Special and General Relativity both agree, the frequency of time speeds up close to a gravitational source along the Axis of Y Prime, although there is a momentary speed bump of where time slows down prior to a full experience of a faster flow of time. It is more obvious now the more drastic time changes at near-orbit altitudes. Near-orbit slower conditions occur in space between the Axis of Y Prime, and the cone of time locations due to the reversal of curvature. The point of intersection in space (along the curved X Axis) are the locations of space experiencing time dilatation. The event horizon is where time is parallel with the speed of light, either making the ship invisible, or making a black hole black. At the gravitational event of Y Prime (on the X axis), the time is slightly faster then out in deep space, due to the increased frequencies of time, in spite of space being parallel in both locations. You can also clearly see the gravitation wave in the curve from Y Prime out to the normal axis of space (the hypotenuse of the triangle. A line could be drawn from the intersection point of Y Prime, out to where the curving ends at the common, normal flat space of X. Another line fitting the curve on the other side of the Y Prime axis makes another cone with tip pointing down. Also, you can see where the logic of light being the frequency of time applies very well in curved space. Also the Well is based on the circumference of a sphere (wave geometry). . . . The speed of a gravity wave is in the relation of a triangle with origin at the axis of Y Prime (time in the curved space), parallel with the common X axis. If light is simultaneous, then in the diagram the speed of the gravity wave is the hypotenuse which travels about 1/3 faster than the speed of light in curved space, and also showing that time is still faster in a gravitational warp. ... Note: it's not a perfect circle perfectly symmetrical, so there is a margin of expected error. I will make a better diagram later, but it's enough to get the idea. This is the gravity warp of a starship. A black hole is different because the axis of space nearly displaces the axis of time and has to be interpreted with different geometry (but still can show that space travels much faster in time in a gravity warp).
One last thing about the above diagram: Light is the 45 degree angle, however quantum physics shows that light is simultaneous without any speed limit, and has no time. That is why the intersection as the "future convergence of infinite time" is important to note, because that is a paradox. Time becomes undefined as the hypotenuse which is the speed of light, and also shows how the speed of light seen in the physical universe is ALSO the frequency of time itself relative with gravitational fields. Gravity is a time-like existence of physical space. Light is no time, no mass, no physical reality as we know it. What is Light? That is explained in META-physics.
7 is half of 12. 180 degrees around a circular waveform of 12 points is 7. This is used in the immediate paragraph below, used to show that often the math only reveals one-half of the hyperdimensional geometry of the Universe.
Updated 3/30/15
I've altered the content a bit of this post. There is additional rambling below this immediate addition, but it has become known that General and Special relativity is not in conflict with one another, and the unity is seen in starship relativity. The above is a spacetime relativity diagram. The below helps one to interpret what's going on there. Keep in mind, the universe is 12 dimensional (most pleasing shape: 3 + 4 = 7 ... 3 x 4 = 12 ... 7 x 2 = 12 which is due to a 12-pointed geometry around a wheel; one half the circumference will have 7 points ..... ... and 7 + 2 = 9 as the Densities of Consciousness); and the image above (the Relativity Diagram at the top) is only TWO dimensional ...
Speed, moving fast and faster clock ticks, is equivalent to gravitational force, which is equivalent to a force of mass, at rest.. but can mass really truly be at rest? To simply things, it's easy to reference the object-location of a sphere of mass like a planet as to how much spacetime it is warping. .... Tesla never believed in curved space.
The relativists would say that time slows down because a massive body dents the curve of space. As space (x-axis) curves down, then the right angle of time as the Y axis also must stay right angles to the surface of that curve. So away from that gravity pocket, we look across a flat plane, and it starts to take longer in time to look, because the Y axis of time is now lengthened. That's Euclidean geometry only, however. A mere 2 dimensions.
Granted, theoretically, if in 2 dimensions then it can be expanded infinitely into any dimensions. A^2 + B^2 +C^2 +D^2 +E^2 ... = Z^2 .... etc ad infinum .....
But, Tesla argued differently. Only from a flat plane of rotation can the gravity of something seen to be more at rest. The more you start to orbit the spacetime dent of the planet, you make ripples in the lake yourself! The two theories work together because a faster frequency of gravitation (gravity-time) can relatively slow that time down.
Yet, there is no contradiction between general and special relativity.
That applies to being in the center of an Outer Ring drive that time would slow way down. On the other hand, time would be slow around the outside of the Outer Ring drive. How's that for weird. It's actually in reverse. Time slows down INSIDE THE GRAVITY FIELD, allowing for more time to pass, because it's going slower.
