Posted by: graemebird | April 12, 2010

Key Methodology: Getting Rid Of Action At A Distance (Gravity-Mitigation Ought To Be Technically Easy, And Is Probably Happening).

I’m grafting across some of the stuff from another post. But its rewritten to emphasize a different point then the one I was emphasizing in the earlier post. So I’m lazy and repetitive? So be it. A good sermon on the mount can do with a retelling (Wareham). Readers may have noticed that I’m very supportive of the Christian religion. I consider right-of-centre Christians to be my natural allies. Yes they were a bit painful at undergraduate level. But we all have to grow up and figure out who our friends are. My support of Christianity is not just because of the recent incitement of the followers of the prophet. But also because of this quite unexpected advent of us being awash in stupid atheists at the moment. I’m an atheist myself and this cultural development I find quite shocking. So my fellow atheists will just have to put up with some Christian imagery I have embedded in this explanation. Christians are often good people. Christians over 40, seem to have on average, more commonsense and a superior habit of reason, then atheists over 40, in 2010, as a general rule. Don’t ask me why this seems to be the case. I’m just as dumbfounded by recent cultural developments as anyone.

I was trying to make the case that where energy is not gravitational potential
energy, then its probably a form of compression. Later I may try to make the
case that even gravitational potential energy is also compression of a sort.

But the main point I will be trying to make here is that one methodology of
investigation ought be for us to try and eliminate action at a distance. Where
action at a distance appears to be happening, we must assume that we are not at
any sort of ultimate level of smallness. If conceptually we find that
eliminating action at a distance requires us to go to ever smaller levels of
micronisation IN THEORY we may have to suck it up. Where I’ve cut out words from
the original I’ll just leave a few dots:

Supposing there are two teak wood planks in space forming a cross. Where they
are held together, it is with strong glue. Much of the basic building blocks of
reality entire in this visage alone. We ought to be able to construct a model of
the universe, without action at a distance, where static forces WITHOUT REACH,
are the building blocks of it.

Taking the lead from the majestic and leggy Philomena I have decided to try and show
how most of reality can be conceputalised from as little as two opposing forces.
In her words love and strife (Philomena being extremely feminine).
Perhaps she was smuggling through the Chinese concepts yin and yang via a Greek Trojan Horse.
We will see how we go with push and pull. (hat tip to Bill Gaede).
But first we must look at latent versions of these two.

……Suppose we show up in space and several of us aided in our movements by
all sorts of micro-rocketry. We attempt to pry the two planks of teak apart, and
sometimes to push them together, in the hope that they may snap. But always
without adding any movement to the situation. We are unsuccessful in our


But there is a difference here between latent push and pull, where on the one
hand we have this adhesion that isn’t being put to the test. And on the other
hand the wood exhibits a force at its surface, as if it wants to maintain its
form. But neither the push force nor the pull force, once brought into action
TRAVEL. The push and pull forces have no reach. I would say that this is the
case with virtually all forces in the universe in the first instance. That all
or virtually all forces are merely static forces without reach. And that where
we see otherwise it is because we haven’t reached any ultimate level of small.

Where pull is concerned I follow Gaeda and his orthogonal ropes. Ropes of ying
and yang wrapping around eachother like on a clothes line. Largely if not wholly
porous to anything passing through them laterally. They may be akin to Birkeland
currents traveling through space in their characterisitc wrap-around way. Yet we
would likely pass through these currents seamlessly if we were travelling in a
lateral direction to them in our spaceship.

Students of basic mechanics may tell us that all pull is really push in
disguise. And that whenever we lassoo someone and pull her towards us the rope
is really pushing her from behind. We may break this down another way on another
day. Into push-adhesion and compression. But for now push and pull will do. And
I’m saying that when there is the force of pull at a distance this implies
orthogonal ropes. For the most part forces don’t “travel”. They don’t work at a
distance. For them to work at anything much of a distance would imply occult

Now just to lay a bit of shorthand on this. Here are a few items I want you to

Under my system (Gaeda and or Adams are not to be held responsible.)

