I decided, to the best of my ability and ability, to focus on lighting in more detail. scientific heritage Academician Nikolai Viktorovich Levashov, because I see that today his works are not yet in the demand that they should be in a society of truly free and reasonable people. people still do not understand the value and importance of his books and articles, because they don't realize the extent of the deception in which we have been living for the last couple of centuries; do not understand that the information about nature, which we consider familiar and therefore true, is 100% false; and they are deliberately imposed on us in order to hide the truth and prevent us from developing in the right direction ...
Law of gravity
Why do we need to deal with this gravity? Is there anything else we don't know about her? What are you! We already know a lot about gravity! For example, Wikipedia kindly informs us that « gravity (attraction, gravity, gravity) (from lat. gravitas - "gravity") - a universal fundamental interaction between all material bodies. In the approximation of low speeds and weak gravitational interaction, it is described by Newton's theory of gravitation, in the general case it is described by Einstein's general theory of relativity ... " Those. simply put, this Internet chatterbox says that gravity is the interaction between all material bodies, and even more simply - mutual attraction material bodies to each other.
We owe the appearance of such an opinion to Comrade. Isaac Newton, credited with the discovery in 1687 "Law of gravity", according to which all bodies are allegedly attracted to each other in proportion to their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. I am glad that Comrade. Isaac Newton is described in Pedia as a highly educated scientist, unlike Comrade. who is credited with discovering electricity…
It is interesting to look at the dimension of the "Force of Attraction" or "Force of Gravity", which follows from Com. Isaac Newton, having the following form: F=m 1 *m2 /r2
The numerator is the product of the masses of the two bodies. This gives the dimension of "kilograms squared" - kg 2. The denominator is "distance" squared, i.e. square meters - m 2. But strength is not measured in strange kg 2 / m 2, and in no less strange kg * m / s 2! It turns out to be a mismatch. To remove it, the "scientists" came up with a coefficient, the so-called. "gravitational constant" G , equal to approximately 6.67545×10 −11 m³/(kg s²). If we now multiply everything, we get the correct dimension of "Gravity" in kg * m / s 2, and this abracadabra bears the name "newton", i.e. force in today's physics is measured in "newtons".
Interesting: what physical meaning has a coefficient G , for something reducing the result in 600 billion times? None! "Scientists" called it "proportionality coefficient". And they brought it in for fit dimension and result under the most desired! This is the kind of science we have today ... It should be noted that, in order to confuse scientists and hide contradictions, measurement systems have changed several times in physics - the so-called. "systems of units". Here are the names of some of them, replacing each other, as the need to create the next disguises arose: MTS, MKGSS, SGS, SI ...
It would be interesting to ask Comrade. Isaac: a how did he guess that there is a natural process of attracting bodies to each other? How did he guess that the “Force of Attraction” is proportional precisely to the product of the masses of two bodies, and not to their sum or difference? How did he so successfully comprehend that this Force is inversely proportional precisely to the square of the distance between the bodies, and not to the cube, doubling or fractional power? Where at comrade appeared such inexplicable guesses 350 years ago? After all, he did not conduct any experiments in this area! And, if you believe the traditional version of history, in those days even the rulers were not yet completely even, but here such an inexplicable, simply fantastic insight! Where?
Yes out of nowhere! Tov. Isaac knew nothing of the kind, nor did he investigate anything of the kind, and did not open. Why? Because in reality the physical process " attraction tel" to each other does not exist, and, accordingly, there is no Law that would describe this process (this will be convincingly proved below)! In reality, Comrade Newton in our indistinct, just attributed the discovery of the law of "Universal gravitation", simultaneously awarding him the title of "one of the founders of classical physics"; in the same way as Comrade was attributed at one time. bene Franklin, which had 2 classes education. In “Medieval Europe”, this did not happen: there was a lot of tension not only with the sciences, but simply with life ...
But, fortunately for us, at the end of the last century, the Russian scientist Nikolai Levashov wrote several books in which he gave "alphabet and grammar" undistorted knowledge; returned to earthlings the previously destroyed scientific paradigm, with the help of which easily explained almost all the "unsolvable" mysteries of earthly nature; explained the fundamentals of the structure of the Universe; showed under what conditions on all planets on which necessary and sufficient conditions appear, Life- living matter. He explained what kind of matter can be considered alive, and what physical meaning natural process called life". Then he explained when and under what conditions "living matter" acquires Intelligence, i.e. realizes its existence - becomes intelligent. Nikolai Viktorovich Levashov conveyed to people in his books and films very much undistorted knowledge. He also explained what "gravity", where does it come from, how does it work, what is its actual physical meaning. Most of all this is written in books and. And now let's deal with the "Law of Universal Gravitation" ...