Slow time is due to longer waves; however, it's due to the shorter waves of time in frequency acceleration that makes for more time to happen (to flow; to pass; to exist) in the gravity field!
There's no contradiction! It's just a different point of view! It adds up to the same thing!
Sure enough!
It's a matter of perspective. If on the outside of the field, we can see that space is indeed curved, and so the Y-axis of time is faster and brought to a cone shape inside the spacetime dent. That means, that if the direction of the flow of time is up the Y axis, then a whole lot more time passes, and even comes to a point of where all time converges, much closer in the future (instead of infinite time passing straight up the Y). We never see the point where the cone tip touches and converges, but can look into the future to where it does. As we are traveling up the Y axis, it's always that curve that remains the same from one moment to the next, we never actually move faster in time on the outside of the gravity warp then the observer's current rate of "time flow" at rest and not close enough to have to orbit the planet.
Also, light from an event from the inverted cone intersection of time with space traveling at a 45 degrees actually is almost traveling in the same axis as space, nearly parallel to the x axis (parallel to the X axis of space, light travels in space without taking any time). Light from an event some distance away in curved space arrives arrives many times faster to the worldline of Y Prime, in time.
A light event from worldline Y Prime (a light bulb turns on and travels in space taking time to reach a distance), with an angle of 45 degrees from the origin of Y Prime arrives at one of the "legs" of the inverted cone at nearly the same time it left, not traveling very far in time, but traveling much farther in space. The inverted cone in the diagram is of course the Y axis of space, as space is curved.
That definitely shows that time is faster inside the gravity warp, and shows that it is cone-shaped along-with a curved parabola.
It just takes longer in time to see into where the faster time rate occurs, observing from in deep space to the far left.
I'll be darned! Special Relativity and General Relativity both say the same thing then, that time really does speed up closer to gravity, it just slows down momentarily directly prior to a faster rate of time frequency "flow".
This certainly has applicability for a starship engine, such as an Outer Ring drive like what NASA is trying to build.
Also it helps explain the nature of the event horizon of a black hole, as far as it receeding the closer you approach the black hole. I love black holes because they are rich paradoxical environments to play with!
I want to re-emphasize that there are two ways to look at the same thing, depending upon the paradox of perspective (paradox of measurement). It further shows in the example of time both slowing down AND speeding up, that there is no wrong or right, but the truth depends upon your point of view.
In the case of the event horizon, where light is always at a 45 degree angle to time and space, when space is curved so that the Y axis of time is at 45 degrees, then as a light event travels in time away from the gravity well, is no longer at 45 degrees, but is at 90 degrees, parallel with the Y axis of time, never crossing the axis of Y, and so the light never reaches any distance in space. Light never escapes! However if you travel into the gravity field a little ways and wait, you'll eventually see the light from the event horizon. However, according to Special Relativity, you could never see it unless you were able to warp time on your own.
In fact,
This is also however, explaining why we do in fact feel the pull of gravity from a black hole, and can actually be claimed, due to the curvature of space, that the gravity wave travels faster than light, in this scenario.
"The Ongoing Paradox invariably depends upon your point of view." -- Barbara Marciniak
Relativistically, The gravity event at the axis of Y Prime disappears from time (and space) in the not-too-distant future, according to the chart. That is when the ship vibrates high enough in frequency to disappear. As it so happens, that is a similar relativistic chart of a starship, as it is a black hole. However the black hole curvature tapers off to infinity, and is not a shallow bottom as is the chart above. Since a black hole's well goes to infinity, the event horizon of a black hole always recedes farther and farther from view as one enters the gravity well. This chart above therefore has to specifically apply to a starship that can travel a tad faster than light.
It also shows the existence of a negative warp bubble, and the contraction of space and the convergence of time in that sense. Where time goes to zero is the photon, and according to tachyon drive mechanics, that is what is required to jump from one point to another point in space, no matter of any distance. Any change of time also changes space; and any change of space also changes time.
In fact, you can see where the distance in curved space is jumped from one intersection of one leg of the inverted cone, to the other side, in one single moment in time. At a certain frequency of time, a distance of space can be traveled in a one-second, or simultaneous jump. Actually, a simultaneous jump is when the 45 angle of light is in parallel to the common and standard (non-curved) X-axis, so that it does not travel in time.
However, if light speed itself is really measuring the frequency of time, then the axis of time is itself, the axis of light, and therefore must be at 45 degrees. And then POW! ... A BRAND NEW FORM of unified physics is born!