1. Acceleration due to PUSH is proof of prior compression.

2. Energy and matter are not normally convertible one to the other. In fact there is no
such separate entity as energy. There may be some partial conversion in special cases.
And this is because both energy and matter have this element of compression to them.

3. The creation of new matter over time is obviously less miraculous and easier
to justify then the creation of all matter instantaneously. Only an idiot would
think otherwise.

4. The creation of matter over time ought not, even at this humble stage, be
thought to be more than 1% miraculous. Since 99% of what is going on is the
setting up of countervailing push and pull arrangements, many of them latent,
and many of them involving static-compression.

Almost all of the behaviours we have for seemingly solid material or liquid or
gaseous material for that matter, can be explained by myriad arrangements of
interlocking push and pull setups. Adhesion, repulsion (of a sort that does not
“reach) either totally latent, or involving compression …. well this is
basically all thats needed to manifest everything that we see and know of.

5. We can imagine that in the middle of moons, planets and stars we have the
following characterisitcs. High pressure. Extreme heat. Powerful electrical
currents. Which also implies monstrous forces of magnetism. I ask you? What else
is needed than the above to set up the myriad countervailing, interlocked,
overlayed forces of push and pull that we take to be matter?

6. Note that looking at the mainstream paradigm, the most efficient energy
conversion that we know of, or at least that I know of, comes from the air
compressor, wherein you haven’t had enough time to lose the thermal energy in
the compressed air, and then you convert it back to work. You can get
efficiencies of above 90% using this system.

7. I would say that ALL instances of what the mainstream consider to be
POTENTIAL ENERGY involve countervailing forces. And the only serious useful
energy storage implies compression of one sort or another.

8. Just think for a minute about the foolishness or at least strangeness of the
photonic view of light. Somehow we let loose a photon. And what does this photon
do? It starts acting like young Forrest Gump. Running flat out in a straight
line at high speed. Or perhaps in waves. They cannot make up their mind. “Where
are you going Forrest?” Where are you going little photon? Are you angry? Are
you lost?

Its really all very silly when you think about it.

Consider the proposition that things tend to maximum disorder. Entropy. Tepid
soup. This CANNOT be the whole story.

In fact this proposition must be dismissed. Perhaps it is the case for normal
matter. Who knows. But even if so the universe is made mostly out of plasma’s.
It is manifest that things do not tend towards maximum disorder. The proposition
has to be limited in some way or dumped. Its doesn’t pass the empirical test.
The first and second laws of thermodynamics DO NOT HOLD in all cases.
This is an empirical fact.

Consider the idea that matter cannot be created nor destroyed. Again. Empirical
evidence refutes this. The matter is here. End of story.

Consider the proposition that energy can neither be created or destroyed except
by way of transmutation between energy and matter. You’d be surprised how little
evidence there is for any of this. There is no need to set the proof bar so low
on account of the cult of personality. This proposition deserves the folded arms

Most of this jive has to go.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> End of blog graft and rewrite…

Hypotheses don’t prove themselves. But if there is no action at a distance then
the main thrust of Bills explanation of light and gravity is pretty much proven
already. This doesn’t mean we don’t get to squabble over the details. I simply
cannot suss it out that the ropes are the most basic of building blocks, or that
they lack some level of proton-to-proton stretch-capacity. How could that work?
I’m calling these assumptions out as impossible.

Do we really need to find ultimate answers? Do we need to go to the very
lowest level of smalls? I think Bills system can lead to immense practical and
technical advantages. Gravity-mitigation being but one small application. I
think this is important. Because I take the view, that while we are probably
headed for a collapse, and for a horrible downsizing of our global population,
if we can bring human reason back into physics, that will at least be helpful in
the recovery.

Gravity-Mitigation Ought To Be Technically Easy, And Is Probably Happening.

Gravity, in my view is caused by Gaede-Ropes. My version of this setup is that these ropes have some proton-to-proton strech capacity to them. They also must always be snapping and reforming. It may be that when they snap, the material goes into a new proton or electron or something. It may be when they reform they unravel one or other of these. I’m only mentioning this speculation to avoid people worrying excessively about this part of the story involving new matter creation.