The "Law of Gravity" is a hoax!
Why do I so boldly and confidently criticize physics, the "discovery" of Comrade. Isaac Newton and the "great" "Law of Universal Gravitation" itself? Yes, because this “Law” is a fiction! Deception! Fiction! A worldwide scam to lead earthly science to a dead end! The same scam with the same goals as the notorious "Theory of Relativity" comrade. Einstein.
Proof of? If you please, here they are: very precise, strict and convincing. They were splendidly described by the author O.Kh. Derevensky in his wonderful article. Due to the fact that the article is quite voluminous, I will give here a very brief version of some of the evidence for the falsity of the "Law of Universal Gravity", and citizens who are interested in the details will read the rest for themselves.
1. In our solar system only the planets and the Moon, the Earth's satellite, have gravity. The satellites of the other planets, and there are more than six dozen of them, do not have gravity! This information is completely open, but not advertised by "scientific" people, because it is inexplicable from the point of view of their "science". Those. b about Most of the objects in our solar system do not have gravity - they do not attract each other! And this completely refutes the "Law of General Gravity".
2. Henry Cavendish Experience by attracting massive blanks to each other is considered irrefutable proof of the presence of attraction between bodies. However, despite its simplicity, this experience is not openly reproduced anywhere. Apparently, because it does not give the effect that some people once announced. Those. today, with the possibility of strict verification, experience does not show any attraction between bodies!
3. Launch of an artificial satellite into orbit around the asteroid. In the middle of February 2000 the Americans drove a space probe NEAR close enough to the asteroid Eros, leveled the speeds and began to wait for the capture of the probe by the gravity of Eros, i.e. when the satellite is gently attracted by the gravity of the asteroid.
But for some reason the first date didn't work out. The second and subsequent attempts to surrender to Eros had exactly the same effect: Eros did not want to attract the American probe NEAR, and without engine work, the probe did not stay near Eros . This space date ended in nothing. Those. no attraction between probe with mass 805 kg and an asteroid weighing over 6 trillion tons could not be found.
Here it is impossible not to note the inexplicable stubbornness of the Americans from NASA, because the Russian scientist Nikolai Levashov, living at that time in the United States, which he then considered a completely normal country, wrote, translated into English and published in 1994 year of his famous book, in which he explained everything that NASA specialists needed to know in order to make their probe NEAR did not hang out as a useless piece of iron in space, but brought at least some benefit to society. But, apparently, exorbitant self-conceit played a trick on the “scientists” there.
4. Next try repeat the erotic experiment with the asteroid Japanese. They chose an asteroid called Itokawa, and sent on May 9 2003 year to him a probe called ("Falcon"). In September 2005 year, the probe approached the asteroid at a distance of 20 km.
Taking into account the experience of the “stupid Americans”, the smart Japanese equipped their probe with several engines and an autonomous short-range navigation system with laser rangefinders, so that it could approach the asteroid and move around it automatically, without the participation of ground operators. “The first number of this program was a comedy stunt with the landing of a small research robot on the surface of an asteroid. The probe descended to the calculated height and carefully dropped the robot, which was supposed to slowly and smoothly fall to the surface. But... it didn't fall. Slow and smooth he got carried away somewhere far away from the asteroid. There he went missing ... The next number of the program turned out to be, again, a comedy trick with a short landing of the probe on the surface "to take a soil sample." It came out as a comedy because, in order to ensure the best performance of laser rangefinders, a reflective marker ball was dropped onto the surface of the asteroid. There were no engines on this ball either, and ... in short, there was no ball in the right place ... So, did the Japanese Sokol land on Itokawa, and what did he do on it if he sat down, science does not know ... "Conclusion: the Japanese miracle of Hayabusa is not was able to discover no attraction between probe ground 510 kg and an asteroid with mass 35 000 tons.
Separately, I would like to note that an exhaustive explanation of the nature of gravity by a Russian scientist Nikolai Levashov gave in his book, which he first published in 2002 year - almost a year and a half before the start of the Japanese "Falcon". And, despite this, the Japanese "scientists" followed exactly in the footsteps of their American colleagues and carefully repeated all their mistakes, including landing. Here is such an interesting continuity of "scientific thinking" ...
5. Where do hot flashes come from? A very interesting phenomenon described in the literature, to put it mildly, is not entirely correct. “... There are textbooks on physics, where it is written what should be - in accordance with the "law of universal gravitation". There are also textbooks oceanography, where it is written what they are, tides, in fact.
