- Nov 11, 2019
What is the book's title sir?About gravitational waves -
A contributor to our Group who sent this article reminded me:
A single mechanical experiment, bringing boundless energy from the gravitational field to the quantum field, performed here on Earth, is worth more than a hundred trillion measurements of supposed accuracy at so many light years apart in the changing and illusory field of empty quantum holes.
He concludes - Paul Sutter did not read your book on Energy extracted from the G-force, nor does he know that this experiment, which brings about boundless energy as Einstein predicted, must first define this Nature of continuous space time. And that this is still ... continuous! Waves are discontinuous impulses. Thus there is a confusion of incompatible terms.
dear Tharm23,Waves aren't a motion which must be discontinuous. You're attempting to define a wave as an entity, but in this case the importance of the wave is it's motion. All this article is referring to is the prediction of a "gravitational memory" by reverberations of gravitational waves against one another. No one here is arguing about utilizing gravitational waves as energy. That's not possible given how little we know about gravity at the moment. These invaluable measurements serve to aid our understanding. Experimentation on light was a bit difficult when we didn't know how light behaved. However, if someone would like to present a hypothesis for this experiment and a sound method for it, please do. Harnessing energy from the weakest natural force would be a breakthrough, especially on a livescience forum.
Sorry for the lack of grammar that did not allow me to communicate.You're making an "experiment conclusion communication" with no experiment to conclude. What experiment was performed? None. A hypothesis for an "experiment conclusion communication" without an experiment. If you're Keen on a "gravitational energy- harnessing machine", make it. Or, study energy yourself without riding on the back of a book proposing conspiracy theories. You've put forth a claim with no evidence but a book you've read. You've cited your evidence by the same book. Let me tell you; no one knows for sure how gravity is produced. There's theories all the way down to a partical for it's interactions (graviton). Pick up a text book, and any of them will cite this same conclusion. If you wish to metaphorically build a theoretical car without knowing the mechanics of the motor, then I wish you luck. If you insist this is possible, do it. Stop wasting your time explaining something, put your Harvard degree into action. Until then, I'll continue my studies of the practical findings of physics, not wishing to build a house before I know how to pour concrete. Continue to preach free energy machines if you like, but it's my hope that everyone here is sensible enough to know that a generation struggling immensely with the creation of fusion energy isn't bothered with creating a generator that runs on unsubstantiated books, poor grammar, and leaps of theory.