Now that we know this. Or assume this with some confidence, the prospect of gravity mitigation becomes obvious. All you would need is to be able to create a situation where some special, near frictionless liquid, was moving at an incredibly fast speed in a circular motion. This would cut you off from the force of gravity by breaking the Gaede-Ropes faster then they could reform. There are probably other ways to mitigate gravity. But this is the most obvious one following directly from my version of Bill Gaede’s explanation of light and gravity.

Now here is a fellow explaining his anti-gravity system on youtube. I think he is onto something. But he explanation is way convoluted because of his acceptance of modern physics. Which is really just a silly, anti-empirical religion. Sociologically and historically derived and not derived via reason.

But despite this fellow’s over-complicated reasoning, I’d have to say his craft would almost definitely work. For this reason, and for the fact that this setup would be pretty easy to make, I’m going to have assume that someone has already made this sort of thing, and that the project has been taken black. I’m not just making this up apriori. There are many rumours and some pretty good evidence for the conclusion that this is a black project. However I want to point out that these rumours ought to be considered pretty credible. In my view this most simple of gravity-mitigation devices (and there are probably many other kinds) ….. ought to work based on first principles, if your first principles come from Bill Gaede.



  1. My explanation as why the Gaede-ropes must have proton-to-proton strech-capacity. And must be breaking and reforming relentlessly. That they are breaking and reforming means we can quickly engineer gravity mitigation.

    As Arnold says “It bleeds ….. If it bleeds we can kill it..”

    If the ropes can be broken then we can mitigate gravity.

    Here I have to assume that with the Gaede-ropes, we have not reached the final level of micronisation. That there must be a sub-level to that. I see no way out.

    For human purposes we don’t need to follow micronisation all the way down. We need to follow it all the way down until some place where the scientific method gives up.

    If we take a Birkeland current, the two “strands” have a deal going wherein if they get too close something will cause them to repel. If they get too far they will attract again and keep wrapping around. Something akin to this must be going on with the Gaede-ropes.

    This implies action at a distance. And to my mind
    action at a distance implies that we are yet to reach any ultimate level of the smalls.

    If anyone can tell me how to avoid this conclusion I’d be happy for the chance.
    I lock in what I feel I know.

    We cannot have gravitrons, with negative
    momentum, moving at 20 billions times the speed of light. Ergo the basic thrust
    of Bill Gaede’s model virtually CANNOT be wrong.

    But thats all I can lock in. The ropes don’t tangle in a totally disruptive way, so they must exhibit apparent action at a distance. Apparent action at a distance means we aren’t at any ultimate constituent building block.

    Because there is no such thing as action at a distance. And the Gaede-ropes must have
    some sort of proton-to-proton “give” or they would either break or not exhibit any force. Since we have long elliptical orbits in some cases, the ropes as of necessity must be capable of break and reform.

    Reform may mean the unravelling of a proton to become the constituent part for more ropes. So it need not imply new matter creation.

    That the ropes must be capable of break and reform, this allows for some sort of anti-gravity. What you would want is frictionless fluid moving in a circular fashion, so fast, that the ropes had no time to reform.

  2. I sent some words of encouragement to the maker of the anti-gravity video:

    I’m saying that your setup will definitely work. But for much more direct and less complicated reasons then you are making out. I’m saying that gravity is the result of Gaede-ropes. So all you need is a low-cost way of getting that swirling matter happening.

    This will cause the Gaede-ropes to break faster than they can reform, rendering anything above the swirling liquid, virtually weightless. The ability to have this swirling virtually frictionless, and to be able to accelerate it ….. this is the only requirement.

  3. HAHAHAHAHA. The winged-menace is really outdoing himself. A welcome addition to our culture.

    Echoing Tony Montana:

    “First you attack Ponzi money. Then you take down the Keynesian multiplier. Then you get – the women…
    12:23 AM Apr 8th via web”

    That would be a bonus of course. But the crusade goes ahead without such expectations.

    “So the inscrutable celestials have gotten to all of my friends? Et tu, Winchester?
    12:38 AM Apr 8th via web”

    “Listen you fuckers, you screwheads. Here is a man who would not take it any more. A man who stood up against wop Keynesian bankers. Here is….
    4:11 AM Apr 8th via web”

    My only criticism is that that last one was too short.