If the law of universal gravitation operates here, and ocean water is attracted, including to the Sun and the Moon, then the "physical" and "oceanographic" patterns of the tides must coincide. So do they match or not? It turns out that to say that they do not match is to say nothing. Because the "physical" and "oceanographic" pictures have no relationship at all nothing in common... The actual picture of tidal phenomena is so different from the theoretical one - both qualitatively and quantitatively - that on the basis of such a theory, tides can be predicted impossible. Yes, no one is trying to do it. Not crazy after all. They do this: for each port or other point of interest, the dynamics of the ocean level is modeled by the sum of oscillations with amplitudes and phases that are found purely empirically. And then they extrapolate this sum of fluctuations forward - so you get the pre-calculations. The captains of the ships are happy - well, okay! .. ”This all means that our earthly tides are also do not obey"universal gravitation".
6. The moon moves around the Earth on a very strange trajectory. The Moon is the closest cosmic body to the Earth, and it has been observed for a very long time. It would seem that we should already know almost everything about the Moon and its orbit around the Earth. But "… the truth is that the orbital parameters do not remain constant - the maximum and minimum offsets change periodically. It would seem - well, so what's wrong with that? Why keep quiet about it? Oh, there is a very good reason for that!
According to the "law of universal gravitation", the orbit of the unperturbed motion of the planet's satellite is Keplerian - in particular, the very simple ellipse. And perturbations due to the action of a third body - in this case, the Sun - allegedly lead to the evolution of orbital parameters. But! They must evolve in concert: for example, a change in the semi-major axis must correspond to a change in the period of revolution - in accordance with Kepler's third law.
So: the movement of the moon is an exception to this rule. The semi-major axis of its orbit changes with a period of 7 synodic months for 5500 km. The range of the corresponding change in the circulation period, according to Kepler's third law, should be 14 hours. In reality, the change in the duration of the synodic month is only 5 hours, and the frequency of this change is not 7 synodic months, and 14 ! That is, in the case of the Moon's orbit, the semi-major axis and the period of revolution evolve "in complete decoupling" from each other - both in amplitude and in periodicity! If such mocking behavior in no way follows from the "law of universal gravitation", then how could one build a theory of the motion of the moon on the basis of this law? Yes no way. But how was the theory of the motion of the moon built? Yes, no way either. There is no "theory of the motion of the moon"…»
The movement of the moon around the earth actually occurs not at all, as it would have to happen in accordance with the "Law of universal gravitation".
I think these examples are enough. To whom this is not enough, he can independently read the article by O.Kh. Derevensky and find there a fair amount of even more sophisticated evidence of the absence of any attraction between bodies. However, already in these examples, the reader will easily understand that "Law of gravity"- this is another artifice those who direct the vector of Humanity’s knowledge in a completely different direction, and would like people to remain at today’s, very low level of evolutionary development, or better, they would go even lower, right to the level of “intelligent animals” (the term “intelligent animals” is exhaustively explained in the works of Academician Nikolai Levashov).
What is gravity really
The real nature of gravity for the first time in modern history was clearly described by academician Nikolai Levashov in a fundamental scientific work. In order for the reader to better understand what has been written regarding gravity, I will give a little preliminary explanation.
The space around us is not empty. It is all completely filled with many different matters, which Academician N.V. Levashov named "first matter". Previously, scientists called all this riot of matter "ether" and even received convincing evidence of its existence (the famous experiments of Dayton Miller, described in the article by Nikolai Levashov "Theory of the Universe and Objective Reality"). Modern "scientists" have gone much further and now they "ether" called "dark matter". Enormous progress! Some matters in the "ether" interact with each other to one degree or another, some do not. And some primary matter begins to interact with each other, falling into changed external conditions in certain curvature of space (heterogeneities).
Curvature of space appears as a result of various explosions, including "supernova explosions". « When a supernova explodes, space fluctuations occur, similar to the waves that appear on the surface of water after a stone is thrown. The masses of matter ejected during the explosion fill these inhomogeneities in the dimensionality of the space around the star. From these masses of matter, planets ( and ) begin to form ... "
Those. planets are not formed from space debris, as modern “scientists” for some reason claim, but are synthesized from the matter of stars and other primary matters that begin to interact with each other in suitable inhomogeneities of space and form the so-called. "hybrid matter". It is from these “hybrid matters” that the planets and everything else in our space are formed. our planet, just like the rest of the planets, is not just a "piece of stone", but a very complex system consisting of several spheres nested one into another (see). The densest sphere is called the "physically dense level" - this is what we see, the so-called. physical world. Second in terms of density, a slightly larger sphere is the so-called. "ethereal material level" of the planet. Third sphere - "astral material level". 4th the sphere is the "first mental level" of the planet. Fifth the sphere is the "second mental level" of the planet. And sixth the sphere is the "third mental level" of the planet.