There are limitations to strict relativity. This chart does not represent an absolute, because it is a very limited 2 dimensional view of generally speaking, a 12 dimensional universe. It serves as a handy map, however. When dealing with frequencies, light, time, and space, whereas light measures the frequency of time, then the physics apply in the way I like to apply them, but it tends to come into conflict with Relativity a bit, and so I've had to blend these two physics the way it has been done at this website! I don't know if the blending is hyper-accurate, or how rough the blending is, but ... it really matches up and fits very well, while also allowing for more room for growth (and with not so much of a need to tear it down and rebuild it)!
I'm surprised at how well Special and General Relativity in particular really confirms the possibilities of teleportation and jump drives.
In the case of frequency relativity, space will be like a wave, with crests and troughs parallel with the X Axis, and not below the X-axis. The distance is still shrunk in space because space has to take all those bends, instead of just taking a straight line, and so it pulls space together, compressing it, and rippling it rather than denting it.
Yet, it's the frequency of time which contracts space; rather it's not space doing the contracting but time itself. It makes for the distance between deep space and event Y Prime a quick hop, instead of a long journey.
If you treat space as a line, and then just increase the frequencies of time, space is still a line, just a much shorter one! You can kind of see that through the worldline height of Y Prime in time. If an Event right in-line with the X axis in the time-line of Y Prime, so where the common X-axis could intersect, then the distance would still be shorter, by increasing the frequencies of time to make the origin of Y Prime up higher on the worldline height of the axis of Y-Prime.
This is also what is represented by the legs of the inverted light cone; at the frequency height along the Y Prime axis of that (second) Event, in negative time (accelerating in time to a future event).. it is negative time from that second Event point, pulling the ship up to it. However the point of view, at the accelerated time frequency, the ship would then be at the height of the Event of the intercept of the inverted cone (the future convergence point). Then, as light is simultaneous as the 45 degree axis of time, then a simultaneous jump in space can be achieved when the frequency of the ship is vibrating at light speed.
AND, obviously the shortest distance is a straight line. As the frequencies of the ship vibration increase, it also warps space (making that bowl-shape in the image), and will pull the intercept of the future convergence closer to the Origin of Y-Prime (the Event of the starship in space).
This means that a frequency of time can be generated that resonates the ship at light speed and can make simultaneous teleportation jumps at the distance of its gravitational warp, at very rapid intervals. Obviously at the frequency of the vertical core vibrations, every 360 degree rotation (a complete wave-form), there will be a frequency-hop through space.
Again, that is why Relativity makes things kind of difficult, because there are so many different ways to look at the universe in 12 dimensions, from only a 2 dimensional image. That's why a blending of physics is important, with a lean toward the Tesla side, because, well, Einstein never did make any engines. There are many more aspects to all of this, but I feel on a whole, all the info at this website is pretty dang close, and certainly close enough to show the truth -- that we can fly to other stars and build starships to do it, and to make the journey swiftly.
Frequency (Tesla) and Geometry (Tesla and Einstein) in a blending of vibration and energy physics
. . .
And here's the best part! :
The X-1 disk is the axis of the changes of time, the Y. The vertical core is the axis of space, the X. Gravity is felt naturally as one walks around or sits in the ship. That's somewhat metaphorical. The X-1 disk is somewhat of a gravity plate, where gravity frequency is held in gravitation, standing over the disk. There are multiple paradoxes involved. Another paradox is the case of the missing OTC-X1 test ships, and Tesla's missing little test ships as they disappear, they are still there through time, but in a pocket in a parallel space. Ghosts or spirits may be able to find it easier than we could. If a signal was sent to shut the engines down somehow, we could locate the missing devices in Tesla's lab (occupying a parallel space of where the lab once was before burned down), and even in Otis's lab.
That bizarre tangent aside though, you can look at the picture above to discern a wide variety of situations.
Internal gravity is discussed in a few posts below, but for now to finish the metaphor, it can already be seen in the gravity well conditions above, that a gravity field can be held in frequency conditions, like a force-field that holds a phantom gravity field. My point is also to note the conditions of gravitation flipped on the other axis (the equator is the polar spinning axis). These are somewhat more wild avenues of thought.
The vertical core has a sheer force, and the cockpit is shielded. The Outer Ring has an internal warping frequency, but is far enough from the interior so that the cockpit is a balanced condition of frequency and force (gravitational fields).
The historic OTC-X1 design puts the cockpit space in the inside, not directly over the rotating capacitor plates and just along the edge of the Central Accumulator. The LAU-X3 cockpit space is above the rotating X-1 disk capacitor plates, but can be inside the field of the Outer Ring, or directly above the inside field of the Outer Ring (meaning the ship would have two decks, and be much larger).