    “At Easter, it’s worth remembering that it was actually the wops who killed Christ. The Jews merely lent them crosses at competitive rates.
    6:47 PM Apr 8th via web…”

    Fucking precisely.

    “Sing with me now: “So when you’re sittin there in yer silk-upholstered chair/ Talkin to some wop bankers that you know…”
    9:23 AM Apr 9th via web”

    Annoying and intriguing. Like a teaspoon of the hard hooch it just leaves you wanting more.

  4. “The plane crash in Russia can only mean one thing. A clear message to me from Penny Wong. She never did like Poles.
    about 19 hours ago via web”

    I’ve liked pretty much every single Polish person I’ve ever met. Although I must say. The fellas tend to scare the women a bit when drinking.

    In any conflict between the Polish and the Russians my tendency is to side with the Poles. Let us not forget that we let them down horribly.

  5. check this out graeme

    blonde Pakistanis

  6. Amazing. Amazing that they managed to keep apart all this time. They ought to try and figure out if their genes have any resemblance to ancestral genes of both the European and Indian peoples. They would have to be inbred to have maintained this distinction so effectively. For example I read that the first Hellenists were blondies, but by the time it got around to Aristotles time they were more nearly all dark-headed. A reflection of the people they co-opted.

    And actually they may well have been more genetically akin to the people who had already been there, with the invading Hellenic types being absorbed genetically but the cultural meme of the interlopers prevailing.

    My information about the blondies might be some sort of hangover from a 19th century bias though. You have to watch out for that. More bullshitartistry has been spun about blood ties then probably in any other subject. The good thing now is that the genticists ought to be able to break through the myth.

    I like to think that the Indian peoples and the Europeans are pretty close cousins. Their differences not preceding the end of the last ice age. Whereas the genetic differences between your people and mine probably go deep into the middle of the last ice age. If not near the beginning.

    To follow will be an interesting video about the relative makeup of European peoples, as they were before the recent modern mass-immigration to Western nations. But there is a bit of subjectivity even to this. Because they have to interpolate ancestral tribal populations and put them in groups. And to do this they must specify some sort of start-date, even for the ancestral populations.

    I’ll find it sooner or later. One thing I found interesting is it was the Finnish that were the most purely Viking. Even though their language is something entirely different.

    But as I said even to make that generalisation you’d have to go to some ancestral unmixed alleged Viking genome. And to do that you’d have to trace it back to prior to the medieval warming period. In a case of a lot of other groups you may have to trace it back prior to the emergence and spread of the Republic of Rome.

    Here we will see how much of a Roman Cambria is. And how much of a dirty Gothic wop. But on the other hand, without a full list of assumptions by the researchers, even this is subjective.

    I assume total Gothic wop. But then I shall let the geneticists tell the story.

  7. In this story they are saying the English have a lot of Celt in them. Whereas another genetic researcher reckons we are mostly Basque.

    You see the problem?

    The Basques predate even the Romans. So their take on it may have the generic Celt standard genome sourced more recently. They could be mixing up Celt and Basque if the matter came from an earlier standard.

    With this subjectivity recognised and caveated, yet still its pretty interesting what these blokes have come up with.

  8. Hey dude. What do you think of my take on anti-gravity?

    Its pretty clear that we have to diminish current physics to the status of “provisional template” and get going with the better gear, if we want to take advantage more fully of what is due to us.

    This is an immensely important project. Could scarcely be more important.

    I’m going to list all those groups the above video is relying on and see if I can make an informed guess at some sort of base year they are using.

  9. dunno graeme I can’t make sense of your theory

    the explanation that gravity is curved space just seems more logically elegant

    btw what sort of background do you think Steve Edney is?

  10. “the explanation that gravity is curved space just seems more logically elegant…”


    Come on you silly cunt.

    You are bullshitting me with both the words “logical” and “elegant.”

    1. There is nothing logical about compressing or stretching something without shape. This is the utter height of illogicality. It is not only wrong. It is the sort of thing logic was meant to prevent.

