases the frequency of time due to the co-counter rotating electrical inertia (electrogravity) of a ship engine, then the ship can travel faster than light, particularly when a propulsive gravity force is used that increases as mass decreases (tacyhon).
Since the frequency of time is increasing purposefully, then not only can the ship travel to Alpha Centauri very rapidly, measured in times of seconds, minutes, and days rather than years, but the ship will also be able to return to Earth without much time having passed on Earth at all.
The engine and energy geometry of the starship engines can be re-vitalizing to a pilot's health as seen in some experiments using electromagnetic Rodin votex (interference wound) coils, and perhaps even incur a biological regeneration ability beyond what the Human can do alone.
As stated on the home page, an increase of resonance also increases the frequency. Such an increase of resonance upon the field of matter itself, using magneto-electrostatic co-counter-rotating inertia, increases the frequency of the matter-field of the vibrating space of the energy field of the ship's fractal atomic structure (matter-energy space).
An increase of frequency of energy resonance, while phasing out the inertial forces of acceleration, also lowers the energy phase of mass and gravitation, while increasing a frequency of matter-space.
The frequency of time itself is increased because the spaces between each moment of inertia are reduced in co-counter acceleration (Acceleration = Gravitation).
A monopole of charged magneto-static inertial force (which includes the mass-wave of that force as particles of mass-force), creating a gravity-time well in the center of the vortex on one side only also increases the resonance of frequency at the central accumulator and throughout the rotational systems.
The relation of the mass-gravitation wave going to zero while time approaches infinity is a similar mechanism to a transformation between electrostatic and electromagnetic waves, as electromagnetic waves are un-polarized (phased to zero in co-counter spin) in pure electrostatic fields.
It does not imply that time and space (time and mass, or frequency and gravitation) is inverse in relationship to each other. It implies that each can be transformed just as electrical force and magnetic force can each be isolated in energy-form.
See: "Keep In Mind (Tacyon Drive Mechanics)" at the bottom of the Tesla Engineering Physics page.
RSS Feed