The X-1 disk would have to extend all the way out to the Outer Ring in that condition, (so the cockpit space won't be directly over the capacitor plates). That might be the only problem, but as long as there is no direct co-counter rotation below the cockpit space, it shouldn't necessarily induce a stronger gravity field than Earth G's. Plus the crew is also isolated in an inertial bubble from the vertical core and Outer Ring drive -- the plasma motion in between the inner and outer hulls (along the inner hull space).
The co-counter rotation applies more to electromagnetic fields, because particles of mass in accelerated motion need only be going in one way only (one direction) to achieve gravitation.
Co-counter rotating electromagnetic and static fields however is the alternative to direct mass acceleration of particles, as a means to achieve gravitation.
So it would seem there are two differences between the LAU-X3 and the OTC-X1 as far as safe pilot places. And it now raises the question of how a gravity field can work in a surrounding "force field" of gravitation, where the pilots have to make the journey inside the ship. These are difficult questions to answer. More about that is discussed in the posts below.
I want to stay focused on the existence of the ship for now, and the understanding of the physics required to build it. As stated, the X-1 engines create a temporal frequency displacement of increased time around the edges, and increased gravitation toward the center, the Outer Ring does the same thing, but also includes the co-counter rotation of mass-charge as accelerated plasma. The rate of frequency acceleration is similar, but a much more powerful force in the Outer Ring due to the plasma.
That central zone of cockpit space inside the Outer Ring plane is also somewhat of a field of an accelerated space, lessening the "impact" of the X-1 gravitational forces, AND allowing for there to be a way for artificial gravity to be generated not by a frequency difference above the capacitors, but by a movement of inertial displacement toward the center. Not all of these are sheerable forces, but also transverse and parallel forces.
The one interesting thing about electrostatic energy is the parallel force it has in the manner not transversely!
That is to say the vertical core creates a downward flow of gravity from top down, at the same force around the vertical core, but the parallel pull of downward gravity is lessened the further away from the vertical core. Parallel Gravity is that concept in a similar way of staking down four posts (perhaps on some little asteroid with hardly any gravity) in a square that creates the same gravity pull down, all throughout the square, say of a comfortable force of Earth gravity.
Relative deceleration forces can apply between the lower X-1 and bottom plasma flow toward the outer ring also in parallel to balance out the forces of gravity.
That's not implying that if you don't turn the right dial at the right speed as another dial that it's going to crush the pilots into goo on the ceiling or floor within a super strong gravity field! That's not implying that at all!
Besides, these fields may affect organic matter differently. Maybe the pilots would have to wear special organic flight suits, or something, or maybe "flying commando style."
That's really the only unknown about all of this. I would not worry though, about the ship being crushed in its own gravitation.
The pilot cockpit space is actually a null-gravity zone the way the engines are designed to focus on the center and the outer edge. Also there is a inner inertial displacement in the central accumulator along with an inner-to-outer force of expansion due to the outward plasma flow from the bottom of the vertical core, only to be made back into an inner accumulation again as the plasma returns from the outer edge to the inner core (at the top of the ship). So those particular polarities reverse once, and it might very well be a more neutralizing effect for safe pilot conditions.
This strange condition diverts inertial force back out to the outer edge of the X-1 (through the plasma flow out the bottom of the vertical core, and over the top of the X-1 outer co-rotating shell), giving a further range of acceleration back out to the edge, only to raise the resonance of the edge itself, so the whole system resembles two toroids stacked on top of each other, the upper toroid field shape flowing top down, inside, then back outside again, and the lower toroid field shape flowing inversely, but again outside through the inside plane to the central accumulator which is over-charged with inertial frequency from the vertical core.
The overall double-toroid shape can inscribe the two tetrahedrons moved through each other as Nassim Haramein describes in his "Black Whole" video.
These are complex field dynamics that do more to complicate the issue of if there is internal gravity or not for the pilots. An independent gravitation field would suggest no onboard gravity at all for the pilots, but it can also suggest that the gravity field of when the engines are turned on is somehow held in stasis. Ralph Ring felt gravity and could walk around in the OTC-X1. Independent gravitation is an easy answer though, to a complex issue of if the ship will pull acceleration g-forces taking fast 90 degree turns. The answer is of course not, the pilots won't be squished like that because the pilots are in an independent gravity field. The only question though, is in an independent field, why does it not neutralize the gravity for the pilots instantly when the engines are turned on and the ship levitates?
Obviously the ship levitates, it doesn't continue to fly upwards. It hovers over the ground. We can assume that flying in an independent field, at that point, the ship can go anywhere, even though separate electrogravity charged flight surfaces can be used separately. So there must be some interaction with gravity and charge and frequency and resonance. Resonance is the highest dimension of thought, in that the concepts of resonance are more innately known to the mind (like probabilities) than angular vectors and velocities and all that mechanical stuff which only creates the resonance field. The resonance field itself is what we want to know about.
When the resonance field-action is understood as "what the fields do," then the identity of "what they are and how they work" are the next logical progressions. It's just a matter of narrowing down the possibilities, and putting them into perspective. ... There are a lot of possibilities as far as that goes. How do the INTERNAL fields apply internally to the ship? Would it be a hurricane of swirling gravity, or would it be the calm in the Eye of the hurricane?
The X-1 uses the frequencies of time more-so than the particle flow using the energies of space. See, this is what I'm talking about "Philadelphia Experiment." As long as the vertical core engine is not engaging a plasma force, and the Outer Ring drive is in operation, then the forces from the X1 horizontal disk are in effect, to whatever that effect is, in the pilot cockpit area, and the Outer Ring amplifies the frequency field and must at least use some of the vertical core to conduct that charge to the Central Accumulator. Normal gravity should be felt where ever the ship can go, because there is no reason to assume that zero gravity would occur in the cockpit in an independent gravity field warp bubble, based on pilot testimony.
When the vertical core is engaged, and the plasma forces flow, a new bubble would form around the cockpit, but it would be balanced inertially through the vortex structure. Again, there is no clear indication of ANY change of on-board gravity in the cockpit area to assume that the pilots would even feel any gravity forces at all. But perhaps it is that distinction alone -- that no distinction can be made other than pilot testimony.
And so on that note, it's logical to assume there will be a nice comfortable on-board gravity environment for the pilots in organic flight suits anywhere and at any time the ship is in operation, and is in fact, a very protective environment from any hazardous conditions in space (including heavy gravity conditions), so as long as the engines are running as a protective shield around the pilots.
Perhaps it is because the utron tips are pointed up into a 45 degree angle, converging at one point, that can explain the left-over unknown aspects of gravitational resonance, further adding to the dimensions of action of angular inertia.
... And also keep in mind that changing the frequencies of either time, OR space, will alter the frequencies of the other. As space compresses, so does time. If the frequencies of time get shorter, distance is also shortened.
. . .
So as a general re-cap to that top portion . . .
. . . a relativity chart in 2 dimensions can be looked at in a few different ways. One of the reasons I held off on the complex relativity was, aside for the obvious reasons, I'd have to come up with a different way to show things when taking into account that light itself measures the frequency of time, and otherwise light is itself simultaneous! It was NEVER clear to me how relativity came up with the idea of light being the 45 degree angle between time and space other than it was just an assumption that light measured time and space in that fashion.
I learned in college long ago that according to the actual experience of the photon, if a laser was shined from here to Mars, according to the photon, it would arrive the very moment it left without taking any time, but we see it taking time because we have mass. That gets into the photon taking both paths around the star, etc.
And that really makes a LOT of sense in relativity. It is essentially the very reason we have warp drive physics and theory at all. I never understood how a tachyon could even exist, until I put it into perspective with frequency, light, and mass, as seen in a hyperdrive engine. Then I understood it. Teleportation is possible because light has those simultaneous characteristics. So what does this say about Relativity?
Frequencies can determine the wave and time characteristics of Relativity, and even explain Inflation and the inner dynamics of a gravity warp, where each of these different aspects of physics each expresses different dimensions of the universe. When these different principles of physics are brought together in unity, then certain aspects of physics overlap, and can even appear as a mirror image; and the geometry of the quantum vacuum starts to be seen more deeply clearly as it applies to the physical universe.
Time is the frequency of space, taken into account gravitation, charge, mass, etc. That's why light measures the frequency of space, and is not at a 45 degree angle between time and space, otherwise light would be a separate aspect of frequency alone and would be part of the universe, rather than the unity of mass in the universe. Light does not depend upon time, otherwise there would not be teleportation, and twin particles wouldn't be simultaneous in their actions.
That's also why time and gravity can't be considered "particles." A gluon is considered a particle when it is merely a gravitational force of attraction overcoming an electric static charge of repulsion.
There is finally, one last way to look at that relativity graph. It looks that space itself is expanded around a gravitational source, being that space becomes the hypotenuse of light and time. Then we would have to say it is not light that is red-shifting, but it is space itself! -- Accelerating Within. As a star moves away from everything else, the time frequency stretches, although the star never really goes away from everything, just the same as to say everything looks like it is moving away from everything, but everything tends to stay where it is, perpetually moving away in the same place it was, and where it will be. That's the pull of gravity.
So it can be seen relatively, that space is not expanding. Gravity sources are expanding within themselves!
We have complicated math to draw simple conclusions like this; yet the math seems to solve the conflicts of "which is right, and which is wrong" -- true or false. But it fails to make the distinction on if it is real or illusion. An illusion can be true, at least until another illusion comes along that is equally as true. What is real, and what is true, is relative, and paradoxical.
Now it can be seen that time slows down at gravity forces, and accelerates within. That slower time flows as a faster slow-time, the more it approaches the gravitational origin. That is a paradox. That is the mechanism upon the quantum vacuum itself. As a gravity source sucks itself in more and more, where the gravity is strongest closest to the source, it pulls harder! That stretches time even more.
As long as we can look at the universe in a particular way that makes sense on all levels, including the negative space of The Interior-Universe, then a true unified perception of the logic of paradoxical unification (geometries of light) can exist.
. ~ . ~ . ~ . ~ .
These are the original ramblings below, pending an edit in the future:
. . .
When an object travels at a fast speed, Special relativity can apply. But a starship is always in a field of acceleration, and not merely just a rock hurdling through space at the constant velocity.
A starship is very different. It travels in a faster gravitytime frequency, and its time frequency is also accelerated. I don't think it is Relativity that defines the starship's movements, because a starship behaves differently and uniquely.
Satellites are in their own fields of acceleration relative with the Earth. GPS satellites which hold a fixed position relative with Earth is in a different relative frame of gravity (acceleration -- due to the circular/curved orbit instead of a linear trajectory) and time than satellites or near-orbit spacecraft like the space shuttle or ISS (International Space Station) that move in a closer orbit.
I almost regret going heavy into concepts of Relativity as it pertains to the information on this website, because it does more to confuse the issues I want to show, which is only dealing with one thing, and one thing only: how to keep the time while moving between stars, IN A STARSHIP.
To those ends, it's rather simple.
And the OTC-X1 makes things even simpler because of the inertial phasing of inertia, and expansion into a wide range of possible location.
What doesn't make sense is the notion that the faster one travels (with a limit upon the speed of light), the slower one actually goes (speed is a factor of time and distance).
Simply put, mass increases as the massive object approaches the speed of light. That's the most important thing, a way to increase mass (thus gravity). The X-1 takes those accelerated massive frames and has something huge to work with, but phases out a large force of gravity to act independently through space and time.
General and Special relativity though, doesn't really deal with frequencies. That makes it less compatible with Tesla physics and engineering (dealing with frequency and vibration), which would seem to easily violate relativity, and make relativity become paradoxical. General and Special relativity deals with geometry more than frequency.
Tesla physics is common sense, though. But it is increasingly difficult for the mind of a well-trained Relativistic scientist to grasp these notions of gravity as frequency fields of time and space, which is mass energy of inertial fields, which is also fields of acceleration (inertial mass; gravity).
The notion that if time speeds up, distance is shortened is paradoxical geometry, however, dealing with frequencies. An accelerated frame of time and space means that time and space are both at a higher frequency, and likewise at a higher gravity.
That's why I keep coming back to the notion that time is accelerated closer to gravity. An object that is not in a frame of acceleration is moving in a straight line, but any curved path an object takes is at a rate of acceleration, mathematically. Gravity is acceleration. If a car takes a sharp turn to the right, and there is a helium balloon inside the car, the balloon will travel to the right side of a car, toward the curve, going against the G-force that throws the driver to the left.
I tossed out doing the math on Relativistic equations long ago because I kept running into conflicts and negations, and nothing that was rock solid that could be applied as a law of physics that worked every single time without fail. Even GPS satellites are very imprecise, and I feel it's not because the math is wrong, but that our understanding of the universe is incomplete.
By now though, more people are accepting the principle of Equivalence (acceleration = gravity), which is a load off my mind.
An object in acceleration cannot exceed the wave-propagation of its own energy. Light speed is the speed of wave-propagation in a vacuum. Electromagnetic waves at transverse are at the speed of 186,000 miles per second, and electrostatic waves in parallel are at 220,000 miles per second. These speeds WILL change throughout the universe, in different gravity-time fields, though. These speeds are the speed of the mass of our solar system, the speed of Earth gravity as Earth travels around the sun. An object cannot travel faster than it's mass-wave can propagate, explaining why a massive object (no matter how big or small) cannot exceed the "speed of light."
It's common sense.
Starships can move faster than light because of many factors: gravity/mass wave resonance, spacetime resonance, gravity neutralization (like the electromagnetic wave is not present in a pure electrostatic energy because the EM wave is co-counter spinning, phased to zero; any electromagnetic wave has a spin in one direction, not both at once). Gravity neutralization is a similar phasing-to-zero of the inertial-mass wave generated by the ship, making it become like a big photon.
It's common sense!
It's not even difficult, so why do people keep getting confused, it's so simple!
A faster rate of acceleration of spacetime is a heavier gravity! That's very simple. That means that time is faster, mass is greater, gravity is stronger.
Time deals with frequency, so as the frequencies of acceleration become more accelerated, it is not logical to assume that frequency (time) slows down, when it is speeding up!
In a faster frequency of spacetime, time is faster, gravity is stronger, mass is greater. How can we measure it? Easy! With something else that can be used as a constant. Light isn't even a constant, neither are electromagnetic and electrostatic wave propagation speeds, because it all deals with frequencies. The frequency of our solar system mass/gravity/time is different than other star systems which can be higher or lower.
Actually light is a constant, but not measurable in our universe. Only things in the universe can be measured with other things in the universe. Something without any space and time cannot be measured in a universe of space and time, and make any sense at all.
We'd have to get into metaphysics to deal with that measurement, and philosophy.
Actually, Light as unity IS the universe, but the universe of space and time is a paradox. A paradox of what? All paradoxes unify. A paradox of light! That's WHY light measures space and time most excellently, because it is common to all matter in the universe, even though light exists without space or time.
A concept of travel to another star cannot even be grasped if we are treating starships like rocks or other inert objects. A starship is highly sophisticated! General and Special relativity cannot really be applied very effectively at all with starship physics. Tesla physics, dealing with frequencies, energy, vibration, now THAT applies.
I'm very sorry to disappoint so many Relativistic scientists on that note, but I just cannot accommodate you very efficiently. I keep going back to the same basic thing: gravity-time is a frequency of inertial fields of mass, like star systems and galaxies. Because of that, Tesla physics don't break apart gravity and time and space like Relativity does. Tesla physics treats space, time, and gravity as a unified field!
Because of that, Starship physics is radically different than General and Special relativity. Try as I may, I can't cram relative physics in with starship physics and have it make ANY sense whatsoever, and those difficulties are clearly seen on this website from where I DID try to accommodate Relativists in an effort to prove this technology works, and so we can start building it.
And in an attempt to over-simply these physics, I may have implied something moving very fast incurs a time dilation, but that should be cleared up right here and now, the difference between linear travel, and travel in a curved path. E = mc^2 is the relation of energy to acceleration. Something falling from a tall sky-scraper building will be accelerating and building up velocity, and all objects fall at the same rate in a vacuum. Earth gravity is what .. off the top of my head around 9.8 meters per second squared?
Anything moving at a constant speed, but traveling in a circle also fits with the standard equation f = ma^2 (force = mass x acceleration) squared. E = mc^2 is in the same standard form relating gravity with acceleration and inertial energy (inertial mass).
I expect people to grasp THAT. But I don't expect people to necessarily be schooled in calculus. I love calculus, but I haven't practiced it in a while because I've mainly been dealing with geometry like E = mc^2, and other simple equations that are more Sacred Geometry than anything else. Sacred Geometry really is the shape of the universe itself. When we know that shape, then we can travel to other stars very easily, and that's ALSO the point of this website, is to show how easy it all can be!
There are only a few things to really know as Laws of physics concerning starships. But honestly the time calculations of Relativity throws infinite hurdles into any attempt to build starships, because one will not build a starship if one does not believe it can be done.
Furthermore, the GPS satellites are supposed to compensate for Relativity, but are inaccurate in some cases as much as 50 feet. If we need to know how much time dilation a starship incurs, then it should be tested and an equation fitted with those measurements of testing it first. If there were a way to calibrate GPS satellite clocks, instead of tuning them before launching, then we could get ultra precise, by making measurements and adjustments on the fly.
Engines are going to be different in their outputs, their RPM's, and in other ways, which means that no two engine is going to be totally the same in how it affects time. Engineering should be what determines these time dilation calculations, NOT physics.
I cannot make it any simpler without really screwing it up.
A gravity lens though, I do want to discuss a bit, here.
Why does it bend light to magnify distant galaxies like a telescope optic; and why does a gravity lens bend light around a star so that we see a planet behind the sun which SHOULD be obscured from view, actually appearing off to one side of the star?
It is because of the gravity frequency. Time and space behaves as an optic lens, but there's much more going on than that. When we deal with gravity-time frequencies, we're dealing with paradoxes. Time is a huge paradox. Time is what separates matter into matter-paradoxes, otherwise everything would all be unified light.
Space and Time is one field. If space is shortened, it takes less time. If time is shortened, the distance is less. Ultra simple.
Gravity may not actually bend space and time after all. Gravity may actually be spacetime FREQUENCIES.
In fact, that's what Tesla knew. Tesla didn't believe in curved space theory.
As the frequency of time increases, to conceptualize time as a wave, then there are less spaces between each moment. Acceleration of frequency brings mass closer to light, not farther apart.
It's painfully obvious to me that a curved space screws up everything. The Human mind considers space curved because the Human mind is typically only thinking in 2 dimensions of Euclidean geometry (look it up if you don't know what Euclidean geometry is). All of our math is calculating gravity and space and time in 2 dimensions. I'm SORRY, but that is truly crippling for a true comprehension.
Simply put, if you want to see a distant galaxy closer and don't have appropriate magnification of a telescope, put a massively huge star in between you and the distant galaxy, so that star can warp the distance and literally pull space closer, so the distant galaxy can be seen more up-close. That is a simple warp drive -- a Gravity lens. Simply put, the space corridor between star (A) and star (B) is lengthened due to gravitational pull of the stars. The space on the back side of the farthest star (while in orbit around the closest star) is contracted due to gravity's pull (space has a higher frequency over the same distance, making it take less time to travel the gap). Universal/Gravitational Mechanics rather than "special dynamics."
People don't believe the simple. But, people also make simple things way too over-complicated. Performing calculus on flat space which belongs in a realm of Algebra is making things too overly complicated.
I'm very sorry that this website is far too over-abundant with way too much information, but I really have to throw in the complex things so people can start to learn on their own and take notes, and put things together in their minds, and sort out the truth, because if it's too simple, it won't be believed.
I'm going to leave what I wrote about Relativity up on the home page, and on the Warp Drive News page, not to confuse people, but so that people can see the true depth of everything involved. I've seen people come up with crystal clear understandings of the universe, only to totally discard that when something new crosses their mind that puts them in conflict. And then, they forget all about that crystal clarity they had, not even remembering when and what they were crystal clear about.
I hashed it out a bit on the Construction Blog page, but that page has other purposes, including to show the difference about how frequency physics applies, and how Relative physics apply.
If you can see the difference, then perhaps you can understand. But keep in mind that the overly-complex parts just describes how over-complex things can get. But the goal is to not over-complicate anything, but see the truth as simply as it actually is. I think this website will also help people teach themselves how to study.
A warp drive cannot even be considered real, unless one can understand Gravity Lensing.
Look at the warp drive philosophy page at all those spaceships, and follow the link to see all those hundreds of color photos, and just look up in the night sky every now and then and watch those objects flying around. Observe how they fly. Some fly around the Earth again and again and again and again. You can watch them moving across the whole sky, wait a moment, and then here they come again, wait a moment, and here they come again.
If I may be so bold, this is what *I* would do: I'd build the ship and then test it. Fly it around the solar system. Test it. Measure it. Until we can do that, there will be endless bickering about if something is true or false, or even real. It's not too expensive to build unless you want to use exotic materials.
This entire website shows that if we build the ship, it COULD work! There is more then enough information and verification to show that it is not just some random idea.
If we can't build these ships to test them and have a little fun with them, then why can't we; THAT should be the only question, not "oh, it violates special relativity and shouldn't be funded."
I'm not going to push that philosophical issue of "why" because that would be another website just as vast as this one. There are many other people's websites that are full of those reasons why and why not. There may very well be huge reasons why.
To Recap:
General and special relativity makes calculations upon curved space in 2 dimensions. That is why the math shows that time is slower closer to gravity.
Dealing with Tesla physics, with an understanding of unified field frequency, time is seen to speed up closer to gravity.
The two should compliment each other, not come into conflict with one another.
So, there it is. Starship relativity. General and Special relativity deals with rocks in motion. Starship relativity deals with complex and sophisticated engines in motion, also in motion with the universe.
See also: "Warp Drive Physics" just above the big picture of the schematics at the top of the Home Page.
RSS Feed