    2. ELEGANCE is not the standard in science. Its the standard in middle-aged sheilas dresses for big occasions. Can you fucking at least get that right? The standard in science is reason and evidence. Not elegance.

    This may be a fault of your early learning in the English language and your typical Chinaman inability to properly enunciate in such a way as to separate L’s from R’s.

    Or should I say L-sounds from R-sounds.

    You silly young Mongol you. The man said EVIDENCE and somehow you got it mixed up with ELEGANCE.

    Its not your fault. There is something different about the structure of the Asian mouth-cavity and tongue.

    Nature is not clean and purest except in certain shapshots. Nature is not the least bit elegant. Its fucking messy.

  11. “btw what sort of background do you think Steve Edney is?”

    Edney is 100% house-nigger.

  12. Isn’t cambria from southern italy? Could he be not just a “wop goth” decent but also arab.

    As for myself the Edney branch were scottish , part irish convict, some later assorted England wales decent as well.

  13. You are a house-nigger Edney. There is no hiding your true background.

  14. Here they are saying that the Italians are about 5% Arab. Your information could crank up that percentage maybe 10%. But he’s also part Jew more from the point of view of recent family history.

    He’s one perfidious and conflicted mo’fo’ alright.

  15. Check out the stupid cunt Birdlab. The one cunt that never lets me down when it comes to stupid.

    “……….Meanwhile, far away from Birdy’s back-shed, actual scientists are doing actual science with actual sub-atomic particles:

    Get it through your thick head you dope. They aren’t scientists. They are just public servants doing what public servants always do. Destroy wealth and waste money. Spit on their benefactors and ruin their hopes and dreams.

  16. The hadron spend-thrifts aren’t coming up with anything. A very small budget and access to some of the best engineers, and we can have one of these gravity-mitigating devices on the fly in very short order.

  17. “Andrew:
    The more i think about it the worse it looks. This government borrowing binge around the world is looking absolutely horrible which is and will do terrible damage.

    Japan looks like it’s about to implode and the rest of the gaggle isn’t that far behind. The welfare state looks like it’s about to self desruct over the next couple of decades and will also take entire economies down the sink hole.

    It amazes me that Greece isn’t talked about in this way. It’s he first welfare state to go under and they’re bailing the fuckers out.”

    Maybe given enough centuries Cambria will finally get back to the better point of view. But he’ll never admit that he was wrong. Still halfway is better than nothing. I don’t want to discourage his turn-around on this matter.

    One thing all the rest of you ought to note though. THIS WAS NO BAILOUT OF GREECE.


    Don’t ever forget that. Say it enough times over so that it becomes real to you.

  18. Yes, and note that Cambria’s reflexive loyalty is to the banks not the Greek people whose living standards and wages are to be cut because of Goldman Sachs’ handiwork and the bank bailouts. Truly, the dude is a straight-out noxious apologist for profligate banking parasites and thieves of socially created wealth.

    And in passing the comment you posted Graeme shows the odious JC doesn’t have the the first clue about why the bailout occurred or what it also reveals about the strength of popular support for the welfare state in Western Europe which is not going to be so easily dismantled in the way despicable, fawning neoliberal footsoldiers like Cambria would prefer.

  19. Right. My idea was to sack all the public servants, bilk the banks, get the budget in surplus. But still have enough welfare for the older guys and the real hard cases, for the time being.

    He would not have said what he said until and unless it was a done deal.

    He would wait until the banks were bailed out by European taxpayers.

  20. One third of the Greek workforce is government employed, so that’s quite an unemployment whack you’re advocating. And if you sacked all those public servants by definition the economy would come to a screeching halt. Not to mention the political repercussions.

    Problem with your simplistic solution is that it will never be applied in real life, will never be supported by any government or the majority of the population and if implemented would create economic and financial chaos, not to mention vast social misery and revolutionary upheaval.

    Many leftists actually would cheer on your proposal. Bring it on, they’d say.

    Are you sure you’re not a commie plant in the heart land of the neo-liberal blogosphere?