Our planet should only be considered as the totality of these six spheres– six material levels of the planet nested one into another. Only in this case it is possible to get a complete picture of the structure and properties of the planet and the processes occurring in nature. The fact that we are not yet able to observe the processes taking place outside the physically dense sphere of our planet does not indicate that “there is nothing there”, but only that at present our sense organs are not adapted by nature for these purposes. And one more thing: our Universe, our planet and everything else in our Universe is formed from seven various types of primary matter merged into six hybrid materials. And it is neither divine nor unique. This is just a qualitative structure of our Universe, due to the properties of the heterogeneity in which it was formed.
Let's continue: the planets are formed by the merger of the corresponding primary matter in the areas of space inhomogeneities that have properties and qualities suitable for this. But in these, as in all other regions of space, a huge number of primal matter(free forms of matter) of various types, not interacting or very weakly interacting with hybrid matters. Getting into the region of heterogeneity, many of these primary matters are affected by this heterogeneity and rush to its center, in accordance with the gradient (difference) of the space dimension. And, if a planet has already formed in the center of this heterogeneity, then the primary matter, moving towards the center of heterogeneity (and the center of the planet), creates directional flow, which creates the so-called. gravitational field. And, accordingly, under gravity you and I need to understand the impact of the directed flow of primary matter on everything that is in its path. That is, to put it simply, gravity is pressure material objects to the surface of the planet by the flow of primary matter.
Is not it, reality is very different from the fictitious law of "mutual attraction", which supposedly exists everywhere for no clear reason. Reality is much more interesting, much more complex and much simpler at the same time. Therefore, the physics of real natural processes is much easier to understand than fictional ones. And the use of real knowledge leads to real discoveries and the effective use of these discoveries, and not to sucked from the finger.
antigravity
As an example of today's scientific profanity one can briefly analyze the "scientists" explanation of the fact that "rays of light are bent near large masses", and therefore we can see what is hidden from us by stars and planets.
Indeed, we can observe objects in the Cosmos that are hidden from us by other objects, but this phenomenon has nothing to do with the masses of objects, because the phenomenon "" does not exist, i.e. no stars, no planets NOT attract no rays to themselves and do not bend their trajectory! Why then are they "curved"? There is a very simple and convincing answer to this question: rays are not bent! They just do not spread in a straight line, as we are accustomed to understand, and in accordance with form of space. If we consider a beam passing near a large cosmic body, then we must keep in mind that the beam goes around this body, because it is forced to follow the curvature of space, as if along a road of the corresponding shape. And there is simply no other way for the beam. The beam cannot help but go around this body, because the space in this area has such a curved shape ... Small to what has been said.
Now, returning to antigravity, it becomes clear why Mankind can not manage to catch this nasty "anti-gravity" or achieve at least something of what the clever functionaries of the dream factory show us on TV. We are specifically forced for more than a hundred years, internal combustion engines or jet engines have been used almost everywhere, although they are very far from perfect both in terms of the principle of operation, and in design, and in terms of efficiency. We are specifically forced extract electricity using various generators of cyclopean size, and then transmit this through wires, where b about most of it is scattered in space! We are specifically forced live the life of unreasonable beings, so we have no reason to be surprised that we can’t do anything sensible either in science, or in technology, or in economics, or in medicine, or in organizing a decent life for society.
I will now give you a few examples of the creation and use of antigravity (aka levitation) in our lives. But these ways of achieving anti-gravity are most likely discovered by accident. And in order to consciously create a really useful device that implements antigravity, you need to know the real nature of the phenomenon of gravity, explore it, analyze and understand all its essence! Only then can you create something sensible, effective and really useful.
The most common anti-gravity device we have is balloon and many of its variations. If it is filled with warm air or a gas that is lighter than the atmospheric gas mixture, then the ball will tend to fly up, and not fall down. This effect has been known to people for a very long time, but still does not have a complete explanation- one that would no longer give rise to new questions.
A short search on YouTube led to the discovery of a large number of videos that demonstrate very real examples of antigravity. I will list some of them here so that you can be sure that antigravity ( levitation) really exists, but ... so far none of the "scientists" has explained it, apparently, pride does not allow ...