  21. I think if you look at the JCs of this world you can’t help but wonder if we did in fact interbreed with the Neanderthals. And be persuaded that he and his ilk are evidence Neanderthals are indeed still with us, living on in our genes and in many important ways ruling the world and lording it over the more evolved, humane homo sapiens and making their stamp by way of perpetuating the more primitive and animalistic of many societal processes the perpetuate today.

  22. We have to separate the various influences. The Greek money is Euros. When the loans from the rest of Europe are cut off it implies their money supply will go into free-fall. Plus they will have less resources. It is this that will cause unemployment. The spending cuts will lead to private sector employment and quite quickly at that. But the countervailing force of monetary collapse goes the other way.

    What can they do? They can renege also on private debts to non-Greek banks. They can cry JUBILEE and cut the debts in half even to Greek banks. Maybe they could think about issuing their own currency.

    There is no way, in the face of this massive monetary contraction, that they can maintain and grow employment without cutting nominal wages in half. Really it has to be that drastic. But bear in mind, done right the cost in living will also fall.

    But always the cut to government spending is increasing and not decreasing employment.

    So lets summarsie.

    1. Totally renege on foreign banks debts.

    2. Cut local debt obligations in half. Cry JUBILEE.

    3. Cut government spending ruthlessly. This increases employment net of what else is going on.

    4. Try and cut nominal before-tax wages at least in half. If they slash spending ruthlessly enough they may be able to almost maintain real wages.

    Under circumstances where they had not been consuming foreign loans, they could easily cut nominal wages and increase real wages at the same time. But with my plan I’m demanding they go into budget and foreign surplus right away. So to do it right nominal wages would have to fall a great deal to get all the public servants re-employed. But real wages would likely only have to small a small amount.

    Done right it ought not be so harsh at all. Done right it ought to wind up quite kind and smooth without too much disruption.

  23. On a Europe-wide level, and the crisis there affects all countries, problem is there’s no prospect for a coherent internationally agreed strategy to manage the situation in a non-disruptive and peaceful manner.

    And why is this so? Again it comes back to the fundamental contradiction which Marxist theory highlights, i.e. the endemic and growing contradictions between a global economy – which is a reality – and the nation-state system – a contradiction intrinsic to capitalism.

    It is this contradiction which will continue to assert itself with increasing virulence in myriad predictable and untold ways in the future. And about which right-wing economic theory has no answers or (palatable) solutions.

  24. You don’t want international solutions Philomena. You only have that when its outright famine. Greece should be able to make it on its own, so long as they don’t have to pay their foreign debts back.

    All international solutions won’t be solutions at all. They will be just more usurpation and stealing.

  25. “You don’t want international solutions”

    Why not? It’s just a bigger pool than in the past when group solutions were initially the means of advancing and progressing the group as a whole, to mutual benefit.

    Ruling out “international solutions” in advance is counter-intuitive and goes against the fundamental lessons of human history and evolution and the irrefutable need for social co-operation and non-exploitative divisions of labour, including internationally.

    The C18th Enlightenment produced the notions of the political ideals of liberté, égalité, et fraternité.
    Liberty signifying natural rights, specifically the right of every individual to freedom of thought, expression, and action, exercised within the boundary of not adversely affecting the rights of others. Equality involved the abolition of privilege and the institution of justice, with the same standard applied in the same way to all (despite its later evident limitations). Fraternity signified harmonising individual rights and social rights and responsibilities in a community, e.g., through sharing instead of hoarding.

    These principles apply to all societies and they apply to all functional groups, such as the family and the optimal raising and educating of children.

    Expansion of consciousness according to the sages and all the principal world religions involves seeing the world, especially all other human beings within the world, as one’s family. As kin.

  26. The search for an international solution isn’t going to be conducted by natural rights theorists. Rather it will be conducted by the thieves who caused the problems.

    Bigshot bankers. Political thieves. Public service parasites. When thieves from many different countries get together for any reason at all the outcome is likely to be one where they conspire to steal more off their involuntary benefactors.

    Take the climate conferences just for one example. So no the idea is to try and bankrupt the banks and stay away from the international thieves. We want nothing to do with those thieves. We have our hands full with our own.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: